Congressional record

o

o

UNITED ^T ATFS

(-*:^y

k

n

or A Mr RICA

\lt

i Ku^LLDi.\L.i AaD DliBATES OF THE S^'^ CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JUNE 7, 1957, TO JUNE 20, 1957 ^

(PAGES 8531 TO 9902)

/

IXniD S lATIS GO\ ERNMENT PRINTING OmCE, WASHINGTON, 1957

^

1^

• p.

• »

1

T:

/

A

:'.''.^-

I'.'iitfd States
of Anient a

;j '

PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE

Ssf co:

XGRESS. FIRST SESSION

*l

\

^

^

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATiVES

I'lunu , Ji M, 7, r.)."7

Thn !If ni.p met {>t 12 o'clork n"^nn.

I'ix\.:clcnt. L..>>.rence S Bur'on. dt ll.e
0";den Stu^-.r i<: thr Ciuarh of Jesus
Christ of I,att('r-U;iv Ka:nus. 0«:;^'r,.

U:.,h. ^ ITtiec

ihc [(Jiiij'.v ai- p) uycr

O'..;- F\.t!ir: ul^.ch a:-t in Hi'a'.'^n. ue~
J.iiinbly bj.v ou: l.v:icl.s this rrorn:n;; Tdp-
fuie Thee in p.a^er and tl;.;nks'Jiv!ng
fii- Thy riani blc-sin;*^ uiilo us incii-
v;(iia;;y and n.'- a Nation. We thank
'1 lite, Father, for o-.r noble fnrPoc.ir<^,
u!^') l;.id Ih.e fyut:Ja':r,n r,f this vcr-y
glorious country upon truth, riphtPO',;s-
ro.vs. and justice. V.'e thank Thcc,
Father, fur those who have follov»-cd
I hem In canyin;-; forward th.ose preat
I-: in'"i;jles. We aie Ki"atef'.;l. Fatlier in
Htaven, for this great le;:is;.itivr body,
d;.!y elected by the people to bui'i upon
thu-^ glorious foundation, and pray

tliat Thou vv.lt b'.e.^s thc;n r ndi-

vidually and collectively. We p.l.tion
Thee. Father In Heaven, to ble.ss this
Nation that it may ^o forward even to
t;reater heights; that it may continue to
be the banner cf truth and democracy
to all nations of the earth, and hasten
the time when freemen evorv-where will
enjoy the glorious principles of democ-
racy which we enjoy here today. Ele.ss
and preserve this country. Bless our
authoritU'-s and be v\ith them at all times,
we humbly beseech Thee in the name of
f ur Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
Even so. Amen.

The Journal of the proceed in.t^s of
yesterday was read and approved.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

A messape from the Senate, by Mr.
McBride, one of its clerks, announced
that the Senate had passed bills of the
followmr; titles, in which the concur-
rence of the House is requested:

S 1141 An act to authorize and direct the
AdmlnLstrator of General Services to donate
to the Philippine Republic cerUiln records
t,uit;irpd frijin Insiirrecto.'; during 1899-iyu3;

S 1408. An^ct to provide allowances for
transportation of house trailers to civilian
(:r.p;.'\ees cf the United States who are
transferred from one official station to an-
other;

S l.'irio An act to amend the Federal Prop-
erty and Administrative Services Act of 1949
t ) authorize the Administrator of General
Services to make contracts for cleaning and
cu.st.idlal services for periods not exceeding
5 years: and

S 1799. An act to facilitate the payment
of Government checlLs, and for other pur-
poses.

Cin 537

I- OUT MYER REVIEW HONORING
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

Ih- SFIAKER. The Chair rec^n-
n:-/"^.^ the pentlrnian frcm Massachusetts
to makr" an announcemt nt.

^^r MrCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, a
.peci.il retreat review wll be conducted
; t F'rrt Myer. Va . at 4 p. m. on June
9. ].;57. next t'unday, honcrin;? the
Members of Coneress who are vctTaiis
of the Army and who have been invited
to attend.

Th.e veteran Mernbers of Congress will
b? represented on the reviewin;? stand
l;y cur colleague the eentleman from
M-^ntana. Mr. LeRoy H. Anderson.

'I he Silver Star will be presented to
h::n durins; the ceremcnies. I.eRoy Ay-
DTRSON is a major peneral in the United
Ftr.tes Army Reserve. He was awarded
the Silver Star but it has never been
j^re.'ented to him. It will be presented
to him next Sunday afternoon at this
cercnionv.

CALL OP THE HOUSE

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I make
the point of order that a quorum is not
present.

The SPEAKER. E\'idently a quorum
is not present.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I
move a call of the House.

A call of the House was ordered.

The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowins Members failed to answer to their
names:

[Roll No. 100]

Arfnds Garmatz O'KonsW

Ayres Green, Pa. Phllbln

P.alley Gregory Poa«re

Barrett Gubser Porter

Heamer Gwinn Powell

B.Htnilc HarrLvon, Nebr Prouly

Bo.'-ch Healey Radwan

B(.w;fr Holtznian Rhodes, Pa.

PurkUy James Rogers. Colo.

Byrne 111 Jiidd ^ Rogers. Mass.

Byrr.p";. Wis. Kearney 8t George

Cederberf? Keeney Schwengel

C-hambtrlaln Kelly, N. Y. Shelley

Chudoff Laird £heppard

(judert Lane Simpson, Pa.

Curtl."-. Mo. Latham Taber

Dav.son. 111. McConneil Taylar

Delaney McGovern Teller

D' lilnger Mclntlre Tewes

DoTiohue Machrowice Utt

Dooley Miller, Md. Vursell

Dorn.N Y. Miller, N. Y. Wainwright

Fallon Mlnshall Wler

Parbsteln Montoya Withrow

Fino Morano Wolverton

Pogarty Moulder Zelenko

Friedel OBrlen, 111.

The SPEAKER. On this roUcall 354
Members have answered to their names,
a quorum.

By unanimoiis consent, further pro-
ceedings under the call were dispensed
with.

CIVIL RIGHTS

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker. I move
tliat tiie House res';l\e itself into tl^.e
Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union for the further con-
sideration of the bill (H. R. 6127) to pro-
vide means of further securing and pro-
tecting the civil rights rf persons within
the jurisdiction of the United States.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly the House resolved itself
into the Committee of the Whole House
en the State of the Union for the further
con.'^ideration of the bill H. R. 6127. with
Mr. FoRAKD in the chair.

The Clerk re?d the title of the bill.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from New York I Mr.
Keating^.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I am
perfectly willing to defer to my col-
league, the gentleman from New York
[Mr. CriLERl.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
such time as she may care to use to the
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania [Mrs.
Gran.^hanI.

Mrs. GRANAHAN. Mr. Chairman, as
a comparatively new Member of the
House of Representatives, with a great
deal yet to learn about national affairs
and legislation, I nevertheless feel that
on this subject of civil rights, of treating
people as first-class Americans in all
instances and in all cases, one does not
have to be an expert on the obscure tech-
nicalities of the law in order to speak
here.

I think it is a case of consulting with
one's heart and conscience, and reaching
one's decision from the standpoint of
what is most in keeping uith our ideals
of true Americanism.

Either we believe ,the great concepts
which were behind the Declaration of In-
dependence and the Bill of Rights or we
have mental reservations about them.
Either we believe that all citizens of this
country have a right to equal guaranties
and equal treatment ynder the law or we
are not quite convinced that the Revolu-
tion of 1776 was a good thing.

Of course no one will stand up on the
Fourth of July and say our forefathers
made a very bad mistake on that hot
summer day in Philadelphia when they
proclaimed the freedom of this Nation.
We are accustomed to paying very lavish
tribute each Independence Day to the
spirit which motivated that Revolution
and those patriots of long ago.

Can we match their courage, however.
In meeting the serious social problems of
our day?

Can we say In good conscience that we
are as willing to attack deep-seated social
ills?

8531

8532

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

Tbey were flghting for civil rights, for
their own civil ris^hta. True, many of
tho«« who fought bravely for the concept
of civil rights in those days were slave-
owners who apparently saw no contra-
diction between their own yearnings for
full freedom politically and the exist-
ence of slavery as an institution to which
they contributed.

That is no reason to say that they did
not exhibit courage or great political
progress in fighting for pohtical freedom.
But obviously they did not go all the way
toward full and complete freedom for
all, even when many of these same great
patriots gathered again to write the Bill
of Rights.

But they started the pattern of Ameri-
can freedoms which we have expanded
and Improved and protected and spelled
out more explicitly generation by gener-
ation. Yet even today we cannot claim
that the United States of America is
completely free of the taint of discrimi-
nations by reason of race or creed or
color In the exercise of pohtical. social,
and economic rights.

That is why we need legislation such
as this. This bill, labeled a civil-rights
bill, actually does very little of a sensa-
tional nature. It is a sad commentary
on the status of our social attitudes in
this country that such a bill as this is
necessary or even useful.

Actually, we know that not all Ameri-
can citizens have the full and complete
and free opportunity to exercise their
sacred rights as citizens— the most sa-
cred of all being their right to vote. It
Is frequently denied^ It is often abridged
In one way, or another. This is no
Becret^unfokunately It often happens
right out in ihe open.

Such a situation must be corrected.
If this bill helps in that respect, then it
will indeed be most worthwhile legisla-
tion.

Prom the jockeying which is going on
over this bill— and which has been going
on for months during this session of Con-
gress—it is obvious that attempts are
being made to weaken this bill even

further.

Mr. Chairman. I urge us all to .search
our own hearts and our own consciences.
I urge that we -consult God and seek His
guidance in this matter.

If we believe in His teachings, we must
believe in the decency and in the dignity
of each person — each human being. We
must believe, then, in the justice of full
rights for all regardless of race, creed, or
color.

We must stand for brotherhood and
for human rights — and not hesitate to
take our stand for what is right.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
yield such time as she may require to
the gentlewoman from New Jersey LMrs.
DwyerI.

Mrs. DWYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in support of the President's program on
civil rights which is embodied in the bill.
H. R. 6127. I oppose any cnpplint;
amendments which may be offered on
the floor.

Mr. Chairman. Members of this House
are now preparing to act on legislation
to which the platforms of both partie-i
are pledged. I am referring, of course,
to civil rights.

I have a particular interest in this leg-
islation. I have Introduced legislation
based on President Eisenhower's civil
rights program during this session of
Congress — legislation similar to that In-
troduced by my distinguished colleague
the gentleman from New York [Mr.

KEATING I .

But. even beyond that immediate In-
terest, I am proud to address this body
as a legi5lator who long has worked for
the cause of civil rights in my home
State of New Jersey, where it has been
proven beyond question that civil rights
legislation can be an effective safeguard
of the God-given rights of equal oppor-
tunity and justice.

Today, in urging House support of the
Presidents civil rights program. I also
stand opposed to any amendments which
would, in effect, cripple the intent and
the effectiveness of this long -overdue
legislation.

It is not my aim to discu-ss the tech-
nical aspects of this legislation. Such
details are being fully explored in the
lengthy debate on this question. Rather,
I want to discuss the moral aspects which
I feel should, in large measure, guide our
actions on civil rights in this Chamber.

From this viewpoint, I t)elieve it might
be well for all of us in the Congress to
recall the words contained in the plat-
fonns of our respective parties last year.

In Chicago, the leadership of the
Democratic Party produced a platform
document which included this pledge to
the people of America:

The Democratic Party Is committed to sup-
port and advance the individual ristbts and
liberties of all Americans. Our country la
founded on the proposition that all men are
created equal This means that all citizens
are equal before the law and should enjoy
all political rights They should have equal
opportunities for education, for economic
advancement, and far decent living condi-
tions.

The Democratic Party then pledged:
We will continue our efforts to eradicate
discrimination based on race, religion or na-
tional origin We know this task require*
action, tfit Just In one section of the Nation,
but In all sections. It requires the c<x)pera-
tive efforts of Individual citizens, and action
bv State and local governments It also
requires Federal action The Federal Gov-
ernment must live up to the Ideals of the
Declaration of Independence, and must exer-
ci.se the powers vested In It by tlie Con-
stitution.

The Democratic Party pledges Itself to
continue Its efforts to eliminate lUetjal dis-
criminations of all kinds, In relation to ( 1 )
full rights to vote, i2i full rights to engage
In gainful occupations. (3) full rights to en-
joy security of the person, and (4i full rights
to education In ail publicly supp<jrted in-
stitutions.

Now, I turn to the platform of my own
Republican Party, forged in San Fran-
cisco late last August

That platform pledged:

This administration has Impartially en-
forced Federal civil rights statutes, and we
pledge that It will cc)ntlnue to do .so. We
supp<irt the enactment of the civU rights
program already presented by the President
to the 84th Congress.

The Republican platform continued:

The Republican Party has unequivocally
recognized that the supreme law of the land
Is embodied lu the Constitution, which

guarantees to «H people the blessing of
lil)erty. due process and equal protection of
the laws It confers upon all native-born and
naturalized citizens not only citlzeoablp m
the Stale where the Individual resides but
citizenship of the United States a* well. This
Is an unqualified right, regardless of race,
creed or color

We believe that tr\ie progress can be at-
tained through Intelligent study, under-
standing, education, and gcxxl will. Use of
force or violence by any group or agency
win tend only to worsen the many problems
Inherent In the situation. This progress
must be encouraged and the work of the
courts supported In eVery legal manner by
all branches of the Federal Government to
the end that the constitutional Ideal of
equality before the law. regardless of race,
creed, or color, will be steadily achieved.

Yes, these are the civil-rights planks
in the 1956 platforms of the Republican
and Democratic Parties.

I. for one. support the aims of these
platforms.

Certainly, the need for such civil-
rights legislation as we now are con-
sidering has t>een clearly established. A
means must be provided for achieving
a more effective enforcement of the
rights already guaranteed by the Consti-
tution and the laws of the United States.
if there Is to be an end to the shame of
second-class citizenship. If we are to
prove to the world that we really prac-
tice the freedoms that we preach.

Our Pounding Fathers, nearly two cen-
turies ago, set the goal which we are
still seeking to achieve when they de-
clared "that all men are created equal.
that they are endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable rights, that
among these are life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness."

If we are to attain this goal, we must
recognize that the rights and privileges
of all Americans, regardless'of race, color,
or creed, are the respwrusibllity of the
Federal Government because those rights
and privileges are anchored in the Con-
stitution and the laws of the United
States.

These rights, however, cannot be guar-
anteed if we continue to turn our backs
on the need for stronger civil-rights leg-
islation, or if we render Ineffective this
legislation with devious legislative de-
vices.

In a final analysis. I believe that the
questions we must honestly face as we
act upon this civil-rights legislation are:

Are we in the Congress once more go-
ing to render only lipservice to the cause
of civil rights — turn our backs on our
platform pledges?

Or will we carry out the pledgees of
our respective party platforms and en-
act an effective civil-rights program to
guarantee equal opportunity and justice
for all?

My stand Is clear. I will stand by the
pledge of my party.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
10 minutes to the distinguished gentle-
man from Ohio I Mr. Hays 1

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. Mr. Chairman,
yesterday Members of the House, pre-
sumably all Members of the House, re-
ceived a mimeographed letter signed by
the gentleman from New York, Mr. Adam
Clayton Powell, in which he both tried
to persuade and threaten Members to

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8533

vote for this legislation. I called Mr.
Powell's oflBce to tell them that I was
going to reply to this letter, and his
office told me that he was suffering from
a heart attack which had occurred in
New York, but that he had been moved
to Bethesda Hospital in Washington.
Apparently, from the Information I got,
the attack is going to last for 10 days
or just until this debate is over. So. I
felt it necessary this letter should be
answered now. I would prefer, of course,
that the gentleman in question the gen-
tleman from New York I Mr. Powell]
should be on the floor. I would like to
recall to you tt^ last year when this
legislation was being debated, the gen-
tleman from New York (Mr. Powell 1
was at sea on a vessel on his way to a va-
cation in Europe. The reason I bring
this letter to your attention is because
one paragraph says this:

As a final word to Democrats, let me say
that the colored voters of the North are fed
up with weak platforms and watered-down
legislation. Tbey are increasingly asking the
question — Why send Pennsylvania and Ohio
Democrats to Congress if they must take
their orders from middlemen who serve the
white citizens' councils In Mississippi and
Alabama?

Now, I do not pay too much attention
to an:' accusations made by the gentle-
man from New York, but I think it is
fair. In view of this accusation, to sort
of read the record and consider from
whence this testimony comes. All 6 of
the Democrats from Ohio — and I have
not researched it — but I believe all of the
Democrats from Pennsylvania voted for
the civil-rights legislation last year, and
all 6 of the Democrats from Ohio voted
against the motion to recommit — all of
this while the gentleman from New York
who is making this thing such an issue
was not able to be in the Chamber be-
cause it seemed to be more important to
him to be leaving on a sea voyage to Eu-
rope for a vacation than for him to be
here to vote on this important legisla-
tion; legislation on which he is now send-
ing a letter threatening os if we do not
vote for it. May I point that again this
year the gentleman from New York I Mr.
Powell] Is not here In person.

Mr. WALTER. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. I yield briefly to
the gentleman.

Mr. WALTER. Does the gentleman
not think that the most disappointed
person In America, if this legislation is
enacted Into law, would be the gentle-
man from New York?

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. Yes. Because
there would be nothing left for him to
talk about.

I have always been told if you have
evidence introduced — I am not an at-
torney, so I am trying in my feeble way
to refute this — if you have evidence In-
troduced, you consider from whence this
evidence comes. Since Mr. Powell fs the
sole source of this statement and since
Mr. Powell hsis made this accusation
against Members from Pennsylvania and
Ohio, maybe we should consider some
of his previous statements. Why he
made this accusation I do not know. I
suppose that is as hard to explain as It
would be to explain why he appeared

with Earl Browder and William Z. Foster
at a joint rally of the Communist Party
in Madison Square Garden in 1944 and
shared top billing with those two. Or it
might be as hard to explain why he was
the editor of a newspaper and the author
of a column in which he one time
identified the New York Times as "a
Salsberger journal of first-class Negro
baiters." I have heard the New York
Times called just the opposite on this
floor by many more people than
the gentleman from New York fMr.
Powell]. Or why when one time, when
the distinguished gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Dies] had the temerity to summon
one of the columnists of Mr. Powell's
newspaper before his Committee on Un-
American Activities, the Reverend Mr.
Powell wrote, "The sooner Dies is
buried, the better." And he goes on
quoting a lot of other trash that I will
not quote because I do not want it to
appear in the Record.

He winds up by sanng. "The death of
Dies is Just as important as the death of
HlUer." Well, Mr. Dies is here, full of
vim. vigor, and vitality. I am happy to
say. So that wish of the reverend gen-
tleman from New York had no more rea-
son than his dishonest statement against
Members of Congress from Pennsylvania
and Ohio.

Maybe we should consider why Mr.
Powell one time said, in 1944, that "the
Soviet Union has renounced violence;
that its position on religion is healthful;
that it is in contradistinction to the
United States. It — the Soviet Union —
accepted the practices rather than the
doctrines of Christianity, especially
brotherhood."

This is the same gentleman who is
saying that the Members from Pennsyl-
vania and Ohio are taking orders
from some middlemen from some white
citizens council.

Right after the war, this gentleman,
the Reverend Mr. Powell, told the stu-
dents of Middleboro College that "re-
ligion was in for a new reformation
whose coming would be hastened by
basically nonreligious forces, for ortho-
dox religion has alined itself with the
Western World, which is on the way out."
Get that. That the Western World is
on the way out.

Last June he made an address at
Morehouse College in which he said.
"Negroes must walk together, work to-
gether, fight together, resist together,
and organize t^ether." In other words,
there is no p^Ron in my opinion in the
United States who Is doing more to di-
vide Negro citizens from the rest of the
citizens than the gentleman from New
York, who sends this letter around.

I Just want to tell you a little ex-
perience I had 10 or 12 years ago, when
I was a county commissioner in Ohio.
A Negro gentleman apparently of the
sanie opinions as the gentleman from
New York [Mr. Powell], came into our
county and called a meeting at which
he asked all county officials to attend.
Most of the county ofiBcials did attend.
He made a speech. He said, "I have
come here to tell you gentlemen we are
going to organize a committee in every

town of this county to see. insist, ahd
be present to observe that the Negroes
get every civil right which the Consti-
tution of the State of Ohio guarantees
them."

I do not recall his name at the moment,
but I got up and took the floor and I said :

"I have just one word of advice to you.
In the little village in which I live, we
have some Negro citizens. They can
and do live on any street in the town:
they can and do go into any restaurant
In the town; they can and do go to the
same public school that all the other
public -school children go to; they can
and do attend the theater and sit where
they like; they can and do attend the
social fimctions of the school. The only
thing you are going to do if you set up
a committee to tell the people of Flusli-
ing that they have to do what they are
already doing and what they have been
doing for a hundred years is to make
them determined that they will not do it
any longer, because they are doing it
voluntarily, and they do not want any
outsider coming in and tellii^ them they
have to do something they already are
doing because they want to do it."

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. In just a minute.

I said further: "I am not only county
commissioner, but I am also mayor of
that town ; and. if you come around there
trying to upset the harmony in which the
races live, I expect you will find yourself
in jail for disturbing the peace and I will
probably be too busy for about 3 weeks to
hear your case."

Mr. CELLER. May T ask the gentle-
man if he is in favor of the bill or against
the bUl?

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. The gentleman
has already said that the six Democratic
Members from Ohio, of which he is one.
voted for the bill the last time, and I
expect to vote for the bill this time, but
I do not preclude that I might vote for
an amendment or two.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield further?

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. I yield.

Mr. CELUER. Of course I do not know
anything about the controversy that you
are stirring up between the gentleman
from New York [Mr. Powell]

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. Just a minute: I
am not stirring up any controversy. Mr.
Powell stirred up the controversy.

Mr. CELLER. Does the gentleman
not think It would come with better
grace if he had made this statement
when Mr. Powell was in the Chamber
rather than when he is in the hospital
suffering from a heart attack?

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. May I say to the
gentleman that I have already said I
would much prefer Mr. Powell's being
present. But he circularized this letter
from the hospital for the purpose of
affecting the outcome of this bill and if
there is to be any refutation of the let-
ter it has to be now. I have not said
anything about Mr. Powell that I would
not say were he present and I would
much prefer. I say, that he were present.

Just one final thing : On the first Sun-
day of October 1956, Mr. Powell asked
his congregation how he. as a Congress-
man, could campaign for Stevenson or

85^

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7.

Eisenhower when both parties take the
Negroes' money and send it to Missis-
sippi and other States to build separate
schools. Four dajrs later he saw Presi-
dent Eisenhower «t the White House and
startled the country by agreeing to cam-
paign for him, and this is what he said:
In seme mysterious way the President of
the United States has changed his mind In
6 days.

Of course you all know the history of
the White House issuing a denial of what
Mr. Powell said.

I merely cite a few of these things
to point out to you that the Members
from Pennsylvania and Ohio do not have
to accept any dictation from anyone, es-
pecially from such a source as the quotes
I have just read indicate. They do not
have to apologize for their record to
anyone, and they do not have to take
slanders of the scurrilous kind that are
in this letter from Mr. Powell or any-
one else. The Members from Pennsyl-
vania and Ohio stani en their own two
feet, and I think that it was a very small
political trick that Mr. Powell singled
out those two States to try to make
someone think that the Democrats from
Pennsylvania and Ohio were some kind
of dishonorable small people who were
taking orders from some kind of un-
desirable person. The gist of his letter
is that he is demanding that the trial
by jury amendment not be accepted.
I think he himself has made enough
arguments to convince me that maybe
the traditional American right of trial
by jury amendment would be a good
thing. Trial by jury is unknown in the
Soviet Union which Mr. Powell's state-
ments seem to indicate he so much ad-
mires.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
yield such time as he may require to
the gentleman from California LMr.

BALDWIiNJ.

Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. Chairman. I rise
In support of H. R. 6127. This civil
rights bill would establish a Federal
Commission on Civil Rights, would
create an additional Assistant Attorney
Generals position in the Department of
Justice, and would authorize the Attor-
ney General to institute civil actions or
applications for a permanent or tem-
porary injunction, or restraining order,
in cases involving a violation of civil
rights, including the right to vote.

It seems to me that perhaps the most
Important single right of a citizen of
the United States is the right to vote
In a Federal election for the offices of
President. Vice President, presidential
elector. Member of the Senate, or a
Member of the House of Representatives.
I believe that this right to vote in a
Federal election should be given every
protection by the Federal Government.

It is deeply disturbing to hear reports
tnat there have l)een incidents where
citizens of the United States have been
intimidated or threatened in an effort
to prevent them from registering or
from voting in a Federal election. In
my opinion, the passage of this civil
rights bill is most essential in order
to provide proper protection to such
citizens.

Many constituents in my Congressional
District are very much interested in the
passage of this civil rights measure.
They feel that it is completely proper
and just for the Federal Government to
establish more clearly its position in this
field of voting rights in Federal elections.
I share theif views on this subject and
would like to urge that the House ap-
prove this civil rights measure.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
yield 10 minutes to the" gentleman from
California I Mr. Hillings!.

Mr. HILLINGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in support of the bill before us today for
several reasons. In the first place, it is
only right and fair that legislation of
this kind designed to implement and
carry out the constitutional guaranties
on the right to vote for every American
citizen, regardless of race, creed, or color,
be enacted. It is only right and fair that
the legislation necessary to implement
that guaranty should be approved by
the Congress.

This IS Important at a time wiien our
country is tr>-ing to convince millions
of people across the world thai they
should join our side, that they should
turn deaf ears toward the Communist
promises that are being made. It is
right and fair at a time such as this that
wo enact legislation which will make
sure that every American has the right
to vote.

Further, Mr Chairman, this is a mod-
erate bill. The bill probably does not
satisfy the extremists who feel we should
have more drastic and more direct ac-
tion to meet discrimination and inter-
ference with the right to vote. I submit
the very fact that this bill is moderate
in its approach makes it easier for all
Americans to support it and will make
the time come faster when we can elim-
inate all forms of discrimination in our
country.

We have made real progress under
President Eisenhower in the field of
eliminating discrimination in America
and we have done it in a quiet, efficient
manner, without a lot of hullabaloo,
shouting, and screaming that sometimes
have characterized previous attempts to
do something In the field, attempts
which in many instances in the past,
despite all kinds of promises, accom-
plished very little. We have eliminated
segregation in the District of Columbia.
We have eliminated segregation in our
Armed Forces. This progress has been
accomplished in just a few years' time,
but always with a moderate and a fair
approach to the problem, an approach
designed not to take away the rights of
our States or the rights of individuals in
various parts of the country but at the
same tune to guarantee the right to vote
for all American citizens.

Mr COLMER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. HILLINGS. I only have 10 min-
utes. I expect to be on the floor through-
out the debate under the 5-minute rule
and I hope to discuss this subject with
the gentleman at that time.

Mr. Chairman, there has been much
criticism in the Congress recently of the
USIA — the United States Information
Agency. Members on both sides of the

aisle have att^i|ked that agency on the
ground its ^ro^casting techniques, its
pamphlete«ring, or other devices used
to carry our ^ry across the world and
behind th^^ron Curtain are not being
performee^ satisfactorily. But all the
best broadcasting and techniques in the
world would avail us little if we do not
have the kind of system In America
which does the things we tell the peoples
of the world we do. One of these things
is the right of all American citizens to
vote regardless of race, creed, or color.

I consider this legislation just as im-
portant In our efforts to maintain the
peace and to keep trfl^oramunists con-
tinuing on the downgrade, that side of
the problem is just as important as the
domestic aspect of this bill.

We are going to hear a great deal of
discussion m the course of the debate on
this bill on whether or not we should
approve an amendment allowing a jury
trial in/'&aptempt cases which might
arise o^t ofxthis particular legislation.
I knoNf It is very difficult for lawyers and
nonla/wyers alike to have a full compre-
hension and understanding of why it is
impoWant that tho^e of us who favor
this legislation should vote against the
amendment to provide for a jury trial.
It is difficult to explain because all Amer-
icans hold very dear the right to trial by
jury in criminal cases or in all civil cases
where the amount involved is $20 or more
under the provisions of our Constitution.
But I hope that those who have grave
doubts about whether they should op-
pose this amendment will ILsten to the
discussion which will take place concern-
ing it. will listen to the discussion as we
trace the history of jury trials In con-
tempt proceedings. It Is Interesting to
me that so many of those who are argu-
ing so vociferously in favor of Jun{?krials
have done nothing in their own States to
see to it that their own Sktte laws are
changed to provide for jury trials in sim-
ilar proceedings, because there Is not a
State law in the country which has such
a provision. Yet. those who are arguing
In opposition to the bill on the ground
that it is an Interference »ith States
rights have done nothing that I know of
In their own individual States to see that
their laws are changed, but they are con-
fining their interest and their attack to
this civil rights legislation which is now
before us.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. HILLINGS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from New York.

Mr. CELLER. Is it not true, where a
crime Is committed, that we do not in-
terfere with the right of trial by jurj-?
All we do in this bill is to provide on
the equity side of the court that the
Attorney General can start an equity
proceeding for an injunction to prevent
the commission of a crime. It Is pro-
phylactic, it is prevention, so that we can
nip in the bud a contemplated wrong,
and in that sense there Is no Interfer-
ence with the time-honored right of trial
by jury, because there never has been
shown a right of trial by jury of a con-
temner who has violated the order of
tl-.e court.

X957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8535

I Mr. HUUNGS. The gentleman Is
correct

Bffr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HILLINGS. I yield to the genUe-
man from Virginia.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I would like
to ask the gentleman this question, and
I ask it in good faith. How does the
gentleman reconcile the fact that Con-
gress has given to the labor unions imder
section 3692 of title XVHI of the code
the right of trial by Jury in all contempt
cases arising out of labor disputes? Now,
how does the gentleman reconcile that
with his apparent denial to give to his
own constituents the right of trial by
jury when they are brought up under
this bill?

Mr. HILLINas. Let me say to the
gentleman that I cannot agree that we
have given the right of trial by jury in
contempt cases involving labor unions,
because under the Taft-Hartley Act.
which is currently the law of the land,
that particular provision which was con-
tained in some previous legislation does
not apply. So, under my interpretation
of existing law — and I think that most
lawyers after studying the problem con-
cur— there is now, today, no guaranty
of trial by Jury of labor unions in similar
cases t)ecause of the existence of the
Taft-Hartley Act.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. HILLINGfe. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.

Mr. KEATING. On that point, the
proof of the pudding is in the eating.
Since the enactment of the Taft-Hart-
ley Act. which has been on our statute
books for 10 years, there has not been
a Jury trial in any case arising under
that act, and in 2 cases where a Jury
was demanded, the court ruled that
there was no right to a jury trial.

Mr. HIT. LINGS. The gentleman Is
correct.

There are two particular points at this
time which I would like to raise in sup-
port of my contention that it is not
right and proper to have a Jury trial
in contempt proceedings which might
arise after the passage of this particular
legislation. There will be Aore>i^-
ments advanced on that Ottrtfig the
course of the debate. But there are two
basic reasons I wish to bring up now.
One of the reasons why a Jury trial can-
not apply in a situation where a court
issues an injunction and/ then someone
violates that injunction 4nd is brought
before the court for contempt is that
time is of the essence, and if time were
taken to have a Jiur trial iinder such
a situation, the whole effect of the in-
junction would t>e null and void and
there would have been no reason for
the court to issue such an order in the
first instance. That does not mean that
the person in violation cannot be heard
or have counsel; all those rights are
preserved. But the very purpose for the
court to issue an injimction in most in-
stances, not only In this type of case
but in labor strikes and other cases, is
that time is of the essence and some
action must be taken quickly. If this bill
were passed and the court issued an

order instructing the local election offi-
cials to allow a certain individual to
vote, the action would probably come on
the eve of an electi(m. If the election
official failed to act in response to the
court order and then were called into
court and sued, and there were a Jury
trial, in most cases the election would
be over and the question would be moot.
So it is important to consider the fact
that time Is of the essence in these cases.

A second reason which I consider
equally important in opposing the Jury
trial amendment, which is going to be
offered in this House next week. Is tne
fact that to compel a Jury trial in this
situation in many ways challenges the
Integrity of our courts across the coun-
try.

One of the greatest authorities on this
subject was the former Chief Justice
of the United States. Mr. Taft. also a
former President. Some of the Mem-
bers have already read in the newspa-
pers the <juotation from former Chief
Justlpe Taft which President Eisen-
hower used at his press conference this
week a'hen he discussed this very prob-
lem. But I think it is worth reading
again and it is worth listening to. The
words of our former Chief Justice cer-
tainly have a great bearing on any deci-
sion that we shall make in a situation of
this kind involving the legal rights of in-
dividuals under our Constitution. This
is what former Chief Justice and former
President Taft said in 1908:

The administration of Justice lies at the
foundation of government. The mainte-
nance of authority of the courts U essential
unless we are prepared to embrace anarchy.
Never In the history of the country has there
been such an Insidious attack upon the
Judicial system aa the proposal to Interject
a Jury trial between all orders of the court
made after full hearing and the enforcement
of such orders.

Mr. Chairman, I do not think I have
to explain further or interpret what
Chief Justice and former President Taft
was saying. But just imagine if. every
time a court isued an order in an equity
proceeding, we would have to stop to
have a jury trial, what would happen.
It would make the court powerless to
act and would make It almost impos-
sible to see that any of its orders were
enforced. It is a fundamental concept
of our Judicial system which is at stake
here. If the Jury trial amendment suc-
ceeds in this instance, then it could be
applied in many other instances which
could weaken our Federal judicial sys-
tem.

Mr. SCOTT of Pennsylvania. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HILLINGS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. SCOTT of Pennsylvania. Does
not the gentleman agree that this so-
called right of trial by jury is not being
sought on behalf of the Injured party
at all; that the Injured party is the
man wbo is denied the right to vote.
But this so-called right is being sought,
not on his behalf, but on behalf of the
man who violates the decree of the Fed-
eral court and seeks to postpone the
effect of any action against him until
it is too late to do the injured party
any good.

Mr. HTT.T.TNG8. The gentleman is
correct. It again points up the factor
that we must alwajrs keep in mind in a
case of this kind that time is of the
essence. That Is one of the major con-
siderations.

Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentlonan yield?

Mr. HILLINGS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Illinois. ;

Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, the gen-
tleman has made a very excellent state-
ment on the question of the Jury trial.
But does not the gentleman agree with
me that the discussions that have taken
place thus far have placed an overem-
phasis on the so-called right to trial by
Jury amendment and that we have
thereby been diverted from considera-
tion of the basic purposes of the bill,
namely, to protect an equal right to that
of trial by Jury which is the right to
vote. No democracy can exist without
participation by its citizens in its affairs.
The primary method of conducting its
affairs is by citizens voting. There has
not been much discussion on this floor of
the abuses toward which this bill is
directed, namely, of protecting the citi-
zens of our coimtry in their right to vote.
Certainly, this deserves as much of our
consideration as the amendment that
is going to be offered. Let us not lose
sight of the fimdamental need for this
bill.

Mr. HILLINGS. The gentleman
from Illinois [Mr. Yatks] has made an
important observation and one in which
I concur. In the course of the debate
thus far. the opponents of this legisla-
tion very skillfully and cleverly have
been able at times to take us away from
the real issue because of their proposed
amendment. We must keep in mind
that our main objective is to see that
all Americans in this country, regardless
of race, creed, or color, have the right
to vote, as guaranteed under the Con-
stitution.

Mr. COLMER. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. HILLINGS. I yield to the genUe-
man from Mississippi.

Mr. COLMER. Of course, we ought
to clarify one thing at this point. That
is the question on which I wanted the
gentleman to 3^eld to me before. The
gentleman says that the provisions of
the Norris-La Ouardia Act giving and
preserving to labor the right of trial by
jury are not now the law. He says that
they have been repealed by the Taft-
Hartley Act. I ask the gentleman to
point out in the Taft-Hartley Act where
that law was repealed. That is No. 1.

No. 2, if our contention is correct, that
It is still the law of the land that labor
enjoys that privilege, would the gentle-
man who Is now addressing the House
favor repealing that right that labor
now enjoys?

Mr. HILLINGS. To take the second
part of the question first, I do not think
there is any reason to discuss the ques-
tion of repealing such a right because
such a question is moot. I am convinced
that the Taft-Hartley Act changed the
Norris-La Ouardia Act to the pomt where
there is not now this guaranty. In sup-
port of that, let me Just cite a statement

8536

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8537

/

of the Attorney General of the United
States^the Honorable Herbert Brownell.
which was placed in the Congrissional
Rkcord by the distinguished gentleman
from New York [Mr. Keating 1.

Mr, COLMER. Before the gentleman
does that, the gentleman said the ques-
tion is moot. That was not my question.
I aslied the gentleman if our contention
is correct that that right is now a right
enjoyed by labor. Whether the gentle-
man would vote to take it away from
them.

Mr. HILLINGS. Let me say as one
who has taken a consistent position on
this that, as I pointed out earlier, there
Is no State law in the land which pro-
vides for a jury trial in such a contempt
proceeding. It is not contained in the
labor laws as I interpret them today.
If the gentleman's position were cor-
rect— and again, this is an ••iffy" ques-
tion— assuming a fact not in evidence,
but assiKning the gentleman's position
Is correct, I would take the position that
hp suggests.

Mr. COLMER. "What Is that?

Mr. HILLINGS. I would see to It that
U the jury-trial amendment is turned
down by this House, is not included in
this legislation, that should be the con-
sistent approach we should make In all
cases where contempt citations are in-
volved, including the labor cases.

Mr. COLMER. Did I understand the
gentleman to say that if i'». is still in the
law he would vote to take it away from
them?

Mr. HILUNGS. No. In the first
place, it is not in the law. In the second
place, assuming it were, I think we should
be consistent in the approach we are
making to the contempt citations. It
might be that in labor cases there would
be something different involved. I was
not a Member of the Congress when the
Taft-Hartley Act was approved, so I do
not have the background on it the gen-
tleman has. But in similar cases, as-
suming labor legislation were involved
in a similar type of contempt action, in
my opinion we should be consistent.

Let me quote from the Attorney
General's statement:

It was only with the enactment of the
Taft-Hartley Act In 1947 that the Oovern-
ment was given Jurisdiction to seek Injunc-
tions In any substantial number of labor
dispute cases and that act expressly pro-
Tided that the jury trial requirement of the
Norrls-La Guardla Act should not apply to It.
Hence It Is probable that the statute which
appears to grant Jury trial In contempt pro-
ceedings for violation of Injunctions Issued In
labor dispute cases ( 18 U. S. C. 3692) has no
application to Injunction suits brought by
the Ctovernment under Taft-Hartley, which
are. for all practical purposes, the only type
of Injunctlop^sults ( private or governmental »
In labor dispute cases over which the Federal
courts have Jurisdiction. (See United Statex
V. United Mine Workers of America (330
U. S. 258).)

That is a clearcut opinion of the At-
torney General of the United States.
He cites cases In support of It. I cannot
see where any lawyer who has seriously
studied this problem can argue effectively
that a jury trial would apply In labor
Injunction cases.

Mr. COLMER. The gentleman has
been very gracious with me. I hope he

will yield further, because he can get
plenty of time.

I wish the gentleman would give me a
definite answer as to whether he would
favor repeahng that right if our conten-
tion is correct. I do not know that he
gave me a definite answer on that, so I
will put it another way: I*will ask my
friend if he had been present in the Con-
gress at the time these alleged abuses
had occurred if he would not have sup-
ported the Norrls-La Guardla bilL

Mr. HILLINGS. Now the distin-
guished gentleman has very cleverly
changed his question. The gentleman
has now added the word "abuses. " If
we find that there are abuses of this par-
ticular bill we are now debating, and
assuming that a jury trial provision Ls
not contained within It. if we find there
are abuses, then I think it is right and
proper that this House should reconsider
such action it may have taken to prohibit
a jury trial. If we find in labor di.'^pute.s
cases under the Taft-Hartley Act that
there are actually abuses involved in the
handling of this type of contempt pro-
ceeding, we should seriously consider the
addition of a jury trial amendment. But.
in my opinion, in the absence of such a
showing, we should be consistent in all
forms of leci.«:lation where similar con-
tempt proceedings are involved. In or-
der for a court to act quickly, effectively,
and fairly. I do not believe it is right and
proper that a jury trial should be granted
in such similar contempt proceedings
whether they happen to Involve labor,
civil rights, or whatever the case be

I urge that this civil-rights bill be
approved by this House to strengthen
our constitutional guaranty of the right
to vote for all American citizen.'?.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman has expired.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from Vir-
ginia [Mr. Smith!.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, the distinguished gentleman from
New York (Mr. CellerI and I have had
a gentleman's agreement that we were
going to discuss this question as to
whether the right of labor to a Jury
trial had been repealed at a later time,
and we were going to discuss it rather
fully. But since the matter has arisen
now. I would like to make a brief state-
ment about it. It Is evident here that
there is a difference of opinion between
lawyers about the question, and. of
course, there is always a difference of
opinion between lawyers, because if there
were not none of us could make a living
as lawyers. But I do want briefly to
point to the law, and I hOF>e the gentle-
men who are Interested in this will make
a note of what I am going to refer you
to in the way of the law, because this
is quite an important question. It, per-
haps, seems strange that all the gentle-
men here on both sides of the House who
are accustomed to defending the rights
of labor should leave it to me to be the
sole one to defend those sacred rights at
this time. I had to do it in the Com-
mittee on Rules — these liberal gentlemen
who have always been so vociferous in
defending the rights of labor just would
not defend them in that case. And the
case is so clear to my mind that it just

seemed to me that somebody ought to
point out what the law is. There Is no
doubt in my mind as to what the law is,
and that Is what I want to point out to
you. The first right of trial by jury was
given in the "Clayton Act. But the real
substance of the thing was carried Into
the Noiris-La Guardia Act In 1932,''when
labor was given the definite right to a
trial by jury in contempt cases In all
cases arising under the Norrls-La Guar-
dla Act. and just under the Norrls-La
Guardia Act. I happened to be here at
that time, and it happens that I voted for
the Norns-La Guardia Act. Then we
come along to the Taft-Hartley Act. The
distinguished gentleman from New York
I Mr. Celleh I and the distinguished gen-
tleman from New York [Mr. Keating!
both say that the Taft-Hartley Act re-
pealed the right of trial by jury to the
labor unions in those cases. That is the
nub of the question that arises. Here
is what happened: In the enactment of
the Taft-Hartley Act it provided that in
the enforcement of orders of the National
Labor Relations Board that certain pro-
visions with respect to the Norrls-
La Guardia Act ahould not apply. It
cited 10 sections. It said that the sec-
tions from 1 to 10 and from 13 to 15
outlined in the United States Code should
not apply In the enforcement of orders
of the National Labor Relations Board.
But It so happens that they omitted, and
purposely omitted, two sections from that
exclusion, and those two sections were
section HI, which gave them the right
to trial by jury. It omitted section 112.
which gave labor the rifeht to say, "This
judge is prejudiced against us, and we
want some other judge to try the case."
The Taft-Hartley Act expressly included
them from the exception and left that as
the law.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I will when
I finish my statement, if you will give
me time.

That is the way the Taft-Hartley Act
left the law. Bear In mind that the
Taft-Hartley Act was passed in the year

1947. In 1948 the Congiess, as shown
in the Statutes at Large of the United
States, solemnly enacted title 18 of the
code into positive law. That became
the law in 1948. What was said In that
code at that time became the law in

1948. Then In the revision of the code.
In title 29. at page 4453, section 111—
that Is the section giving them a Jury
trial. And remember that was a year
subsequent to the passage of the Taft-
Hartley Act. The note of the revisers
under that section said: "That section
is repealed." Then It says. "But It Is
now covered by section 3692." In other
words, they simply transferred that and
broadened It. So, let us sec what sec-
tion 3692 Is. Remember that the Taft-
Hartley Act was In 1947; the code was
In 1948, and the code Is the last word
of Congress on that subject. And the
most of you people voted for It. Let us
see what section 3692 says. It does not
say the same thing as the Norrls-La
Guardla Act. The Norrls-La Guardia
Act says they were entitled to a Jury
trial in all cases arising under the Nor-

rls-La Guardia Act, but In 1948 the Cpn-
pre<!s said more In section 3692. This
is the law of the land today, and nobody
can successfully dispute that It is the
law.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
pentleman has expired.

Mr. CELLER. I^r. Chairman, I yield
the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Section 3692,
"In all cases" — not only any case aris-
ing under the National Labor Relations
Act and the Norrls-La Guardla Act, but
"in all case"?, all cases of contempt aris-
ing under the laws of the United States
governing the issuance of Injunction or
restraining orders In any case involving
or growing out of a labor dispute, the
accu."cd shall enjoy the right to a speedy
and public trial by an Impartial Jury in
the district in which the contempt is
committed." Can anything be plainer
than that?

Mr. CkT.I.ER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to state that
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Smith] and myself had a gentleman's
agreement that subsequently we would
discuss this matter. I did not anticipate
the subject of our contemplated debate
wa.s coming up today. We had agreed to
"participate In debate on Monday. I am
prepared to meet the distinguished gen-
tleman In "combat," as two contending
lawyers, on Monday next at the begin-
ning of the session — meet this great "de-
fender ' of liberalism, and I wonder
whether labor considers the gentleman
from Virginia a "defender" of labor. But
I am surethey would say. "Beware of the
Greeks bearing gifts. ' With reference to
what he has said about the code and the
Taft-Hartley Act and the Norrls-La
Guardla Act. nobody has ever stated, as
far as I know, who represented the Ju-
diciary Committee of the House, neither
the distinguished gentleman from New
York fMr. Keating] nor mj^elf particu-
larly, that the Taft-Hartley Act repealed
the Norrls-La Guardla Act. It did not.
The Taft-Hartley Act waived the pro-
visions of the Norrls-La Guardla Act with
reference to the injunction and. there-
fore, the Norrls-La Guardla Act has no
applicability whatsoever with reference
to the Taft-Hartley Act and the National
Labor Relations Board Act.

The Judiciary Committee codifies the
statutes; It Is our duty. We have been
doing that for years. This is the first
time I have heard any criticism about the
codification work of the Judiciary Com-
mittee. In revision and codification we
retain the best experts possible. Codi-
fication is very difficult work, but our
duty as codlflers is not to change the
law; we have no right to do that. We
cannot change one lota the substantive
law; we have to write the substance of
the law and try to reconcile as best we
can whatever conflicts may exist In the
statutes. Tlierefore, we have continued
the Norrls-La Guardia Act In the new
code and we say it Is the law. We had
no choice. But we could not disregard
the Taft-HarUey Act which In effect
waives the provisions of the Norris-La
Guardla Act We also include in the
code the Taft-Hartley Act and the Nor-

rls-La Guardia Act. So when the gentle-
man from Virginia says that we indi-
cate that there is a repeal of the pro-
visions of the Norris-La Guardia Act, that
Just is not so.

As lawyers we evaluate those statutes.
We come to the Inevitable conclusion
thTat the later statute waived the former
statute: namely, Taft-Hartley waived the
provisions, skirted around the provisions.
if I may put it that way, of the Norris-
La Guardia Act. That is the sum and
substance of the matter. I shall be very
glad to go more In detail on Monday
next with reference thereto.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
yield myself 2 minutes. I agree with the
gentleman from New York that It will
serve a more useful purpose Monday to
go into this thing more fully, but it seems
to me that at this point in the RBcord
it should be pointed out to the gentle-
man from Virginia, and others who are
interested, that when the gentleman
from Virginia sat here in this body with
this piece of paper, a bill like we are
considering today, both he and I, in vot-
ing for the Taft-Hartley law. voted to
waive not the sections as he has given
them, sections 101 to 110 and sections
113 to 115; the piece of paper that we
considered here waived the provisions of
sections 101 to 115. Section 111 was
the jury trial provision. It was waived
when we passed the bUl in this body on
a piece of paper similar to that which I
now hold in my hand.

We lawyers are in some dispute over
what the effect of codification was. Re-
codification bills go through here with-
out any consideration on the floor. We
are in dispute. The Attorney General
has held that the iH-ovisions of the Nor-
ris-La Guardia Act, so far as jury trial
is concerned, are waived by the provi-
sions of the Taft-Hartley Act. I agree
with it; the gentleman from New York
agrees with it. The gentleman from "Vir-
ginia disagrees.

It BO happens that a court has passed
on the question and has held that in a
labor dispute imder the Taft-Hartley
Act there is no right of jury trial.
This case was tried out In ttie fifth cir-
cuit.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield for a cor-
rection of the Recoro?

Mr. KEATING. It seems to me, there-
fore, that in the absence of something
later that is the last word. It certainly
was the Intention of Congress in pass-
ing this piece of paper, the Taft-Hartley
law. to waive the provisions of the Nor-
ris-La Guardia Act.

As I said before, the proof of the pud-
ding is In the eating. To my knowledge,
there has never been a Jury trial in the
hundreds and hundreds of labor disputes
we have had in this country under the
Taft-HarUey law. or since the NLRB was
set up.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KEATING. I yield to the gentle-
man from Virginia.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Would the
gentleman be good enough to put In his
remarks the reference to the case that
decided that point?

Mr. KEATING. Tes.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. May I ask a
further question. Of course, this thing
Involves a far more serious question. It
involves the question of the Integrity and
the reliability of the United States Code.
which is depended upon try lawyers in 48
States of the Union as expressing the
law. They do not go back to these tech-
nical things we are talking about. They
look at the code, and the code says that
title 18 was en£u;ted into positive law in
1948, a year later than the Taft-Hartley
Act. The reviser's note reads as follows :

This title was enacted into positive law by
act of Congress on June 25, 1948, chapter 645.
volume 62; Statutes at Large, at page 683.
The complete title as so enacted into positive
law is set up herein.

If that is not the law of the land, hc-v
is a lawyer or a judge to determine what
is the law of the land?

Mr. KEATING. The court has deter-
mined that and also the Attorney Gen-
eral It is clearly the law that there is
no right to a jury triaL

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Will the gen-
tleman name the cases that so hold?

Mr. KEATING. I will, yes. It is Na-
tional Labor Relations Board v. Red
Arrow Freight Lines (193 F. 2d 979 (5th
Cir. 1952)).

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Some of us
would like to know what they are.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. Vamik}.

Mr. VANIK. Mr. Chairman, today we
are concerned with the relationship of
the right to vote to the right of ivarj
trial in contempt proceedings. The right
of Am^ican citizens to vote Is vital and
at least equal to the right to jury trial.
We must weigh the equities when one or
the other is threatened. Certainly, the
right of law-abiding citizens to vote
without re^raint is in every respect as
important as the right of a wrongdoer
to a jury trial. In most States the jury
panels are selected from among the elec-
tors, and, therefore, the right to vote
itself is fundamental aiKi essential to the
conduct of fair jury trials. It is in the
nature of things that some people who
seek to interfere or restrain others in
their right to vote must give up their
right to jury trial under these circum-
stances so that others — equ^ Ameri-
cans— may have the right to vote, from
which all authority in our Government
develops.

The purpose of this legislation Is to ^
restrain, abate, or condemn a wrongful
act before it occurs. The purpose of this
law is to define and identify a wrongful
act before it occurs. The purpose of an
injunction is to restrain a mob from un-
lawful action or threats to engage in
unlawful action. It is the only means
known to give quick force and effect to
a court determination that the civil
rights of a citiaen have been violated or
threatened.

In my community restraining orders
and injunctions have been used by the
courts to limit the rights of picketing
88 well as to assure the rights of pickets
to picket in an orderly maimer. When
these court orders were violated, citizens
have been Jailed without Jury trial and
without community complaint. In my

8538

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

city, the citizens' right tOjESsembly has •
been limited without jury trial by the
exercise of the court's injunctive process.
In one case, the menacing assembly of
members of a group was prohibited at or
near the judge's personal residence. The
purpose of this legisaltion is to provide
the polling place with similar protection
from indignity.

The right of jury trial as well as the
right not to testify against ones own self
are rights protected by all for the benefit
of very few who must rely upon them. If
human rights can be given a priority, it
seems to me that the right to vote pre-
cedes the rights of a person charged with
a wrongdoing. The former are the rights
of equal people in the manifestation of
their equality while the latter are rights
of people presumed to be innocent but
suspect of possible wrongdoing.

If civil rights legislation is to be effec-
tive at all, it must be expeditious. The
determination that civil rights have been
transgressed upon after an election has
been consummated are rights lost for-
ever. Once lost, they cannot be regained
or restored. By the time a suspected
transgressor of civil rights could be
brought to trial before a jury of his peers,
the finding of the court would be a mean-
ingless determination which would be
history rather than a practical working
of the law.

In relying on the use of the injunctive
process, this Congress is not narrowing
the liberty of man. It is extending it.
It Is creating a living law which faces
up to the practicality of an existing sit-
uation and seeks to avoid the injury to
citizens by deprivation of the right to
vote before that injury occurs. It is to
be expected and hoped that the mere
existence of this power in the court will
of itself be sufHcient to render its use un-
necessary. It is not contemplated that
citizens will be imprisoned in large num-
bers or in groups. It is contemplated
that they will respect the great and
proper power with which our courts are
vested.

The purpose of this legislation Is not
to eliminate trial by jury, as many of our
colleagues would have us believe. Its
purpose is to provide for compliance with
the law which cannot be provided in any
other way of which we know. The leg-
islation anticipates that many varied
means and devices nay be developed by
individuals and groups to circumvent the
spirit of the law. and it vests the court
by Injunctive mandate to determine
upon the facts what acts can or cannot
be undertaken and then provides the
court with the power of contempt pro-
ceedings where prompt compliance does
not follow.

No one stands suspect. No one stands
accused. If conditions arise which,
when brought to the attention of the
court, appear to Invade or transgress
upon the rights of citizens to exercise
their right to vote and the court does so
find upon the facts submitted, the court
can Issue Its mandate directing those
persons to cease and desist from pur-
suing in such conduct. If such persons
feel that such order Is arbitrary or ca-
pricious and without support in fact or
law. they can take proper legal steps
to appeal the action of the court. To

this point no one has been hurt, and no
one has suffered, and the civil rights of
uncountable persons have been pre-
served. Only those persons who persist
in a course of conduct fpund unlawful
and restrained by the order of the court
need worry about the likelihood of pun-
ishment. The right to vote without re-
straint or restriction Is a fleeting right
which passes with the day. One* lost.
it can no more be restore than the day
which has passed. Only the firm and
well-considered directive of a court can
prevent the Infringement of this sacred
and highly volatile privilege.

In his argument on the floor of the
House yesterday, the gentleman from
Virginia I Mr. PoffI. argued that this
legislation constitutes a mass indict-
ment of the Integrity of the entire south-
ern populace of the country and that
it would be Irresponsible to charge that
a whole people would be faithless to a
solemn jury's oath. Pertnlt me to point
out to the gentleman that the conduct
of contempt proceedings under this leg-
islation will In every case be conducted
before distinguished jurists of the Fed-
eral bench who have lived and who have
developed In their home communities.
In every respect they are products of
the South. They know its traditions and
Its culture.

Can those who oppose this legislation
logically contend that these gentlemen
would Ignore their obligation to comply
with all corners of the law in passing
upon the contempt charges which may
be brought against their fellow men?
Can It be contended that these are men
who may be swayed by passion or prej-
udice or who Will render arbitrary and
Indlscretionary judgments? I do not
believe so.

Mr. Chairman, at the proper time, I
shall ask unanimous consent to Include
following my remarks and as part of
them a biographical sketch of the mem-
bers of the Federal district courts in
the South, gentlemen who were bom
and raised In the communities in which
they now act and pass judgment as
judges of the Federal district court.
They are products of the schools of the
South. Many were Members of this
Congress and many have served with
distinction throughout their entire
careers. There Is no reason for anyone
to suspect that the legislation which
we are considering today if enacted into
law will not be administered In
keeping with the highest traditions of
American jurisprudence.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
yield 20 minutes to the gentleman from
Illinois [Mr. Mason).

Mr. MASON. Mr. Chairman. I first
want to say that I shall not attempt to
discuss the legal technicalities and the
legal problems that are Involved in this
bill before us. I leave that to the dis-
tinguished members of the bar who are
Members of this House. They are doing
a pretty good job, I observe.

Secondly. I want to say that I shall
not even attempt to discuss the provi-
sions of the bill, nor what might hap-
pen If the provisions of the bill are
translated Into law. I shall leave that
to others who are members of the Com-
mittee on the Judlciar\'. The chairman

N

of the committee, the gentleman from
New York IMr, CiLLral. and the rank-
ing minority member of the committee,
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
KiATiNcI, have done an excellent Job
covering the provisions of the bill. That
leaves nothing for me to do but make a
few general observations about the bill.

Mr. JOHANSEN. Mr. Chairman. I
make the point of order that a quorum
is not present.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will
count. [After counting.] Eighty-slx
Members are present, not a quorum.
The Clerk will call the roll.

The Clerk called the roll, and the
following Members failed to answer to
their names:

[Roll No. 1011

Andresen.

Fogarty

Moulder

August H.

Frledel

Multer

Anfu*o

OarmatB

OKonskl

Arend.s

Green. Pa.

Philbin

Ay res

GubRer

Poage

Bailey

Owmn

Porter

Barrett

HarrlKon, Nebr

Powell

Beamer

Healey

Prouty

Belcher

H.bert

Rad«aa

Blatnlk

Holtzman

Rains

BoM;h

James

Rhodes. Arl2.

Bowler

Jensen

Rhodes. Pa

Buckley

Keeney

Rogers. Masa.

Byrne, ni.

Kelly. NT.

6t George

Bymea, Wis.

Keogh

Bchwengel

Cederberg

Kllburn

Shelley

Chamberlain

Krueger

Simpson, Pa.

Chudofl

Laird

Spence

Clark

Lane

Taber

Coudert

Latham

Taylor

CurtU. Mo.

McConnell

Teague. Tex.

Dawson. 111.

Mcculloch

Teller

Delaney

McOovern

Tewes

Dolllnger

Mc In tire

Thompson. La

E>onohue

Machrowlci

Utt

Dooley

Miller, Md

Vursell

Dorn.N. Y.

Miller. N. Y.

Walnwrlght

Eberharter

Mlnahall

Written

Fallon

Montoya

Wler

Farbstein

Morano

With row

FaHcell

Morris

Wolverton

FIno

Morrison

Zelenko

Accordingly the Committee rose; and
the Speaker having resimied the chair,
Mr. PoRAND, Chairman of the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the
Union, reported that that Committee,
having had under consideration the bill.
H. R. 6127. and finding itself without a
quorum, he had directed the roll to be
called, when 335 Members responded to
their names, a quorum, and he submitted
herewith the names of the absentees to
be spread upon the Journal.

The Committee resumed its sitting.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Illinois [Mr. Mason] is recognized.

Mr. MASON. Mr. Chairman. I was
trying to say when I was interrupted
by the quorum call that I propose to
make a few general observations on this
bill and discuss the constitutional prob-
lems involved. That Is all I propose to
do. I was asked why I was standing
over on that side when I usually stand
over here and I said that I thought the
people on that side needed the gospel
according to Noah rather than the peo-
ple on this side.

I want to serve notice, Mr. Chairman,
that I win not yield until I have fin-
ished my statement, then I hope to have
5 or 10 minutes of very interesting fun
with the questions that will be asked.

Mr. Chairman, In discussing the explo-
sive subject of civil rights. I want to ap-
proach It without bias, discussing It both
impartially and Impersonally — If that Is
possible — Ignoring the controversial seg-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8539

regation Issue almost entirely, placing
ttie emphasis upon Clod-given bimian

riKhts and States rights and the tendency
of our leaders to sacrifice those rights
ix\ order to establish by law the mirage
of civil rights.

We have all heard the old saying. "The
cure can be worse than the disease." In
connection with the proposed civil-rights
lc»qislatlon that saying may well apply.
We can exchange States rights and our
God-given human rights for a civil-rights
program and be much worse off after the
exchange. Let us not exchange the real
blessings we now enjoy for the fancied
or fictitious blessings that may be a part
of the mirage known as civil rights.

Habits, customs, obligations are much
more effective than any civil-rights pro-
pram implemented by Federal laws.
Custom Is much more effective than any
law because It polices itself. Laws are
not particularly eflBclent. A law has
little chance of being enforced if It does
not have the approval and support of
the majority of the people affected.

Mr. Chairman, prohibition was once
the law of the land ; It was a part of our
written Constitution. However, because
It did not reflect the conscience of the
majority of our people, it was not en-
forclble from a practical standpoint and
it had to be repealed.

Edmuiid Burke once said. "I know of
no way to bring an indictment against
a whole people." That statement applies
in a democracy such as ours. It does not
apply under a despot; it does not apply
in Russia.

Any attempt to enforce a civil-rights
law upon 48 States that have different
conditions, different customs, different
social standards, and people with differ-
ent personal consciences is simply an ef-
fort to indict, to arraign, to try a whole
nation, a whole section, a whole state.
It Just cannot be done in a democracy;
it can only be done under a dictator.
Is not that exactly what this civil-rights
bill proposes to do? Mast we surrender
our precious guaranteed States rights In
order to establish a program of civil
rights? These are questions that bother
me. They worry me. Is not the cure
much worse than the disease?

Laws reflect reform; they never induce
reform. Laws that violate or go con-
trary to the mores of a community never
bring about social peace and harmony.
Our times call for patience, for modera-
tion, for gradual evolution — not revolu-
tion by Federal law or by Supreme Court
fiat.

Mr. Chairman, today the 85th Congress
under President Eisenhower is facing the
same civil-rights proposal that the 81st
Congress faced under President Truman.
In 1948 President Truman gave the fol-
lowing as his civil-rights objectives:

First. We believe that aU men are cre-
ated equal under law and that they have
the right to equal justice under law.

Second. We believe that all men have
the right to freedom of thought and of
expression and the right to worship as
they please.

Third. We believe that all men are en-
titled to equal opportunities for jobs, for
homes, for good health, and for educa-
tion.

Fourth. We believe that all men should
have a voice in their government, and
that government should protect, not
usurp, the rights of the people.

I say. these are all worthy objectives.
No decent, law-abiding citizen would
question these objectives nor oppose
them. But. President Truman's methods
for bringing about these objectives were
questioned. His methods were opposed.

Mr. Chairman, I want to call your at-
tention and the attention of the NaUon
to the fact — and this is the crux of this
whole matter — that each and every one
of these objectives is a State function, a
State responsibility, a State obligation.
They come within the police powers of
the various States, and were deflnitely
left to the States by the Constitution.
Why then should the Federal Govern-
ment violate States rights by assuming
functions that belong to the States?

When the Federal Constitution was
before the States for ratiflcation, four of
the States demanded guarantiee that
freedom of the press, of speech, and of
religion would be a part of the Consti-
tution. Nine of the States insisted that
States rights be guaranteed. Thus the
10th amendment was made a part of
tiie Bill of Rights so that the Federal
Government would be restrained from
ever interfering with the rights of the
States under the Constitution.

The first nine amendments in the
of Rights deal with the rights of the
pie, God-given rights; the 10th amern
ment deals with the powers of the Feder
al Government. It limits those power
It says, m effect, to the President, to th
Supreme Court, and to the Congr
"You may do what the Constituti
specifically says you may do, but youjjrfay
do no more. Those powers thaL^re not
given you are either reserve* to the
States or they belong to the people."
That is what the 10th amendment spells
out, and we must not forg^it m,our
desire to establish civil rights.

Mr. Chairman, time and again, froi^
Chief Justice Marshall to Chief Justice
Hughes, the United States Supreme
Court has said that the wisdom or de-
sirability of either Federal or State legis-
lation to do for the people what might
be for their good was not for the Court
to decide, but simply whether the power
to legislate in any particular matter had
been delegated to the Nation, or was re-
served to the States or to the people.

Justice Hughes, in deciding the
Schechter "sick chicken" case, by which
NRA's "blue eagle" died, said:

It Is not the province of this Court to
consider the economic advantages or disad-
vantages of such a centralized sTstem. It la
sufficient to say that the Federal Constitu<
tlon does not provide for it (295 U. S. 495).

Paraphrasing the remarks of Justice
Hughes. I say. "It is not the province of
this Congress to consider the social ad-
vantages or disadvantages of such a
Federal civil rights proposal. It Is suf-
ficient to say that the Federal Constitu-
tion does not provide for it."

Mr. Chairman, after Lincoln had been
elected President he wrote:

The maintenance Inviolate of the rights
of the States and especlaUy of the right of

each Btate to order and control its own do-
mestic Institutions according to its own
judgment exclusively. Is eesentlal to that
balance of powers on which the perfection
of our political fabric depends.

The Republican platform upon which
Lincoln had been nominated and elected

contained the following plank:

The maintenance of the principles pro-
mulgated In the Declaration of Independence,
and embodied In the Federal Ck>nstitutlon
are essential to the preservation of our re-
publican Instltutionis, and that the Federal
Constitution, the rights of the States, and
the Union of the States, must be preserved.

Mr. Chairman, in those days political
platforms were sacred pledges to be car-
ried out by the successful party and the
candidates of that party. The Constitu-
tion in that day was the solid, tmchange-
able foundation upon which our Govern-
ment rested, the rule book that must be
scrupulously followed by each admin-
istration that was entrusted by the voters
with the Nation's affairs and well-being.

Such were-t^e views and the opinions
of ChiefJustice Marshall and Chief Jus-
tice Hughes, two of our most distin-
guished Justices. Such were the views of
the first Republican President. Honest
Abe/ How times do change.

r. Chairman, in 1952 Candidate

isenhower, before he became President,
said:

The Federal Government did not create
the States of this Republic. The States
created the Federal Government. The crea-
tion should not supersecr' the creator. For
if the States lose their meaning our entire
system of government loses Its meaning and
the next step is the rise of the centralized
national state in which the seeds of autocracy
can take root and grow.

Those words, of course, were uttered
when General Eisenhower was a candi-
date for the Presidency. Since becom-
ii3g President. Eisenhower's actions have
not carried out his preelection utterances
insofar as States rights are concerned.
Preelection utterances are no longer

Mr. Chairman. I had the good forttine
to serve on the Commission on Intergov-
ernmental Relations imder the chair-
manship of Dean Manion, one of the
greatest constitutional lawyers in Amer-
ica. The one great principle he empha-
sized was that the purpose of the Ameri-
can Government is to preserve and pro-
tect our God-given rights; that the
American Government is a mechanism
for the protection of human rights; that
civil rights are rights^^provided by law
that deflnitely come under the jurisdic-
tion of the States, not under the juris-
diction of the Federal Government; that,
whenever the Federal Governmient un-
dertakes to establish or set up a i^ogram
of civil rights, it must of necessity en-
croach upon States rights andVupon
God-given human rights. \

Can we afford to do that? Darevwe
violate the Constitution by ignoring the
following clear and concise lahguage? —

The powers not delegated to the United
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited
by It to the States, are reserved to the
States respectively, cr to the people.

Mr. Chairman, in my humble opinloo.
any Member of this House who votes for

8540

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

the proposed civil-rights bill will vio-
late his oath of office to uphold and de-
fend the Constitution of the United
States. We should refuse to do that, no
matter how desirable the objective seems
to be.

Mr. JOHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. MASON. I yield.

Mr. JOHANSEN. I should like to
commend the gentleman on his very able
presentation. I would like to raise the
question as to the gentleman's feeling
and impressions with respect to the re-
sponsibility of the Federal Government
for guaranteeing and safeguarding the
right of citizens to vote and the extent
to which he feels it is a Federal or a State
obligation.

Mr. MASON. The right to vote is a
civil right. Under the best interpretation
of the Constitution, civil rights are rights
granted by law and reside in the states
and not in the Federal Government. The
States can make whatever reservations
they want as long as they treat all their
citizens ahke. They can say you have
to pay a poll tax in order to vote. They
can say you have to be 18 years old or
21 years old. If you want to vote. It is
the States' business to do that and not
the Federal Governments business.

Mr. JOHANSEN. What actions on the
part of the State or failure to act on the
part of the State would the gentleman
construe to be a violation of the 15th
amendment which guarantees that the
rights of citizens shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any
State.

Mr. MASON. That, in my opinion,
after studying the Constitution for years
and teaching the Constitution, is a gen-
eral statement made in the Constitution
that that shall be the general rule re-
garding all citizens regardless of the
States in which they live. But. it still
leaves to the State the right to draft laXTs,
confining that right, explaining that
right, or even limiting that right.

Mr. JOHANSEN. What would the
gentleman say with respect to section 2 of
the 15th amendment to the effect that
the Congress shall have the power to
enforce this article by appropriate legis-
lation?

Mr. MASON. And the Congress has
never done that — and the Congress has
never done that.

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. MASON. I yield.

Mr. DINGELL. Does that mean the
Congress does not have the power?

Mr. MASON. It does not.

Mr. DINGELL. Does not the language
of the 15th amendment say, 'Congress
shall have power to enforce this article
by appropriate legislation"?

Mr. MASON. It does.

Mr. DINGELL. Does the gentleman
deny Congress has that power?

Mr. MASON. He does not.

Mr. DINGELL. The gentleman says
this Congress does not have the power in
spite of the clear language of the Con-
stitution to that effect?

Mr. MASON. I am saying that Con-
gress has the right to implement that
general statement, but that Congress has
never acted under that.

Mr. DINGELL. Do you not think it Is
about time Congress did that?
Mr. MASON. No. I do not because you

were all challenged here the other day to
produce one Instance in your Congres-
sional District where anyone was refused
the right to vote, that had the right un-
der these State laws, and not one Member
could cite one instance.

Mr. DINGELL I would like to say this
to the gentleman, if the gentleman al-
leges there is no reason for passing this
legislation

Mr. MASON. That is what I do allege.

Mr. DINGELL Then this is per-
fectly harmless legislation because it
walks on no one's toes; is that not a
fact?

Mr. MASON. And in passing it, you
are violating in my opinion, the Constitu-
tion of the United Stales and your oath
of office because you are legislating in a
field that does not belong to the Federal
Government.

Mr. DINGELL. I am going to quote
the Constitution to the gentleman. It
says:

Congress shall have power to enforce this
article by appropriate legislation.

That refers to the 15th amendment,
and the Constitution says and I quote:

The right of citizens of the United Statea
to vote shall not b« denied or abridged
by the L'nited States or by any State on
account of race, color, or previous condition
of servitude.

Mr. MASON. I have read that docu-
ment and I have taught that before the
gentleman was born. So maybe I know
what is in it.

Mr DINGELL. I want to say I have
great respect for the gentleman's old age,
but I happen to know a little constitu-
tional law too. and both the courts, and
I say he is wrong.

Mr. ASHMORE. Mr. Chairman, I
yield the gentleman 5 additional min-
utes.

Mr BOYLE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr, MASON. I yield.

Mr. BOYLE. Referring to your origi-
nal remarks as to the weight of cus-
tom, is it not true if yoa extend your
argument regarding the weight of cus-
tom we would never have had demo-
cratic government?

Mr. MASON. Oh, no. Custom is
something that has been established by
being accepted generally by society as
a whole, whether It is in this State or
that State or the other State. When
it is accepted by a majority of the peo-
ple, regardless of the boundaries, then
it becomes what might be called an un-
written law. And it is earned out gen-
erally by people without any laws on the
statute books.

Mr. BOYLE. That seem."; to be in sup-
port of my proposition that if you are
going to argue about the dignity and
the permanence of custom, you rule
out the possibility of ever having a
democratic government or a democratic
society.

Mr. MASON. Oh, I think the gentle-
man l.s absolutely wrong, because cus-
tom gradually changes in an evolution-
ary manner, and it is not practical to
revolutionize custom by passing a law

forcing everybody to do what the great
majority do not believe in and do not
want.

Mr. BOYLE. Will the gentleman
yield further?

Mr. MASON. I am glad to yield to
the gentleman.

Mr. BOYLE. The gentleman Indi-
cated in his opening remarks that the
first 10 amendments to the Constitu-
tion are restrictive on Federal activity.

Mr. MASON. No. You did not un-
derstand plain English. I said that the
first nine amendments dealt with hu-
man rights. God-given rights of per-
sons.

Mr. BOYLE. That Is right.
Mr. MASON. I said the 10th amend-
ment hmited the power of the Federal
Government.

Mr. BOYLE. Therefore I renew my
observation: Is It not true that you said
that the first 10 amendments are re-
strictive on Federal activity?
Mr. MASON. No.

Mr. BOYLE. Just Incidentally, ap-
pealing from "Noah's Treatise on Consti-
tutional Law," let me enunciate a propo-
sition that according to "Boyle's Treatise
on Constitutional Law," the first 10
amendments to the Constitution are re-
strictive of Federal activity. I chal-
lenge anybody in the Congress to argue
that that is not a true and correct repre-
sentation of American jurisprudence.

Mr. MASON. We are not arguing
that point with you. You are stating
something that I did not state. You
are stating that the first 10 amendments
are restrictive on the Federal Govern-
ment. I said the first 9 amendments
dealt with persons, God-given human
rights for those persons, and I said the
10th amendment limited Federal Juris-
diction.

Mr. BO"YLE. I was just agreeing with
the gentleman, and sought to say that
insofar as you adopt that position you
are correct according to all of the rul-
ing cases that enunciate that proposi-
tion.

Now will the gentleman answer this
question: Does he agree that the sub-
sequent amendments to the Federal Con-
stitution are restrictive on State activ-
ities?
Mr. MASON. Some of them are: yes.
Mr. BOYLE. Are they not exclu-
sively?

Mr. MASON. That has nothing to do
with this problem that we are dealing
with now.

Mr. BOYLE. It might help you to re-
solve the question of whether under the
15th amendment there is a limitation on
State activity.

Mr. MASON. You are entitled to the
gospel according to Boyli and I am en-
titled to the gospel according to Noah.
Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. MASON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Illinois.

Mr. YATES. The gentleman has
stated that the right to vote is within
the province of the States. I think I
interpreted the gentleman's statement
correctly. What would the gentleman
do in the event that within any of the
States there is an inability, there is an
absolute restriction on the rights of cer-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8541

tain American citizens within tho$e
States to vote for National or Federal
offlces?

Mr. MASON. I would say that that
Is not according to the Constitution;
that should not be, according to the Con-
stitution; and I defy anybody to prove
that that is a fact.

We hear all this talk about poll taxes.
The poll taxes apply to the white people
as well as to the dark people; they treat
all alike: and as long as it Is a limi-
tation on the right to vote in that State,
treating all alike. I do not see anything
wrong with it.

Mr. YATES. What about questions of
Violence?

Mr. MASON. We have questions of
violence, but in the last 60 years that I
have watched them and followea* them
they have been gradually disappearing
until we have hardly any more. This
is a gradual evolution, something you
cannot bring about by law.

Mr. MOORE. Mr. Chairman. I yield
10 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio
I Mr. Bowl.

Mr. BOW. Mr. Chairman. I have
asked for this time to discuss what I
consider a very serious question of civil
rights. I assume many of my colleagues
know what I am going to talk about for
they have heard me speak of this sub-
ject on numerous occasions. I should
like to discuss civil rights.

We have heard discussions here on
the proposition that the color of a man's
GikiJi has changed the right of some peo-
ple. The rights I want to talk about
today are the rights under the Consti-
tution of the United States of the men
wearing a particular tyiJe of suit who
lose their constitutional rights and their
civil rights — the man who wears the uni-
form of the United States, our Armed
Forces, and leaves the shores of the
United States to serve abroad, who then
loses his civil rights.

I have been asked by some of my col-
leagues whether I intend to offer an
amendment to this bill on the question
of the status of forces. I want to take
this time to say to my colleagues that
I do not intend to offer an amendment
on this bill. I do not think it is the
orderly and proper way to approach the
problem. I understand that we jvill
have hearings shortly, however, before
the Foreign Affairs Committee on the
resolution as we had them last year. I
am hopeful that the events and things
that have happened will have pointed
up the facts that the fears many of us
have expressed in the past 3 years on
the Status of Forces Treaty have now
come about and that we will be able to
have that resolution reported out to the
floor of the House so that in an orderly
and proper manner we may approach
the question as to whether those treaties
should be renegotiated or abrogated.

The resolution is House Joint Reso-
lution 18. I feel that we can again pre-
sent to the Foreign Affairs Committee
evidence that will place us in a position
where they will permit that resolution
to come to the floor of the House for
consideration.

Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, wlU the
gentleman yield?

Mr. BOW. I yield to the gentleman
from South Carolina.

Mr. RIVERS. The gentleman has
taken so much Interest in the Girard
case and the whole concept of the Status
of Forces Agreement, and he has gone
into the facts surrounding the Girard
case so fully I wonder if the gentleman
would venture the assertion that Girard
Is being sold down the river primarily
because of international political expe-
diency to satisfy and save face with the
Empire of Japan?

Mr. BOW. Well, I have had some
feelings about that, of course, as my col-
league knows. May I say that as far as
the Girard case is concerned. I believe
that the Members would be interested,
since we are talking about laws and civil
liberties, to know something about this
particular treaty with Japan.

Mr. RIVERS. Let me make one
fuither statement. The reason I asked
that question is this: The military au-
thorities in the theater of Japan refused
to turn over Girard to the Japar^se au-
thorities and they were overruled. He on
the ground floor was overruled by some-
body somewhere in Washington.

Mr. BOW. I would like to go into the
Girard case and discuss with the com-
mittee here today something about this
Japanese treaty. There have been many
stories around atwut this proposition and
I think perhaps the House might like to
know something about it. I will say I
have practically lived with these treaties
for the last few years and I think I know
something about them.

Under the security treaty entered
Into between the United States and
Japan. Japan asked the United States to
keep troops in Japan. We hear many
times that we are in these countries to
protect ourselves, that we are there at
the sufferance of these other nations;
but the treaty itself is a request of this
country to maintain our Armed Forces
in Japan.

Now, there Is no Status of Forces
Agreement in the treaty Itself. There Is
a provision In the treaty that there will
be an agreement on the disposition of
troops, and that is all. Then our Am-
bassadors got together and they entered
into the agreement whereby Japan would
have the right to try our men for off-duty
offenses and that we would retain the
right to try our men for on-duty offenses.

A Commission was set up of 2, 1 be-
ing an American officer who now is Ad-
miral Hubbard and the other is a repre-
sentative of the Japanese Government.
They are the ones who are to determine
whether a man is on duty, and we certify
that young Girard was on duty. The
fact of the matter is he- was guarding
American property imder orders fron^an
American officer when this Incident oc-
curred. So he was on duty, and our Grov-
ernment has maintained, and still main-
tains, that Girard was on duty.

But prior to this, and back some
months ago, these two men said:

"Well. now. what U going to happen if we
cannot agree on whether or not a man U on
duty?"

There were only two men on the Com-
mission, and there might be a stalemate.
This Is where I think we were In error.

They talked it over In this meeting, and
then their minutes were made up, and
the minutes became a part of the agree-
ment. In that we said that if the two
men cannot agree, then we will submit it
to a court to determine whether or not
the man was on duty.

Mr. Chairman, what coul^ do you
think we agreed to send it to? To a
court In Japan. So you see what we were
up against. If these two men could not
agrae, then it was to go to a court. If
there was to be a determination it would
go to the Japanese court to determine
whether or not the man was on duty.
Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
, Mr. BOW. I yield to the gentleman
from Georgia.

Mr. LANHAM. I want to commend
the gentleman from Ohio for the splen-
did fight he has been making for several
years to try to get some modification of
these Status of Forces Agreements. The
gentleman will remember that last year
I introduced a similar resolution and
that I, along with the gentleman from
Ohio, appeared before the Committee on
Foreign Affairs to testify in favor of that
resolution.
Mr. BOW. That Is correct.
Mr. LANHAM. I agree with the gen-
tleman this happening in Japan Is, In my
opinion, going to make it possible to get
some action or at least to bring a bill to
the floor of the House and see If we can-
not do something to protect the men who
serve us in foreign nations.

I am happy to note that a United
States district court has temporarily en-
Joined the Secretary of State, Mr. Dulles,
and the Secretary of Defense, Mr. Wil-
son, from surrendering Girard to the
Japanese courts for trial.

If he is surrendered to the Japanese
courts and denied his constitutional
rights it will be an act of appeasement
on the part of our ac&ninistration that
will be hard to justify.

Mr. BOW. I appreciate the gentle-
man's remarks.

May I Just say this. It shows, in all
of this fight I have been making, the
necessity for American servicemen to
have the right of trial by jury. One ol
the fundamentals of American juris-
prudence is that a man has a right to
trial by jury whether it is in the civil
law or whether it is in the case of these
men who are now sent overseas.

Mrs. CHURCH. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman 3rield?

Mr. BOW. 1 5^eld to the gentlewoman
from Illinois.

Mrs. CHURCH. I could not more
heartily agree with any words ever
spoken on the floor of this House. I
know of the fight that the gentleman
from Ohio has nmde. I have been in
the Yokosuka prison in Japan in which
our men are held. I know their resent-
ment at being denied a trial by jury.
I also know that som^ of the sentences
given were light; but the fact remains
that the American soldier who is sent
overseas, by action not his own. in my
opinion has every right to the same pro-
tection imder the Constitution, particu-
larly if he is on duty, as would be his if
he had remained in this country. I
would like to remind the gentleman from

8542

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

Ohio that there were — and it has been
published— 10 members of the House
Committee on Foreign Affairs who voted
to bring out the Bow resolution last year.
I am very happy and proud to have been
among that number; and I pledge my
utmost support to the finish this year, to
maintain justice for our men in uniform.

Mr. JOHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOW. I yield to the gentleman
from Michigan.

Mr JOHANSEN. I would like to com-
mend the gentleman for his statement

Mr. SCHEREIi. Mr. Chairman, wili
the gentleman yield?

Mr BOW. I yield to the gentleman
from Ohio.

Mr. SCHERER An identified Commu-
nist who appears before a congressional
Investigatmg committee, even though h«^
Is an aiien, has the right to invoke thi?
fifth am.endment Now, does an Ameri-
can soldier who is tried by a Japanese
court have that privilege?

Mr BOW. No. Of course, he has lost
that constitutional right

Mr THOMPSON of New Jersev Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. EOW I yield to the gentleman
from New Jersey

Mr THOMPSON of New Jersey With
respect to the Girard case as distin-
guished from the status of forces prob-
lems in sieneral, did the gentleman .say
that in the Girard case this was after
Admiral Hubbard and his opposite had
discussed it before submitting it to a
Japanese court '^

Mr. EOW If we had not agreed to
turn Girard over, then the next step
would have been to go to the Japaneso
court.

Mr THOMPSON of New Jersey With
respect to the agreement to turn him
over, one gentleman earlier said — I think
It was the gentleman ffom South Caro-
lina— that the decision was made her«
In Washington. Does the distinguished
gentleman from Ohio know who made
that decision in Waiihington''

Mr. BOW No; I do not know who
made it. but I am of the opinion it was
made here in Washington and that Ad-
miral Hubbard was under orders from
the Dej^artraent of Defense

Mr THOMPSON of New Jersey. Is a
the understanding of the gentleman from
Ohio that that decision was made by
the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary
of State and by the President?

Mr. EiOW. No; not the original de-
cision to turn the boy over. It was not
made on that level. Later it was mace
on that level.

Mr. 1HOMPSON of New Jersey. All
right. But. ultimately a decision was
made by the President of the United
States and the Secretary of Slate and
the Secietary of Defense, was it not?

Mr. BOW. To confirm the decision
of A:lmiral Hubbard to turn him over.*

Mr. THOMPSON of New Jersey. Now.
could those officers, including the Presi-
dent, have reversed Admiral Hubbard s
decision?

Mr. BOW. They could reverse the
Riven word of the United States at that
time: the position taken.

Mr THOMPSON of New Jersey. They
could. In other words, the ultimate re-
sponsibility, then, in the Girard case lies
with the President, the Secretary of
States, and the Secretary of Defense,
does It not?

Mr BOW May I say to the gentle-
man, that I think it should be recognized
that the United States Government
under this agreement had given its word
to turn Lhe boy over. That was then
reviewed, I think by Secretary Wilson or
Secretary Dulles. To answer the gen-
tleman. It would be on the basis that this
country had given its word under an
a-^reement which could not be revoked
without breaking the word or the plediie
of the United hl^les. That is not my
interpretation. I am saying now what
they have said is the position that they
have taken. p

Mr THOMPSON of New Jersey. I
understand that, but there was a ques-
tion, was there net. in the Kentleman's
m'nd but m the minds of other authori-
ties, as to whether cr not Girard was on
duty"

Mr EOW. No . I tiunk I can say to the
gentleman from New Jer:.ey that I have
never seen any question raised as far as
American officials *eie concerned as to
the on-duty .status of this man I think
wo have always maintained he was on
duty. There was a question raised, how-
ever, by the Japanese as to whether he
was on duty

Mr GROSS Mr. Chairman, ^mU the
gentleman yield'

Mr BOW. I yield to the gentleman
from Iowa

Mr. GROSS. Lot me answer the
question of the gentleman from New
Jt-rsoy [Mr. Th ^i«?s«.)n i as to whether
th's man Girard was on duty or not. A
press release by Secretary of State Dulles
and Secretary of Defense Wilson as of
the dale of Tuesday, June 4. 1957. had
this to say in one sentence. I quote
vorbalim from that elease:

The corcrnandlnf st*nfral of Gtrnrd s divi-
sion crrtiflMl that a-rara s dctiuu was U^ i»e
l.i tiie perfjrmauce of nfflc;.!! duly

BOW. There Is no question of

THOMPSON nf New Jersey. Mr
will the gentleman yield

Mr
that
Mr

Chairman,
further '

Mr BOW I yield

Mr THOMPSON nf New Jersev That
being the case, and I concede that it is
the case, then I fail to understand com-
pletely a^ I know the gentleman does,
as well as the gentleman from Iowa
fMr Gross', how in the name of any-
thing the soldier was turned over to the
jurisdiction of a Japanese court by the
President under the.se circumstances.

Mr. BOW I miuht agree with the
f""ntlpman I r.used the question with
Secretary Wilson onpinally and I have
raised it with the President.

Mr. TPIOMF'SON of New Jersey. I
happen to be m basic disagreement with
the positirn of the eentleman on the
Status of Forces AKreent^nt, but in this
instance. I am m sympathy with his
position.

Mr. BOW. In this case we have
reached the millennim: the gentleman

from New Jersey (Mr THOiiPSONl and
I are finally in agreement on .something
for the first time I ihinji: since we have
been m Congress.

Mr. JOHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield''

Mr BOW. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. JOHANSEN. Is not the gentle-
man in agreement with the statement
that the initial decision to surrender
the man was made by someone higher
than the admiral on the Commission
and someone lower in the echelon than
the Secretary of Defense^

Mr. BOW. I think me genlleman is
correct.

Mr. JOHANSEN. And as far as the
gentleman is concerned, the Identity of
that person or persons is unknown?

Mr. BOW. Unknowii to me.

Mr JOHANSEN. Do^.'« rot the gen-
tleman feel that It Ls a disturbing thing
in the extreme that a yielding of the
sovereignty of the Government of the
United States and of the ruhts of a citi-
zen can be made by a facele.^s member
of the bureaucracy''

Mr EOW. I ihink we should f^nd out
who It IS and somebody should be re-
moved.

Mr SCHERER Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yieW

Mr BOW I yield to the gentleman.

Mr SCHERER Is it not a fact that
often whfn we turn a boy over to a for-
eign country to be tried, he cannot get
a fair trial for the simple rea.son that
there are prejudices and hatreds in the
community m which he is to be tried by
reason of the fact that such animosities
are engendered when you have an army
there protecting that foreign country''
And as a result of these hatreds and
prejudice."!, and evidenced by what hap-
pened on Formosa the other day, it Is
Impossible to get normal safeguards
thrown around such a boy to that he
may obtain a fair trial in that foreign
jurisdiction''

Mr BOW. I think the gentleman :s
correct.

Mr SCHERER. In this country, do
we not provide for the right to apply for
a change of venue when there is a feel-
ing of animosity?

Mr BOW. That Is correct. If a man
cannot get a fair trial In a certain area
in this country, he may apply for a
ch^^Re of venue.

Mr SCHERER. But there are no such
provisions for a change of venue in 90
percent of the countries where these
foreign cases might arise.

Mr BOW. And let me .say further
that there are many other constitutional
provLsions that we have that are not rec-
ognized by the penal system of Japian.

Mr SCHERER. There are at least
10 of them.

Mr GR06S Mr Chairman, will the
gentleman yield ''

Mr. BOW. I yield to the gentleman
from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. Has the gentleman
made it completely clear that there is yo
such thing as a Jury trial in Japan?

Mr. BOW. Yes.

Mrs. BLI^H. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOW. I yield.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8543

Mrs. BUTCH. I wanted to be sure
that It is clear that there is no jury trial
in Japan.

Mr. BOW. That is correct.

lii. JOHANSEN. Mr. Chairman. I
ask unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point in the Rxcord.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objecUon
to the request of the gentleman from
Michigan?

There was no objection.

Mr. JOHANSEN. Mr. Chairman the
current outcry against turning an
American serviceman over to the Japa-
nese courts for an alleged offense while
on duty is a belated public awakening to
a situation about which a minority of
Members of Congress — of whom I am
one — have been protesting for several
years.

In fact. I testified on this very mat-
ter—in opposition to the sUtus of forces
agreements — before the House Commit-
tee on Foreign Affairs on July 14. 1955.

Moreover, the main point which I
stressed in this testimony 2 years ago
becomes particularly significant in view
of the present pending effort in the
United States Federal Court to secure
a writ of habeas corpus in behalf of
Army Specialist William Girard. My
argument, before the committee, was
that surrender of an American citizen
to a foreign court, or his conviction by
a foreign court, effectively deprived that
citizen of his constitutional right of pe-
tition, in American courts, for a writ of
habeas corpus.

As my colleagues well know the writ
of habeas corpus, going back to ancient
English law, is a court order to a Jailor
or other officer having a prisoner in
chaise to bring him before the bar for
Inquiry as to the legahty of his restraint
from liberty. Our own Constitution —
article I. section 9 — provides that —

Th« piivUege of the writ of habeas corpus
shaU not be suspended, unless when In cases
of rebellion or Invasion the public safety
may require It.

In my testimony before the House
committee in .support of a resolution op-
posing trial of American servicemen in
foreign courts. I cited the Federal Court
decision that an American serviceman
tried and imprisoned by a French court
could not be the subject of a writ of
habeas corpus sought in a United States
court. This decision, as I pointed out.
was based on the finding that the court
was without Jurisdiction in the case —
since jurisdiction had been turned over
to the foreign government — and that
American Army officials no longer pos-
sessed custody of the person for whom
the writ was sought, and therefore could
not be ordered to "produce the body,"

Possible significance of the timing of
the petition for writ of habeas corpus
In the present Girard case is that ap-
parently he has not yet actually been
turned over to the Japanese authorities
and, of course, has not yet been tried
or convicted In a foreign court. It will,
of course, be a matter of Immense con-
cern to see the outcome of these Judicial
proceedings.

»The Important, and outrageous, fact,
at last dramatized for the American

public in the present case, is t^at once
an American serviceman Is tiu-ned over
to foreign courts the basic constitu-
tional safeguard of petition for writ of
habeas corpus In an American cotirt Is
forfeited. In my judgment, many other
constitutional rights and protections are
also actually or potentially abrogated.
One of the other shocking aspects of
the Girard case Is, of course, the fact
that the decision and the order turning
Girard over to the Japanese authorities
was made by some anonymous — as yet,
at least — subordinate in the executive
branch. Yet this decision was regarded
by top Defense and State Etepartment
officials as a binding and Irrevocable
commitment of our Government.

It is appalling to think that an un-
identified, "faceless" bureaucrat — one,
therefore, subject to no accountability —
can make a binding decision involving
the rights of an American citizen and
the sovereignty ol" the United States
Government.

To me, the entire situation Is intoler-
able, and I hope the present case will
bring Congressional action ending this
state of affairs.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOW. I yield to the gentleman
from Nebraska.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Chair-
man, I ask unanimous consent to extend
my remarks at this point in the Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objecUon
to the request of the gentleman from
Nebraska?
There was no objection.
Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Chair-
man. I afifree with the gentleman from
Ohio I Mr. Bowl on his views of the
status-of-forces agreements, that this
country maintains with many of the
countries where our troops are now sta-
tioned. Several resoliltions have been
Introduced In the House which request
the President to make a revision of the
present administrative agreements and
treaties which permit foreign courts to
have criminal Jurisdiction over American
servicemen in their country. Resolution
No. 16, by Mr. Bow^. seems to cover this
Important and sensitive subject.

I think it is agreed that Soldier Girard
was on duty In Japan defending the
property of the United States. It seems
to me that with our troops now sta-
tioned in 72 places outside the United
States that it is important that we ex-
tend to the American boy the protection
of the flag and the Constitution when
he Is serving In these foreign countries.
In the case of Soldier Girard, appar-
ently someone in the Defense Depart-
ment made the decision that he should be
tried In a Japanese court. It should be
understood that Japan has no trial by
jury. It seems also that with our troojw
and many civilian employees stationed in
these foreign countries that their grows
up a certain tension and prejudice
against our troops and civilian personnel.
This could not help but be reflected In
any court procedure that might be fol-
lowed. That was thoroughly demon-
strated by what happened on Formosa
In the recent riot that destroyed Ameri-
can property because there was a court

martial decision that people of Formosa
did not Uke. Formosa was supposed to
be a friendly foreign nation.

Mr. Chairman, every Member ofCon-
gresB is receiving letters and wires pro-
testing this Intolerable situation. A
sample of such protest Is a wire that I re-
ceived from the American Legion which

1 read as follows. Grand Island Post 53.
American Legion, at a special meeting on
Jime 6, 1957, has gone on record as
strongly opposing the action taken by the
mllitiuy in submitting Private Girard to
trial by a Japanese court. This wire was
signed by J. D. Morledge the commander.

Mr. Chairman, I will support the res-
olution by Mr. Bow and others that will
not only give the American boy full pro-
tection but will cancel and mod^y the
so-called. Status of Forces agreements.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield

2 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. Tbompson]; but I may say
that this is the last time I shall yield
for the purpose of this discussion. We
are way off base here and should re-
turn to a discussion of the civil rights
bill.

Mr. THOMPSON of New Jersey. Mr.
Chairman. I am constrained to agree
with the distinguished gentleman that
this is extraneous to civil rights except
that in a court-martial proceeding there
is no trial by jury. So, the connec-
tion might be there, even though fairly
remote. ^

If the gentlemian from Ohio [Mr. Bow]
would answer a question I .would be
grateful. We are In agreem^iit perhaps
for the first time, and this is delightful. ,
In the colloquy a minute or two ago It
was stated th'iit the decision to hand Wil-
liam Girard over to Japanese authorities
was made by some faceless person in the
bureaucracy. Is that not correct?

Mr. JOHANSEN. That is the re-
mark I made; yes.

Mr. THOMPSON of New Jersey. I
would submit to the gentleman from Ohio
this question: Is he In agreement with
me that the ultimate responsibility need
not rest with some anonymous, faceless
person, but can be quite aptly placeS-ln
the Girard case on the person with the
ultimate responsibility; namely, the
conunander in chief of the Armed
Forces?

Mr. BOW. Then I would say to the
gentleman from New Jersey, you are
faced with this, that in the first instance
the only question there was whether or "
not this boy should have been turned over
for trial to the Japanese. After that Is
done, then the second question arises:
What is the pledged word of the United
States by a duly authorized and con-
stituted representative of the United
States under an agreement entered into
between the United States and the sov-
ereign nation; and after the word
has been given on that, whethernt should
be broken by someone in a different
echelon. To me, what the gentleman's
real objection should be is to the agree-
ment. I can see what the gentleman is
attempting to do, of course.

Mr. THOMPSON of New Jersey. The
gentleman and I are in agreement. The
gentleman from Iowa is also In agree-
ment. I think the consensus is that the

8544

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Jiuie 7

man was on duty. The gentleman said
that therefore, under the Status of
Forces Treaty, whether or not you agree
with it. jurisdlctioa should have been
retained by the military courts of the
United States, but it was evident that
the man was turned over by the Chief
Executive, the Commander in Chief, the
President of the United States. General
Eisenhower, and not some nameless bu-
reaucrat, must bear the responsibility for
placing Girards civil liberties into the
hands of a Japanese court.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
10 minutes to the gentleman from Vir-
ginia [Mr. ABBITT].

Mr. ABBITT. Mr. Chairman. I am
bitterly opposed to this legislation which
is known as the civil rights bill. This
clearly is a misnomer and should be
called the anti-civil-rights legislati£)n.
Frankly, in my opinion, it is the most
civil rights destroying legislation that
has ever come to my attention as a legis-
lator. It is destructive not only of the
rights and privileges of the people of this
great Nation but it strikes at the sover-
eignty of our States. It strikes down the
constitutional concept of our Govern-
ment. It is a most drastic and inde-
fensible proposal.

I desire to call attention briefly to just
what the legislation permits. I think
this should be done for a number of rea-
sons, among them being the great effort
that has been made and is being made
by a large segment of the press, newspa-
per editors, columnists, radio and televi-
sion commentators as well as many of
the active proponents of this legislation
to deceive the American people into be-
lieving that the main purpose in enacting
this bill is to protect the voting rights of
certain minority groups in the South.
These same people are constantly refer-
ring to this anti-clvil-rights bill as the
right-to-vote legislation. Particularly
has the Washington Post done this both
In its editorial column and in its news
articles. This is done, of course, to lull
the American people, outside of the
South, into beheving that this is an inno-
cent Uttle measure that will provide bet-
ter voting opportunities in the South and
to permit the Federal Government to
protect voting rights in certain cases.
Anyone with any intelligence who is fa-
miliar with the provisions of this legisla-
tion knows that this is far from the
truth — that actually this is the most
drastic and far-reaching proposal almost
ever proposed in America.

I am sure it Is the first time In the
legislative history of this great country
that legislation has been reported out of
a Congressional committee which, if en-
acted into law, deprives the people of
this great country of so many fundamen-
tal rights that our forefathers intended
to guarantee to them by the ratification
of our great Constitution. The provi-
sions in this legislation dealing with vot-
ing rights are mild compared to the oth-
er fundamental issues and rights in-
volved. For a few minutes let us review
just what this bill proposes.

First. Part I sets up a Commission on
civil rights. This Commission Is given
authority to make a full study of all civil
rights. It is given subpena power. It
is given the authority to drag witnesses

from all corners of the country. It will
be a commission that lias the authority
under this legislation to harass, to
browbeat and intimidate the American
Ijeople in an endeavor to force them to
succumb to the whims and wishes of the
NAACP and other like organizations. It
will be a sounding board for socialistic
groups. It will be in a position to carry
out the conspiracy between the NAACP.
this administration and Brownell to
compel State officials and other loyal
Americans to submit to the obnoxious
judicial tyranny of the Federal judiciary
as exempUfied by the Supreme Court of
America. Hoffman of Norfolk and other
judicial tyrants in the judiciary.

The Commission is permitted to accept
the services of volunteers but the Com-
mission is given authority to pay their
travel expenses and per diem out of the
United States Treasury.

It might be well to note at this point
that the Committee on the Judiciary re-
fused to put any limitation upon the
amount of money that this Commission
of inquisitors could .spend in any one
fiscal year. Every effort to limit the
amount of money that might be spent
was beaten dowr. and the floodgates
thrown op)en so that this counterpart
of the bloody assizes might spread venom
of hate throui;hcut our land without
thought of how much of the taxpayers
hard-earned money was being spent in
such political maneuvering in the at-
tempted intimidation of honest Ameri-
can citizens. That briefly is just some
of the things that the Commission is au-
thorized to do under this proposed legis-
lation.

Second. Part II provides for an addi-
tional Assistant Attorney General in
the Department of Justice. It does not
limit the number of assistants to the as-
sistant. It will mean the setting up of
a small gestapo under an Assistant At-
torney General. It will mean a roving
band of hatchetmen going throughout
our land to stir up litigation to break
down law and order so far as States and
localities are concerned. They will be
able to drum up fictitious charges against
loyal citizens and hale them into court
at the expense of the taxpayers of Amer-
ica. They will be Uke a pack of wild
dogs or wolves turned upon a flock of
defenseless sheep who are ready for the
slaughter.

Third. Part HI of the bill, which is U.e
most iniquitous part of all. confers upon
the Attorney General of the United
States powers unheard of heretofore in
a free country. At one stroke of the
legislative pen it brushes aside all State
administrative remedies; wipes out State
sovereignty; it authorizes the Attorney
Gejieral in the name of or on behalf of
the United States to institute civil action
in civil-rights matters whether or not
the aggrieved party requests such pro-
cedure by the Attorney General or
whether or not the aggrieved party ob-
jects to such action. In other words, the
Attorney General Is clothed with all
power to come into the Federal court
and against the wishes of the aggrieved
party Institute a civil action In the ag-
grieved party's behalf in *he name of the
Government. He does this at the cost
of the taxpayers of America. He thus

deprives the States of their right to
enforce their criminal laws. He thereby
deprives the defendant of a right of trial
by jury.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ABBITT. I yield.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Would the
gentleman agree with me that under this
language, as it is drafted, which gives
the Attorney General this power that
that language would give no one any civil
rights except the Attorney General.

Mr. ABBITT. It seems to me It de-
prives all segments of our society, all
segments — minority and majority — ex-
cept the Attorney General whoever he
might be, the hatchetman of the admin-
istration that happened to be in power,
and sets up a strong gestapo and a
hatchetman to go around all over the
country digging \fp strife and unrest in
areas where they desire to do so.

It allows the Attorney General to make
of the Federal local judge the admin-
istrator, the prosecutor and the executor
of the functions of the States and
localities.

The Federal judge would be allowed to
operate the schools, the transportation
system and many other functions of the
local and State government. It will
permit the Attorney General to harass,
to browbeat, and to intimidate and
humble the people of this great Nation
into accepting sociological views of the
particular Attorney General and the
jurists trying the case. We will then
have law by judicial flat and injunction.
We will then have enforcement of the
criminal laws by contempt proceedings.
Anyone who desires to stand up to the
Attorney General, his roving henchmen
and political hatchetmen, will be tried
and cast into prison without any limita-
tion as to the term of imprisonment or
the intervention of a jury. Anyone with
any intelligence who has studied this sit-
uation and who will be honest with him-
self must admit that our Founding
Fathers who wrought out this great civ-
ilization for us never intended such to
happen to the people and States of this
great Nation. This legislation. If passed,
strikes at the very heart and liberties of
our people.

The real purpose of this part Is to cre-
ate jurisdiction in the Federal district
courts to supervise, control, and dom-
inate together with the Attorney General
the internal management of local affairs,
particularly in schools, transportation,
and election issues. It is intended to
compel certain segments of our society
to change their habits, customs, mores,
and social activities. It is an endeavor
to foster upon the people of this country
the sociological views and political phi-
losophy of leftwing socialistic groups and
permit them through the Federal judi-
ciary to comp>el the acceptance of their
views by placing this jurisdiction in the
hands of the Federal judiciary and de-
priving the people of their time-honored
right of trial by Jury. It is felt that our
people will be so intimidated that all
resistance to the new order will be broken
down. The right of a trial by jury before
Imprisonment is a sacred and constitu-
tional right which must never be given

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —• HOUSE

8545

up If the people of this country are to
retain their rights, privileges, and
freedoms.

On occasions in the past, English-
speaking people have been threatened
^\ith the loss of the right of a trial by
jury. On every occasion the determina-
tion of the people to retain this right
has withstood the pressure of tyranny
and turned back the threat to their
rights.

King George in of England did the
very same thing to the American colo-
nists that Is attempted to be done by
this legislation. He attempted to turn
over to the admiralty courts all jurisdic-
tion as to enforcing criminal laws in
the American colonies, the effect of
which was to deprive the colonists of a
right of trial by jury. The Americans
refused to submit to such tyranny. The
Revolution followed and we have a great
democracy In America today.

This legislation gives authority to Fed-
eral judges to enforce the criminal laws
on the equity side of the Court, so the
American people will be deprived of a
Jury trial. It is wrong, it Is immoral, it
Is dishonest and a smear upon the good
name of freedom-loving people all over
our Nation. The test of all legislation
Is not what a good and wise man might
do with it but what a bad man can do
with IL Power is a dangerous thing. We
could expect such legislation as this In a
totalitarian government such as Ger-
many under Hitler. Russia under Stalin,
and Italy under Mussolini but it is unbe-
lievable that in America, the land of the
free tind the home of the brave, such leg-
islative proposals could be supported by
people who profess to believe in democ-
racy, who profess to cherish freedom
and liberty and who pretend to love the
heritage and ideals of our Nation.

Abraham Lincoln, who was the patron
saint of the Republican Party, said on
one occasion:

You may burn my body to ashes, and scat-
ter them to the winds oJ heaven; you may
drag my soul down to the regions of dark-
ness and despair to be tormented forever;
but you will never get me to support a meas-
ure which I believe to be wrong, although
by doing so I may accomplish that which I
believe to be rtght.

Even without the civil-rights legisla-
tion, we have seen the evil that has been
brought about by usurpation of power
on the part of certain Federal Judges.
Without the right of trial by jury the
people will be at the mercy and whims
of the Federal judiciary. There is no
hope for appeal to a political-minded so-
ciological conscience of the Supreme
Court of the United States.

The only hope of curbing some of the
imbridled power of judicial tyranny per-
mitted by this legislation is the preserva-
tion of the time-honored right of trial by
Jury.

Some of the Federal Judiciary has al-
ready usurped power and authority never
given them by the Constitution or the law
of the land. They have already taken
over certain functions of the States and
localities and endeavored to browbeat
whole commtmltles Into accepting their
own philosophy as to sociological prob-
lems. Our people would have no way of

cm 538

combating this In the absence of a right
of trial by jury.

The purpose of a jury trial is to protect
all of our people from every section of the
country from Judicial tyrarmy at Its
worst. We must not lose sight of the
fact, however, that even If the Jury trial
amendment Is adopted, we will still have
In the clvil-rlghts legislation an Iniqui-
tous, wicked, liberty-destroying measure
that will desecrate the Constitution, ob-
literate State sovereignty, and destroy
the Individual liberties of our people.

I call upon the Members of this body
to consider well before they pass this leg-
islation which by this part sets up the
Federal judiciary as the law-enforce-
ment agency of tlie police powers of our
States and localities. It turns over to the
Federal judges along with the Attorney
General the authority and power to nm
our schools, our transportation system,
election machinery, and many, many
other functions in the so-called civil-
rights areas. It wipes out the sovereignty
of our States and the liberty of our
people.

Fourth. Part IV permits preventative
action in right-to-vote matters. It per-
mits the Attorney General to institute in
the name of the United States and on be-
half of the United States civil actions
dealing with election matter?. All that
was said about section n^^re^arding Jury
trials, powers, and authot^teS of the At-
torney General and the Peileral courts
apphes equally to this part. It is abhor-
rent to our way of life and further In-
fringes upon the rights and freedoms of
our people.

Along with part in. it provides a device
to bypass State laws, State remedies.
State courts, and the right of trial by
Jury, thus depriving our people of their
main protection from a tyrannical Judi-
cial oligarchy.

Mr. Chairman, I hope the people of
America will realize before it is too late
Just what this bill does to our Constitu-
tion, to our way of life, to our freedoms
and liberties, and to generations yet un-
born. I tmst that it will never be en-
acted Intolthe law of the land.

Mr. POFP. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point in the Record.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Virginia?
There was no objection. ^

Mr. POFP. Mr. Chairman, those who
support this bill have criticized those of
us who oppose it for the delay which has
occurred. They have impugned our mo-
tives and challenged our sincerity of
purpose. In so doing they have been
guilty of the same intemperance and in-
tolerance with which they charge us,

I will not say that the delay has not
been purposeful. Moreover, I contend
that the delay, measured by every fair
yardstick, has been productive. The de-
lay has afforded time for more exhaustive
hearings and given the members of the
House Judiciary Committee more oppor-
timlty for more mature deliberation, as
a result of which the bill before us today
Is infinitely less oppressive, offensive, and
objectionable than the one which passed
this body last year. While it Is still un-
acceptable—and doubtless will be even

more so when the amendatory process is
concluded — the committee has, by rea-
son <A the delay, been able to make sev-
eral positive and substantial improve-
ments, some of which I would like to
mention briefly.

First, we inserted a new section re-
quiring the Commission in its hearings
to observe the same rules of procedure
which govern Congressional committee
hearings, with certain important modifi-
cations. The subpena power under
which witnesses may be compelled in-
voluntarily to attend Commission hear-
ings has been confined to the United
States judicial circuit in which the wit-
ness is found or resides or transacts busi-
ness. Many of us felt that it should have
been confined to the State of residence.
Such witnesses are guaranteed 8 cents
per mile for travel expense, $12 per day
for subsistence and $4 per diem for at-
tendance upon the Commission hearings.
Another meritorious modification pro-
vides that public disclosure of evidence
given in executive session which might
tend to defame, degrade or incriminate a
person shall be a criminal offense.

Second, the bill has been amended to
require complaints filed before the Com-
mission to be in writing, under oath and
specific in content. This amendment,
which brings the pre jury laws into play.
Is designed to discourage the filing of
grouhdiess. frivolous, vexatiotis, and
•niird, the coounittee removed the
extortionary complaints,
clause which empowered the Commis-
sion to investigate complaints of "un-
warranted economic pressure" and study
economic and "social" developments. No
member of the committee was able to
define the phrase "unwarranted eco-
nomic pressure" and many of the pro-
ponents of the legislation Joined with
the opponents in the conviction that a
civil rights commission should have no
power to Investigate a matter which
cannot be classified as a civil right with-
in the meaning of the Constitution,
Had this clause not been removed, any
small-buslnras man — druggist, grocer,
barber, baker — who declined on account
of race to employ a Job applicant should
be subject to the expense, inconvenience
and embarassment of an investigation
by the civil rights commission. That
would be nothing but PEPC by the back
door.

Fourth, we removed the language
which would have authorized the At-
torney General of the United States to
bring a suit for damages on behalf of
one private citizen against another pri-
vate citizen. While there are on the
statute books laws which authorize such
civil suits when the damages are con-
tractual in natiire, there is no precedent
in American Jurisprudence for such a
suit when the damages arise out of a
tort or a personal grievance.

Firth, the committee did not remove
the power of the Attorney General to
bring a suit on behalf of one private
citizen against another private citizen
for injunctive relief to prevent thejcom-
misslon of a civil wrong, but we did re-
quire that such a suit be brought only
upon the written request of the ag-
grieved citizen. In the legislation which
passed the House last year, the Attorney

8546

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

General had the power to bring such a
suit with or without the request or con-
sent and even against the will of the
aggrieved citizen.

Sixth, we amended the bill to make the
United States as a party to a suit in
which the defendant prevails liable for
court costs and reasonable attorneys'
fees. In last year's le^slation, the de-
fendant was liable for these costs, even
though he won his case.

These amendments approved by the
Committee on the Judiciary were only a
few of the many proposed by the op-
ponents of the bill. Those which were
rejected will be offered again when the
bill is read for amendment. At this
point, time will not permit me to dis-
cuss all of them. However. I would like
to address myself to three which I con-
sider of paramount Importance.

First, the bill as now written vests the
Federal district courts with jurisdiction
over the legal proceedings authorized by
the legislation "without regard to
whether the party aggr eved shall have
exhausted any administrative or other
remedies that may be provided by law."
That language, if left in the bill, will
have the practical effect of depriving
State administrative agencies and State
courts of their traditional jurisdiction
over matters in this field. Heretofore,
every case decided squarely on the point
has heldlhat in this field no litigant has
a standing in the Federal court until and
unless he has first exhausted all rem-
edies available to him in State tribunals.
I have prepared and inserted at page
665 in the prmted hearings a legal brief
on this question. It is my hope that the
amendment to correct this defect, which
I understand will be offered by the gen-
tleman from New York LMr. R.^yJ will
be adopted.

Second, the bill as originally intro-
duced authorized the Commission to in-
vestigate complaints of discrimination
on account of religion as well as color.
race, or national origin." In the sub-
committee, the word -reUgion" was re-
moved. In the full committee, it was
restored. I hope it will again be re-
moved by amendment on the floor. For
the sake of the preservation of the purity
of the principle of separation of church
and State, neither this Congress nor any
commission created by it should tres-
pass upon this delicate domain.

Third, in a criminal contempt proceed-
ing arising out of a case to which the
United States is a party, a defendant does
not. under this bill as presently written.
have the right to demand a trial by jury.
An amendment guaranteeing a jury trial
was defeated in the full committee with
the use of proxies by a vote of 17 to 15.
This amendment will be offered again on
the floor by the gentleman from New
York t Mr. Millir I . SuflQce it now to say
that of all the civil rights we enjoy under
the Constitution, none is more sacred
than the right of trial by jury.

In this brief analysis, it is impossible
to digest all of the obvious objections to
this legislation or to forecast all of Its in-
sidious potentialities. Neither is it pos-
sible to make even a remote estimate of
its probable cost. Even if the legislation
were needed, it could not be justified from
a fiscal standpoint at a time when the

Congress, at the behest of the people, is
striving to reduce Ck)vernment spending.
But the point is that the legislation la
not needed. There Is no civil right under
the Constitution for the violation of
which the Constitution does not already
guarantee a remedy. Not only is there
no need for additional legislation, but
there is a great positive need for no leg-
islation. In Ctovemment. as well as in
prlvate-Ufe. sometimes the best action Is
no action at all. In this period of social
and cultural upheaval occasioned by the
Supreme Court school integration de-
cision, legislative action by the Federal
legislature can only nurture the 111 will,
cultivate the prejudice, and inflame the
personal passion on which the problem
feeds and grows. This problem does not
require legislation, pohce investigation,
legal prosecution, or penal correction on
the part of the Federal Government;
rather, it requires on the part of the
Federal Government patience, forbear-
ance, and self-restraint. Never before
has the Congress of the United States
had such an opportunity to accomplish
so much simply by doing nothmg.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
20 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
LMr. Dowdy 1.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. Mr.
Chairman. I make the point of order that
there is no quorum present.

The CHAIRMAN i after counting).
Ninety-two Members are present. Not
a quorum.

The Clerk will call the roll.

The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to their
names;

I Roll No. 102]

Andrpsen

Augu.st H
Anfuso
Arenda
Avres
Baiiey
Baker
Barrett
Beamer
Belcher
Biatnik
Bosch
Bowler
Bririrtr Mo.
Buckley
Byrne, lU
Byrnes. Wis.
Cederberg
( "hamberialn
Chudoff
Clark
Cole
Coudert
Cretella
Curtis. Mo
Etewson. 111.
Delaney
Dolllnger

Snohue
olev
Dorn, .N Y.
Durham
Eberharter
EnKle
Fallon
Parbsteia
Fine

Accordingly the Committee rose: and
the Speaker having resumed the chair,
Mr. FoRAND, Chairman of the Commit-
tee of the Whole House on the State of
the Union, reported that that Committee
having had under consideration the bill
H. R. 6127, and finding itself without a
quorum, he had directed the roll to be
called, when 321 Members responded to
their names, a quorum, and he submitted

Fo«arty

Multer

Fr:edel

O Brien 111

Gannatz

O Kon^ki

Green. Pa.

Philbva

Orlfflths

PuaRf

Oubser

Porter

Ow'.nn

Powell

Harrison. Nebr

Proutv

Healey

Radwaa

Hclifleld

RaUm

Holland

Reed

Holtzman

Rhodes. Pa

Jamea

Rogers Colo.

Kean

Rogers. Mane.

Keeney

St George

Kellv N y.

Hchwen^el

Keogh

Scott. Pa.

Kllburn

Shelley

K:uczyn.«kl

Simpson. Pa

KnieKer

Smith. Wu.

La.rd

Spence

I.tine

Taber

Lank ford

Taylor

Latham

Teller

McConuell

Tewe«

Mcculloch

Thompson . La

McGovern

Utt

Mclntire

Vorys

Machrowlca

Wainwrlght

Mack. Ill

^Wesiland

Miller. Md

Wtdnall

Mliler, N Y.

Wler

Mln.shall

WlBJ?le«worth

Montoya

Wlthrow

Morani)

Wolverton

Morrison

Zelenko

herewith the names of the absentees to
be spread upon the Journal.

The Committee resumed Its sitting.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Texas [Mr. Dowdy! is recognized
for 20 minutes.

Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Chairman, will the
distinguished gentleman yield?

Mr. DOWDY. I yield to the gentleman
from New York such time as he may de-
sire.

Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Chairman. I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point in the Rkcokd.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?

There was no objection.

Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Chairman. I very
much appreciate the courtesy and kind-
ness of my distinguished friend, the
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Dowdy], in
yielding to me at this point.

I shall vote for the pending bill H. R.
6127 as written, and shall vote against
all emasculating amendments including
the so-called jury trial amendment.
The bill in its present form would
merely provide a minimum civil righta
program and correct the most urgent
needs of members of minority groups
who have been treated as second-class
citizens. It will provide protection
against violence and give meaning to
the right to vote in parts of the coun-
try where that right Is now denied. I
feel that the great majority of the
American people support this legisla-
tion as written and without amend-
ments and that It should be passed by
the House after a fair time for full
debate. What \n guaranteed by the
Constitution ought to be enforced.

Mr. MARTIN Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yleW

Mr. DOWDY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Massachusetts.

Mr. MARTIN. I want to inform the
House that the Republicans have a very
Important conference scheduled for the
rest of this afternoon. While we do
not want to Interfere with the debate, be-
cause we believe it should continue as
long as possible, we hope there will be
no more points of no quorum made be-
fore the time for adjournment arrives.
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DOWDY. I yield.
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I wonder if
the gentleman would like for the Com-
mittee to rise now and give us an exten-
sion of time on the debate next week on
the bill.

Mr, CELLER. I cannot consent to
that.

Mr. MARTIN. Would the gentleman
consent to coming In at 11 o'clock, let
us say, on Monday?

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. How about
adding a couple of hours to the time for
general debate?

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I will
yield more time to the gentleman from
Texas. If he needs It, but would the gen-
tleman yield to me now?
Mr. DOWDY. I yield.
Mr. CELLER. Would the gentleman
from Virginia repeat his question?

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I wonder If
we might not agree on a couple of hours

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8547

general debate on Tuesday and wind the
thing up.

Mr. CELLER. That Is on condition
that we adjourn now.

Mr. MARTIN. I would think it would
be better to come in early on Monday
and run a little later on Monday even-
ing.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I would have
to object to that.

Mr. CELLER. I would be willing to
come in at 12 o'clock and have an addi-
tional 2 hours of debate on Tuesday, if
we adjourn now. so as to accommodate
the gentlemen on the Republican side.
Mr. MARTIN. I have no objection to
that.

Mr. DOWDY. Mr. Chairman. I am
sorry that I have lived to see the day
that men representing the American peo-
ple here in the Congress of the United
States stand up and say that they would
willingly deprive the American people of
the right of trial by jury in any kind
of case. Having listened to all of the
debate that has gone on here and hear-
ing things that have been said, I went
back to my offlce last night and picked
up a copy of the Declaration of Inde-
pendence and read it once again. There
I found a number of thirxgs which'l will
mention as we proceed that were indict-
ments by the American colonists against
King George — things that wel-e pro-
claimed as reasons why we should have
our independence. And we won our
Independence for those reasons.

Mr. Chairman, far abler and more elo-
quent men than I have addressed you.
They have pointed out the inherent dan-
gers in this bill. I will try not to be
repetitious of the things that they have
said as I proceed; but they have shown
the effect that this bill could and would
very likely have upon the American Na-
tion in the way of prostitution of the
American people to the whims of a
politically appointed Attorney General.

Our words and our pleading may not
produce a single convert to our way of
thinking, but it certainly will not be pos-
sible in the future for any Member of
Congress who is here to claim that he
acted in ignorance If, after hearing what
we have said, he persists in voting for this
vicious and evil bill.

I am sorry that more of the Members
are not here to listen, to be educated,
and to understand actually what is hap-
pening to the American people. If this
bill is adopted.

There was a housewife who attempted
to install a can opener on the wall, but
after several unsuccessful attempts she
was not able to get it fixed up. So she
went and got her glasses to read the
directions how to put It on the wall.
When she returned the can opener was
already installed and the cook was using
it. She asked her, "Now, how did you
get this up? You have told me you can-
not read." She said. "Well ma'am, when
you cannot read you have just got to
think." What we want to do Is to try to
think a little bit and see what Is con-
fronting us.

This is a fundamental Issue, striking
directly at whether we shall have gov-
ernment by men or government by law
in this country. My philosophy of gov-
ernment calls for government by law.

The proposed bill would set up a despot
In the Attorney General's pfBce, with a
large corps of enforcers under him, and
his will and his oppressive action would
be brought to bear on American citizens.
Just as Hitler's minions coerced and sub-
jected the German people. If we had a
would-be dictator in Uils United States of
America today, the first thing he would
want would be the enactment of a bill
such as this.

You have heard statements made con-
tinually upon the floor that this is a mod-
erate bill. Let us see what this moderate
bill does. This so-called moderate bill
abolishes and sets aside State remedies
and sets aside State courts to try cases,
and it puts into law the preemption that
we have been complaining about ; namely,
the Supreme Court trying to Judicially
legislate. Exampler are the subversion
case from Pennsylvania, and another was
the teachers' case from New York, and
others that have been called to your at-
tention from time to time. It does that,
and in addition It does away with the Jury
trial. It gives the Attorney General a
secret police, or State police, and allows
him to bring lawsuits against a private
individual in the name of the United
States, but for somebody else. He does
not even have to get the consent of the
person for whom he brings the lawsuit
and even without the knowledge of that
person. It is without the consent and
without the knowledge of the person that
the suit is brought in behalf of.

In addition to that, the State and lo-
cal officials and ordinary citizens of this
United States of America can be denied
their fundamental constitutional rights,
not only the right of trial by Jury but
their rights of free speech, free press,
and free assembly, and they are deprived
of their liberty or property, or both,
without due process of law. That Is a '
moderate bill?

Now, let us do some more thinking
about It and see if some of the statements
that have been made on the floor of the
House by the proponents of the bill can
be reconciled. The gentleman from
New York (Mr. Keating] before the
Rules Committee, stated that 80 to 90
percent of the purpose of this bill Is to
do away with Jury trials. That Is the
reason we have it here. He says If you
take that out of it you have got but 10
or 20 percent of the bill left. Similar
statements have been made by other pro-
ponents as they come here. Out of the
other side of their mouths they say that
this bill would deprive no one of a Jury
trial, and they try to rationalize it. And
to the unthinking person their argu-
ments might seem almost plausible.
But you will remember one thing, in our
Declaration of Independence one of the
indictments against the English King
was "For depriving us, in many cases,
of the benefits of trial by jury."

Let us again examine statements vari-
ous Members have made here on the floor
and prior to the consideration of the bUl,
including the comjnlttee chairman and
rankingr minority member. They say
this bin Is not Intended to, and will not,
deprive any person of any right he cow
has. Now, in my book if a person now
has a right to a trial by Jury and this
bill, if enacted, would destroy that right.

then that person would be deprived of a
right. There can be no question about it.
We have the means of testing the sin-
cerity of their claim that this bill would
not deprive a person of a right to trial
by Jury, We can find out whether they
are sincere in that or not. The propo-
nents insist It Is not their Intention to
deprive anyone of a right now possessed.
If they are honest and sincere about
that, let them accept a slight amendment
to the bill so that It will not take away
the right of jury trial, and they will still
have their legal aid society down there
in the Attorney General's office without
otherwise depriving any person of a right
now ei35oyed.

All they would have to do in two places
In the bill, on pages 10 and 12, is to strike
out the words: "the Attorney General
may institute for the United States or In
the name of the United States" and in
place thereof Insert "the Attorney Gen-
eral may Institute, In the nai]^e of the ag-
grieved party or parties." Then they
Would not deprive anybody of a right
they now have. There is the "gimmick"
in the whole bill, as far as Jury trial is
concerned.

If they are not willing to make that
change in the bill then it is their inten-
tion and their deliberate and willful in-
tent to deprive people of a right they
now have. That cannot be disputed.

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
' Mr. DOWDY. I yield to the genUe-
man from Georgia.

Mr. FORRESTER^ In other words,
what the gentlemaii is saying is that
if they do not wish to deprive of a jury
trial all on earth they have got to do is
to cut out the words "in the name of the
United States."

Mr. EKDWDY. And require the suit
to be filed In the name of ag^eved
party or parties.

Mr. FORRESTER. That being true,
does not that prove completely to the
point where there can be no argument to
the contrary whatsover that the purpose
must be to eliminate the right of trial
by Jury?

Mr. DOWDY. That Is what I have
tried to say in my statement. This will
test the sincerity of the i>eople who say
Uiis does not deprive anyone of a right
he now has — whether they agree to that
amendment

Last Svmday, as you will remember.
Stalin's successor as Russia's chief. Nik-
Ita Khrushchev, made his first appear-
ance before tm American radio and tele-
vision audience. As you all know, he Is
the Secretary of the Russian Communist
Party and he actually runs the whole
show in the Communist worid. Un-
doubtedly the only reason the Commu-
nists agreed to the radio and television
Interview was that they felt It would be
a good opportunity to put over some
Communist propaganda to the American
people.

Khrushchev was almost plausible; but
all good liars are almost plausible. It
was evident throughout the Interview
that It was pretty well rehearsed. The
Red chieftain predicted that our grand-
children will live imder a Marxian-
Leninist social system, In other words,
a Communist dictatorship.

/I

854*^

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Jinie 7

It would seem from such a statement
that Khrushchev was aware of the cur-
rent effort being made to undennine
among other things our right of trial by
jury, which is a cherished heritage of all
Americans. An all-out effort has been
made to brainwash the American people
to accept this abrogation of the right of
trial by jury by calling this bill a civil
rights bill. It is better named a civil
wrongs bill. It does not protect any civil
rights; it destroys.

The Communist front organization of
lawyers calhng themselves the National
Lawyers" Guild, if I have the name right.
claim to be the author of one of the bills
in the last Congress, one of these so-
called civil rights bills: and. of course,
the bill here is supported by the Com-
munist Party and its news organ, the
r>aily Worker. It is also supported by
the National Association for the Agita-
tion of Colored^ People, as well as other
Communist front organizations and Red
sympathizers in America. If we are un-
able to defeat this montrositv. a Ion?
backward step will have beeij taken
toward the loss of a right which was first
acquired by English people 700 years ago.
and Khrushchev's claim that our grand-
children will live under a Communist,
dictatorship will be brought much closer
to realization; it will be closer to real-
ization than you and I like to contem-
plate.

The civil rights issue is merely a con-
flict between those who btlieve in forcing
all citizens to conform to the dictates of
a minority group in such matters as per-
sonal associates and employees, and those
who believe in free ahoice by the indi-
vidual in those matters. Basically, when
reduced to its simplest terms, this issue,
which is caused by the two opposing
philosophies of government, is the out-
growth of the theory that the State
should be all powerful and the master of
the citizen. This theory, of course, re-
verts back to the old idea of government
before the American patriots enunciated
a new theory of government as ex-
pressed in our Declaration of Independ-
ence and in our Federal Constitution, in
which all power inheres in the citizens
and the State Is their servant. Unless
we understand this fact we are likely to
be confused by the real issue in this so-
called civil rights proposition.

It is easy to be misled by arguments^
put out in its favor which are usually
clothed in pious and humanitarian senti-
ments. But one needs only to remember
that when one citizen can tell another
group with whom they may associate,
who they may employ, who their neigh-
bors may be, and where they may work,
and what work they may do. and this
dictation is enforced by the courts and
the police power of the State, then the
p^ice state is here. It is around our
necks, and what we may have said cannot
happen will have already happened, as
I see it.

The object of the pressures being ex-
erted in favor of the civil-rights legis-
lation by administration officials, by pol-
iticians and by many organizations
selfishly interested in the extension of
Federal power and control is not. in my
opinion, primarily to benefit minority
racial groups but, rather, it is to further

the

the

abridge the rights of the 48 States and
to weaken our constitutional form of
government in preparation for the day
when the United States can be made into
a dictatorship. The battle for the bless-
ings of liberty are not won yet. as wit-
ness the controversy here in our strug-
gle to preserve the right of trial by jury,
which was first so laboriously won by
English-speaking peoples 700 years ago.
and granted in the Magna Carta, and
this present effort of the disciples of an
alien philosophy to bring about in our
own United States the shortcuts in legal
procedures which are used in dictator
nations. Such departure from the letter
and spirit of the Constitution is charge-
able to the suspicion, hatred, intolerance
and irrespKjnsibility of a part of our own
txxiy politic which has a lack of appre-
ciation for, and fails to understand the
age-old struggle of mankind to achieve,
our present-day bles.sings of libertv.

It is imperative that all American.s
take time for a searching reflection.
Notwithstanding the contributions of
American patriots through the centuries,
the far-sit!hted wisdom of the Founding
Fathers of our Nation, and the written
guaranties ^f the Constitution, liberty
is not necessarily our permanent pos-
session. Both external and uuernal
Ateessures constantly assail it. It is
sfxiomatic that every generation, to keep
its freedom, mu.st earn it through under-
standing of the past, vigilance in the
present and determination for
future.

The CHAIRMAN The time of
gentleman from Texas has expured.

Mr. CELLER. I yield the gentleman
5 additional minute.s.

Mr.pOWDY. It IS easier to know how
to cdinbat a foreign enemy who chal-
lenges our right to those freedoms, and
thus prevent a .sudden c(5llap.se of the
things we hold dear, than it is to sub-
ject ourselves to daily analy.sis and disci-
pline for the purpose of preventing the
internal erosion that can, with even
greater effectiveness, destroy them.
That internal "Erosion is today trying to
get in lis deadly licks

I could talk some more about trial by
jury, but I am going to do that under
the 5-minute rule when that question
coma's up, because there are some other
points I want to get to. as time allows.
Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield '^

Mr. DOWDY. I yield to the gentleman
from Pennsylvania

Mr. FULTON. You .see. some of us
want the people of all religions and na-
tionalities in this country to have the
right to vote.

Mr. DOWDY, I thought the gentle-
man was going to ask a question and
not make a staeech Will the gentleman
please ask the question?

Mr FULTON. I am. If that is the
ca.se and you do not think this is the
correct method to obtain it, then what
is the correct method to let these people
vote^

Mr. DOWDY. Do you know of a sin-
gle person denied the right to vote in
the United States today? That chal-
lenge was made day before yesterday,
and I reiterate it : There is no such sit-
uation existing in the United States.

That Is another reason why this bill Is
so silly.

Mr. FULTON. When I see Federal
elections for various offices with only a
few thousand votes, and a minor per-
centage, maybe 10 or 15 or 20 percent
out of the total population voting, and
then I am told that they cannot even
vote. why. that is a situation which
should not exist.

Mr. DOWDY. Just a moment. Tliat
is not unusual in a noncontested election.
Mr. FULTON. Or that Congressmen
sit here elected by a very few votes, when
I have to get elected by 180,000 to 200.000
votes very time.

Mr. DOWDY. Well, the population
of my district Is about 300,000 people,
and all that are eligible vote If they
want to.

Mr FULTON. How many votes do
you get out of that number?

Mr DOWDY. Ther^ are usually 50.-
000 to 60 000 votes cast.

Mr. FULTON. ' ^^ol 300,000?

Mr DOWDY. ;S^B|k

Mr PULTON, 'j^^^^^y^^ think that
is enough? ^^^^^^

Mr. EKDWDY. l^^Bldren do not
vote. They have toU^years of age to
vote in Texas. I do not know how old
they have to be in your State.

Mr. FULTON. Twenty-one. Is not
somebody left out?

Mr DOWDY. Anybody that wants to
vote can vote In Texas. There Is no
question about that. We encourage
them to vote. And if anybody here can
stand up and say they know of a single
person that Is denied a vote. I will take
time out to answer that. But. obviously,
you cannot do it.

Mr. MASON. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. DOWDY I yield to the gentle-
man (rom Illinois.

Mr. MASON. Illinois permits every-
body to vote that wants to vote; so does
Pennsylvania. Yet. Illinois never votes
more than 50 percent of their registered
voters, and I do not think Pennsylvania
does much better.

Mr. DOWDY. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. FULTON. I can correct that for
Pennsylvania. We do It. and I think
better, m my State, than that.

Mr. DIES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr DOWDY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Texas.

Mr DIES. Is it not a fact that in
Texas, in the primaries, sometimes as
many as a million and a half or two mil-
lion people vote, and then in the general
election about 500,000 vote?

Mr. DOWDY. That is exactly right.

Mr. DIES. But that Is not because
they are being deprived of the right to
vote.

Mr. DOWDY. It is because they do
not go down to the polls and vote. There
is nobody depriving them of the right
to vote. ■ Many of our general elections
are without contest, and the voters do
not turn out. \

Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Mr? Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DOWDY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Tennessee.

Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Why all this
talk about Federal elections? There is

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8549

no such thing In America as a Federal
election. Every one of us Is elected as a
representative of a State. There Is no
such thing as a Federal election. You
do not even vote for President or Vice
President. We vote for electors in the
States, and they can vote for anybody
they want to, so there is no such thing
as a Federal election.
Mr. DOWDY. That may be right.
Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DOWDY. I yie\d to the gentleman
from Oeorgia.

Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. In view of the
statements which have Just been made,
I would like to give this information
about voting in my own district, of
which Atlanta, Ga., is a part. We had
a runover election there about the mid-
dle of May, and I would lilce for some
of these bleeding hearts who plead for
the colored race to listen to this. In
that election, which has been analyzed
by the Metropolitan Voters Council. 76
percent of the registered colored voters
voted in that election as compared to
36.2 percent of the white registered
voters. I should like to give the gen-
tleman one other figure. Since 1956 the
registration of colored voters in Atlanta,
Ga., according to this analysis, has in-
creased 9 percent whereas the registra-
tion of white voters in Atlanta. Ga., has
increased only 6 percent.

Mr. DOWDY. That illustrates the
point. Of course, in our general elec-
tions in Texas ordinarily there is no
opposition on the ballot which accounts
for the fact, as Indicated by the gentle-
man from Texas (Mr. Dies] that in a
general election in Texas there may not
be more than half a million vot«s cast in
the general election, though 3 or 4 times
as many may be cast in the primaries.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Dowdy]
has again expired.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
the gentleman 2 additional minutes.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DOWDY. I am sorry, I cannot
yield further at this time. I do want to
proceed a little more with my statement.
I think it is more important that I do so.

There is another provision in this bill
that I think is Just as dangerous and Just
as bad as the denial of the Jury trial and
that is the provision on page 10 and again
on page 12, which says that these pro-
ceedings shall disregard entirely whether
or not the aggrieved party shall have
exhausted any administrative or other
remedies that may have been provided
by law.

Much of the debate and much of what
I have said has concerned the Jury trial
but another point of at least equal im-
portance has to do with the bypassing
of the State courts and taking every-
thing directly into the Federal court.
That is contrary to the intent of the
United States Constitution and reminds
us of another of the indictments against
the English King in our Declaration of
Independence which stated;

He haa combined with others to subject
us to a Jurisdiction foreign to our Constitu-
tiou and unacknowledged by our laws.

And this further:

For abolishing our most valuable laws and
altering Xundamentally the forms oX our
Government.

I would say that Miss Liberty sitting
-In the harbor in New York is shuddering
on her pedestal over what might happen
to the United States if this particular bill
ever becomes law,

Mr. Chairman, I have talked too long
•already. I have gotten hoarse, although

1 have not taken as much time as I
should have liked, because there are so
many things that need to be said about
this. But I trust and hope that if this
monstrous bill is to be stuffed down the
throats of the American people, we may
at least have the amendments approved
to preserve the right of trial by jury and
wipe out that part of the bill that woyld
destroy the States, the State courts, and
the State remedies; and also that the
Attorney General should be requested at
lM( to have the consent of the person

^^^^'hom he files suit before he files

^^^^11 hope to discuss other dangers
Inherent in this bill under the 5-minute
rule.
Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield

2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York [Mr. SantangiloJ.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Mr. Chairman, I
am sorry the previous speaker refused to
yield to answer a question.

Mr. DOWDY. Mr. Chairman, I will
answer any question now, but I did not
have the time before.

Mr. SANTANGELO. He challenged
this body to produce evidence of any sec-
tion of the country which denied people
the right to vote. I am not a member
of the committee which listened to the
testimony, but I thumbed through it in
the last few days and I came across some'
testimony before the committee to which
I should like to call your attention. Let
me say this: That when the testimony
was presented to the committee, they had
an examiner on that committee from
Georgia who explored every facet of the
charges or the statements that were
made. There was no questioning as to
this witness. I say the witness was Mr.
Wilkina. Let me read the testimony.
When they asked him whether there yas
any evidence of people being denied the
right to vote, he testified as follows:

Prior to the 1954 election, we received
firsthand reports on how prospective voters
were Intimidated. Perhaps the most Impres-
sive of these accounts came from a man who
said that after he paid his poll tax he was
called In by his employer. The employer
ordered him to tear up the poll-tax receipt
and stay away from the p>olls on election
day If he wanted to keep his Job. When the
man compiled, the employer added as he was
leaving, "You had better not tell anyone I
made you do this because I don't want the
FBI after me."

This happened in the great State of
Mississippi, where over 16,000 Negro citi-
zens were there, and only 147 were regis-
tered voters. Is that an accident, or is it
something which the Commission and
the Attorney General should investigate?
That is what we want.

This is on page 424 of the record of
the hearings. The testimony was by Mr.
Wilkins of the NAACP, an organization

which some of the Southern States have
sought to outlaw— yes, laugh if you will,
but that is a sad and serious situation,
when you can laugh at civil rights. Mr.
Forrester is one of the great men on
that committee, and he is here now. I
read where he cross-examined many wit-
nesses, and I read the testimony how he
cross-examined, yet there was not a
statement and nary a word from him
contradicting such testimony,

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield mere?

Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes.

Mr. FORRESTER. 1^ happen to re-
member very well what the gentleman
was talking about. The gentleman is a
lawyer, is he not?

Mr. SANTANGELO. It is presumed I
am.

Mr. FORRESTER. We will certainly
operate on that presumption.

Will not the gentlonan be kind
enough to admit that the charges made
by the head of the NAACP were strictly
hearsay and opinionated and as far-
fetched charges as you have ever heard'

Mr. SANTANGELO. I do not so
agree.

Mr. FORRESTER. Will the gentle-
man not agree as a lawyer that none
of that testimony would have been ad-
missible in any court of the United
States?

Mr. SANTANGELO. If you took that
position as a standard, 75 percent of this
testimony would not have been admitted
Into evidence.

Mr. FORRESTER. I tried to urge that,
and I could not get that fact over.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman has expired.

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Chairman. I
yield 1 additional minute to the gentle-
man from New York.

Now let me ask the gentleman this:
Did the gentleman continue to read that
record?

Mr. SANTANGELO. I read 400 pages
of it.

Mr. FORRESTER. Is it not true that
in the 84th Congress not one opponent
was allowed to appear and testify?

Mr. SANTANGELO. I do not know.
I was not on the committee, and I am not
in a position to testify as to that.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. SANTANGELO. I yield to the
gentleman from New York.

Mr. CELLER. I do not think that is a
very fair statement at all.

Mr. FORRESTER. It Is a correct
statement.

Mr. CELLER. We heard , everybo<fy
that wanted to be heard before the
committee, without question.

Mr. FORRESTER. I want to say here
and now that our distinguished chair-
man erroneously thought I was talking
about the 85th Congress.

I asked a question ^f the gentleman
and I want him to answer it. Has he
read the record?

Mr. SANTANGELO. I read 400 pages
of it.

till. FORRESTER. Is It not true that
not one opponent was allowed to testify
before that committee in the 84th
Congress.

8550

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

Mr. SANTANGELO. I know that I
read some of your testimony where you
opposed the bill.

Mr. FORRESTER. No, you did not; In
the 84th I did not testify.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Not in the 84th.
but in one of the records you testified —
in the 85th. I was not in the 84th Con-
gress. I do not know.

Mr. FORRESTER. You read the
record?

Mr. SANTANGEXO. Four h'^adrcd

pa ;?s of u.

Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chainnan, will the
gentleman yield':'

Mr. SANTANGELO. I yield to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. FULTON. The gentleman from
New York has brought out a very good
point, that when people cannot register
or vote and are not allowed on the rolls,
there is then a small recrLstration of voters
according to the total population, ■who
control everyone. Is that not the case
in the areas about which the gentleman
is talking; ^

Mr. SANTANGELO. It is, certainly, in
the great State of Mississippi, as in the
other poll-t: x States, le?i than 5 per-
cent of the citizens are permitted to
register and vote.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman has expired.

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield to me for a minute?
Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
2 minutes to the prentleman from Georgia.
Mr. FORRESTER. I would like to ask
the gentleman if this is not true. Is it
not true that for the first time this year
In the 85th Congre.ss. the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Celler] did something
no one else has ever done — he permitted
the opposition to come in and testify; is
that not true?

Mr. SANTANGELO. It may be so that
he did that for the first time; I do not
know.

Mr. FORRESTER. It is so.
Mr. SANTANGELO. I think it was
quite proper for him to call upon both
aides to testify before the committee.

Mr. FORRESTER. Let me ask the
gentleman this: Did the gentleman read
the testimony of the Governor of the
State of Mississippi where he branded
every one of those charges as absolutely
untrue and challenged them to come in
and prove their charges, and they did not
prove them — they were as silent as the
tomb? Did you read that?

Mr. SANTANGELO. Did I read his
testimony:'

Mr. FORRESTER. Yes, sir; did you
read his testimony?

Mr. SANTANGELO. I did not read
his testimony.

Mr. FORRESTER. I want to tell you
that this is the record, and I just wanted
to get that cleared up.

Mr. SANTANGELO. But the question
is that there is no doubt about the fact
that of 16,885 Negro citizens, 147 Negroes
were registered, and of 10,000 white peo-
ple, over 5,000 were registered. Why is
that a fact?

Mr. FORRESTER. Would the gen-
tleman want me to answer that? I will
be very happy to do so.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes. I wish the
gentleman would explain how less than

I will be very

Do they not have

They register

5 percent of Negroes in the great State
of Mississippi are registered whereas in
other States, where they do not have
these situations of poll taxes and pres-
sures, from 40 to 50 percent are regis-
tered citizens.

Ml-. FORRESTER,
happy to tell you, sir.
Mr SANT.'\NGELO.
tiie $1.75 poll lax?

Mr. FORRESTER.
*hea they want to re^'ister. But. let me
sive you a little bit of history. In Mis-
sissippi and in Geori:ia. they did not
want to vote for years because they c ilied
tlicmsclves Republicans and we do not
have anyth.n;; down there but the Dem-
ocratic Party. It is a new thing with
them, but they are coming on by leaps
and bounds. In Atlanta, Ga.. the other
day 74 percent of the Negroes voted in
the election and only 31 percent of the
whites. What do you think of that?

Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr FORRESTER. I yield.
Mr. FULTON. I was pleased to hear
my friend say that in some counties and
to'.vn.'hips where 90 percent of the Ne-
groes are not re'r^istcred to vote, that ac-
tually 90 percent are Republicans ac-
cording to your statement. Then only
10 percent are Democrats.

Mr. FORRESTER. No; I did not say
that.

Mr. PULTON. Then 10 percrnt of
Democrats are running the local area
against 90 percent of Republican Ameri-
can citizens. Do you think that is
right? Of course, it is not right.

Mr. FORRESTER. The gentleman is
willfully misconstruing what I said.
Eighty percent of them just cannot de-
cide what side they are on.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman has expired.

Mr. NIMTZ. I yield 10 minutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Ray).
Mr. RAY. Mr. Chairman, before
coming to the amendment I intended to
discuss, I would like to have the atten-
tion of the chairman of the Judiciary
Committee and the chairman of the
Rules Ccmmittee pertaining to the sub-
ject that those gentlemen are to discuss
on next Monday. It seemed to be
agreed by all who debated the question
as to whether we now have a Jury trial
in contempt proceedings, that there had
been a jury trial provided under the Nor-
ris-La Guardia Act, which was in force
from 1932 to 1947. There was also de-
bate as to whether or not that continued
in effect after 1947. My question is.
When that Nonis-La Guardia Act was

adopted

Mr. CELLER. It was adopted in 1932.
and it is in effect today, but as to the
Taft-Hartley Act. as I said before, the
Taft-Hartley Act in its provisions waived
all the provisions of the Norris-La Guar-
dia Act. J

Mr. RAY. I am talking about the pe-
riod between 1932 and 1947. Trial by
jury was a part of the procedure during
those years?

Mr. CELLER. Yes; but not where the
Government was a party.

I think you forgot to state that the
National Labor Relations Act was passed

m 1935. and the National Labor Rela-
tion* Act al-so waived provisions of the
Norris-La Guardia Act.

Mr. RAY. I did not recall that being
mentioned In the debate. But. at any
rate, there was a time when trial by jury
became a part of the procedure?

Mr. CELLER But it only referred to
tl^.^.-^e caes that originated under the
Morris-I^a Guardia Act. It was limited to
those cases.

Mr RAY. There was a time, call It
experimental, if you like, but there was
a time when thnc wa.<; a trial by jury.
Mr. CELLER That is correct.
Mr. RAY. Now. conceding that Uiat is
no longer a part of the procedure, tliat
trial by jury is not applicable to any-
thing today under these laws, what is
Uie reason why another experiment
should not be made, even though there
is nothing like it in any of the other
laws in which Injunctions may Issue?
I did not expect to raise that fot discus-
sion today, but I think it is of interest to
a number of people here, and that it
mi-Tht be dealt with on Monday.

Mr. CELLER. If you care to have me
answer it now, I will answer it briefly.

There is no need for that inclusion of
the exception now. There was need for
It in 1932 because of Uie history of what
we then called government by injunc-
tion." The courts undoubtedly abused
their riqhl.s. and the country was in out-
cry against the many unjust injunctions
that had been issued by district courts
throughout the length and breadth of
the land against labor. The Congress
then took cognizance of that situation.
Now. after passing that act, if we find
th.it the courts abuse their powers in tlie
granting of injunctions. I would be the
first to come into the well of the House
and proclaim with all my power that we
should take away that power of Injunc-
tion from the courts, just as I did in 1932
when there was that abuse. I spoke as
strongly as I could about putting restric-
tions upon the courts.

Mr. RAY. As I understood It. that
means that in 1932 it was your view that
the circumstances required a trial by jury
remedy?

Mr. CELLER. I think so.

Mr. RAY. Under present circum-
stances you think trial by jury is not re-
quired in this law?

Mr. CELLER. I do not think we have
reached that point. The Russians have
a saying: You should never roll up your
pants until you get to the river. When
we get to the river and we find that there
are abuses, I would be the first, as I say,
to demand a change and tha: restraints
be placed upon the judiciary with refer-
ence to the issuance of injunctions.

Mr. RAY. I think that clears up one
point for me. Instead of dealing with
the queston of what is In the law, we are
dealing with the question of what should
be in the law, and in the gentleman's
judgment this change Is not needed at
this time.

Mr. CELLER. Right.

Mr. RAY. Others may say a remedy
Is required, but that is the question at
Issue in the ca.«e.

Mr. CELLER. That Is correct.

Mr. COLMER. I wonder if the gentle-
man would yield to me briefly?

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8551

Mr. RAY. I yield to the gentleman
from Mississippi.

Mr. COLMER. If I understand the
Rentleman from New York [Mr. Celler]
he would prefer to wait until abuses oc-
cur before he seeks a remedy. Now I
am asking my friend from New York if
he does not think it advisable, particu-
larly under the philosophy of the gentle-
man from New York (Mr. Celler] in
1932, that we should provide that safe-
guard in the bill now rather than wait
for the abuse to occur?

Mr. RAY. If the gentleman will let
me act on advice I have had from the
chairman of the Judiciary Committee. I
will not roll up my trousers on that one
until the debate on Monday.

The amendment In which I am inter-
ested touches somewhat the issue which
has been discussed today; In part It is
quite different. There seems to be gen-
eral agreement that one of the principal
purposes of this civil rights bill Is the
grant of authority to the Federal courts
to issue injunctions without regard to
administrative or other remedies.

The amendment I propose would strike
out those words "or other" which would
let the courts disregard administrative
remedies. It seems to me they are not
applicable to the kind of problem pre-
sented when you have a question of In-
terference with the right to vote. My
amendment would let the Attorney Gen-
eral waive those, but would not let him
disregard Judicial remedies.

For that purpose I would add a sen-
tence at the end of section 121 and at
the end of section 122 to this effect:

The district courta shall not exercise Juris-
diction In proceedings authorized by this
section if a plain, speedy, and efficient rem-
edy may be had in the coiirts of the State
or Territory in which the party aggrieved
resided at the time the cause of action arose.

I think the meaning of that must be
apparent to all who hear It even for
the nrst time. If there is a plain, speedy,
and eflBcient remedy in the State courts
there is no occasion in my Judgment for
any suit to be carried on in the Federal
courts.

There Is precedent for this sort of
treatment of a constitutional question
which has been on the books for more
than 20 years. Back In the IQlO's and
the 1920's rate regulation became gen-
eral for public -service companies, prices
were rising, and companies were having
difficulty In making the necessary earn-
ings. Rate commissions were having
difficulty in justifying orders Increasing
rates.

Mr. NIMTZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield
the gentleman 4 additional minutes.

Mr. RAY. Mr. Chairman, the utU-
Ities went Into Federal court claiming
confiscation, deprivation of property
without due process of law. That caused
a lot of trouble. Finally Congress en-
acted section 1342 of title 28, United
States Code, that in such cases the com-
pany might not maintain Its suit In Fed-
eral court If a plain, speedy, and effi-
cient remedy existed in the State courts.
Thus the Federal court decided at the
threshold whether there was such a rem-
edy; and If there was such a remedy
the case went to the State court. If not,
it continued in Federal court.

That gave each State that wanted to
exercise Its sovereignty and retain ju-
risdiction over cases of that sort the
opportunity to do so. Where the States
did not take that action the remedy ex-
isted in the Federal court.

I think that example can be applied
In this case. It would preserve the sov-
ereignty of the States, it would assure
that there was a backing up remedy in
the Federal courts if the States did not
so act.

The amendment has a broader impli-
cation. There is an established doc-
trine that when Congress preempts the
field It excludes State action. Should
this bill be enacted in its present form
I do not know how far it would be held
to preempt the field and render inoper-
ative the State statutes that exist in
many States and under which there are
adequate remedies for any interference
with the right to vote.

Mr. Chairman, I will say more about
this when the bill reaches the amend-
ment stage. I hope you will all be in-
terested and will look into it.

Mrs. CHURCH. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman^ yield?

Mr. RAY. I yield to the gentlewoman
from Illinois.

Mrs. CHURCH. I have been following
the gentleman's statement with much
Interest. Some of us feel that time is of
the essence in this matter. Has the gen-
tleman given consideration to how much
delay there might be if primary consid-
eration had to be given to the question
as to whether the State remedy is ade-
quate or not?

Mr. RAY. It has not caused serious
delay. It has worked well in the cases
I have spoken about. All it takes is a
paragraph in the pleading or in the bill
of complaint. The Attorney General,
starting a case in Federal court, would
allege that no plain, efficient, or speedy
remedy was available in the State court.
The Issue would be raised, and that ques-
tion would be decided at the threshold.
It would not take separate litigation.

Mr. JOHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, wiU
the gentleman yield?

Mr. RAY. I yield to the gentleman
from Michigan.

Mr. JOHANSEN. Would the deter-
mination by the Federal court as to
whether there was at the State level an
adequate, speedy, and efficient recourse
be based on«exIsting statutes or laws or
would it be based on the record of per-
formance of the State courts or other
agencies?

Mr. RAY. All of the things the gen-
tleman mentioned can be taken Into ac-
count by the Federal court.

Mr. JOHANSEN. I have In mind the
allegation, I am not passing judgment
on it, that justice cannot be secured by
someone in certain State courts in the
matter of the protection of the right to
vote. I am wondering if that aspect of
the matter would be weighed by the Fed-
eral court in making its determination?

Mr. RAY. I think the gentleman will
find in the precedents appearing in the
books that whether a remedy exists un-
der State laws depends on the decisions,
the course of decisions, as well as on the
statutes.

Mr. JOHANSEN. That Is, previous
decisions?

Mr. RAY. Yes; and current decisions.
Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
15 minutes to the gentleman from Geor-
gia [Mr. Brown].

Mr. BROWN of Georgia. Mr. Chair-
man, H. R. 6127 would create in the
executive branch a so-called Civil Rights
Conunission composed of six members
with power to investigate allegations that
citizens are being deprived of their right
to vote by reason of their color, race,
religion, or national origin. This Com-
mission would be empowered to study
and collect information concerning
legal developments constituting a denial
of equal protection, and appraise the
laws and policies of the Federal Govern-
ment. In addition to this grant of in-
vestigative authority, which more ap-
propriately falls within the jurisdiction
of the Congress, the Commission would
have subpena power which is given to
few committees of the House of Repre-
sentatives. The Commission would be
empowered to employ an unlimited
number of personnel, and up to 15 vol-
untary and uncompensated persons.

H. R. 6127 provides for an additional
Attorney General in the Department of
Justice, and would empower the Attor-
ney General to institute in the name
of the United States civil actions or other
proceedings for preventive relief, includ-
ing injimctions. restraining orders, and
other orders. The United States would
be liable for costs the same as a private
person, and it would not be necessary
for a complainant to exhaust his admin-
istrative remedies. Proceedings could
be instituted by the Attorney General
against any person who has engaged
or is about to engage in any act of prac-
tice to deprive another of his voting
rights.

This bill provides that a Commission
Is to be created to make a study and to
obtain information regarding so-called
civil rights. Although the purpose of
the study is to obtain information, be-
fore there is any finding or recommen-
dation by the Commission it is further
proposed that the Attorney General be
granted the unprecedented power to ig-
nore the existing rights of the States by
instituting such proceedings as he con-
siders appropriate for preventive relief
without the consent of the private party
who is presumed to have been injured.
Such proceedings would be instituted in
the name of and at the cost of the United
States and the party against whom the
action is taken would be denied the right
of a trial by jury. This unprecedented
authority is being requested by the At-
torney General in the name of making
a living reality of the pledges of equality
imder law which >are embodied in the
Constitution, without reference to article
m, section 2, of thAconstltutlon, which
provides that the trial of all crimes,
except in cases of impeachment, shall be
by jury.

We are proud that we have a govern-
ment of law rather than a government
of men, yet this bill would create a Com-
mission which would apparently estab-
lish its own rules without statutory re-
striction, while using subpena powers

8552

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

and employing uncompensated person-
nel. The testimony clearly indicates
that the protection of the rights of the
individuals who are to be brought before
this Commission would be entirely de-
pendent upon the caliber, judgment, and
motives of the men to be appointed to
the Commission. It is difficult to under-
stand the reasoning of those who express
their willingness to place their complete
trust in a group of men serving on a
Commission while at the same time they
question the integrity of American juries
and State judges. When questioned
about the extremists who might be em-
ployed as uncompensated personnel by
the Commission, the Attorney General
indicated that this would enable the
Commission to employ an outstanding
expert who would not want to take pay
from the Government because there
might be a conflict of interest. This
statement would indicate that this bill
also carries with it a built-in exception
on conflict of interest in the employment
of uncompensated personnel by the Com-
mission.

Eleven States were sufficiently eoB^^
cerned to send their representatives to
testify before the House Judiciary Com-
mittee. Eight States were represented
by an^ attorney general of the State and
two States were represented by an as-
sistant attorney general. Without ex-
ception, each State attorney general £ind
assistant attorney general was opposed
to this legislation. These proposals were
viewed by them as an unwarranted cen-
tralization of power, and both unneces-
sary and iindesirable. State officials
took the position that the distrust of
State governments, of State law. and of
the State judicial processes implicit in
the proposals were not deserved.

The Constitution of the United States
and the statutes already existin? provide
every remedy and protection that any
citizen of the United States could right-
fully desire. As the minority report
states, the existing statutes are broad
enough to cover not only an action for
damages, but include preventive relief in
equity with the right of the court to grant
an interlocutory or permanent injunc-
tion. I am glad that the existing law is
not sufficiently broad to dispense with a
trial by jury. I am also glad tiiat existing
law does not give to any Federal official
authority to represent selected complain-
ants at the taxpayers' expense while at
the same time denying equal protection
to defendants who are presumed under
existing law to be innocent. The minor-
ity report points out that under the pro-
posed legislation the Commission might
subpena 10 or 15 witnesses for a com-
plainant to appear at a remote location,
with the Government paying travel and
per diem aUowances. At the same time,
the defendant who is presumed under
law to be innocent, would be required to
appear at the same remote location at
his own expense with the responsibihty
of getting his own witnesses and paying
their expenses.

Not only would this proposed legis-
lation establish a commission to in-
vestigate allegations that citizens are
being deprived of their right to vote by
reason of their color, race or national
origin, but H. R. 6127 adds "religion."

The minority report points out that the
word "religion" was struck from the bill
which appeared as a committee print
on February 28. 1957. but reappeared in
H. R. 6127. I am unaware of any testi-
mony in the recent hearings of the
Judiciary Committee which indicates
that any citizen has been deprived of
any right due to religious belief. In
fact, the minority report states:

In the hearlncs that have been conducted
before the House* Judiciary Cvjmmillee over
a p)«rlcxi of many years, we have befn un-
able to discover a single I'.ne of testimony
from any individual appearing In parson
and on his own b«half contending that sucb
persona civil n^jhts had been abused.

Since America i.s universally recog-
nized as a land of freedom, and recog-
nized above all for religious freedom, I
am unable to understand this effort to
ir.c'ude reli'xion in this proposed legisla-
tion. The inclusion of religion appears
to be contrary to the first amendment
of the Constitution, which sintes that
Congre.ss Lhall make no laws respecting
an establishment of religon. or prohibit-
int; the free exercis" tliereof. Inherent
In the thiriliing of the Individual Ameri-
can is the conviction that every citizen
has a right to the enjoyment of religious
freedom, and the inclusion of the word
••religion" In this bill is inappropriate.

Also, inherent in the thinkine; of
Americans is the belief that every ac-
cused E>erson is entitled to justice in our
courts, and the conviction that justice
is safeguarded through trial by jury.
The framers of the Constitution of the
United States were intent upon preserv-
ing the right of trial by jury when they
provided in article III, section 2, that —

The trial of all crimes, except In cases of
Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such
trial shall b« held In the State where the
said crimes shall have been committed; but
when not committed within any State, the
trial shall be at such place or places aa the
Congress may by law have directed.

It is inconceivable that the proponents
of this legislation could conclude that
the vast majority of Americans would
be willing to accept less than a trial by
jury for an accused person where human
rights are concerned than they have
been willing to accept for the adjudica-
tion of property rights. Yet, practically
every State in the Union has provided
for a trial by jury in emment domain
cases, while this effort is being made to
abolish trials by jury in these cases in-
volving human rights.

The proponents of this legislation seek
to abolish trial by jury by bringing ac-
tions in the name of the United States
rather than in the names of private par-
ties. The purpose of section 3691 of title
18 of the United States Cruninal Code Is
to provide that in contempt cases the : c-
cused. upon demand therefor, shall be
entitled to trial by a Jury, and to conform
as near as may be to the practice in other
criminal cases. Since this section does
not apply to contempt committed In the
presence of the court or suits brought
or prosecuted In the name of the United
States, an effort Is being made to have
the United States Government engage In
the private practice of law for the sjje-
ciflc purpose of avoiding jury trials. Sec-

tion 3692 of title 18 of the Criminal Code,
which follows the section I have men-
tioned, also clearly sets forth previous
thinking covering judicial procedure In
contempt cases. This section provides
that, in all cases of contempt arising un-
der the laws of the United States govern-
ing the Issuance of Injunctions or re-
straining orders in any case Involving or
growing out of a labor dispute, the ac-
cu.scd shall enjoy the right to a speedy
and public trial by an impartial jury of
the State and district wherein the con-
tempt shall have been committed.

There was good reason to provide for
trial by jury in contempt cases growing
out of labor disputes when the Norris-
La Guardia Act was passed, just as there
is good reason for providing for a trial
by jury In contempt cases growing out of
this proposed legislation. I was for trial
by juiy ;n contempt cases growing out of
labor disputes when the Norris-La Guar-
dia Act was passed, just as I am In favor
of a guaranty of trial by Jury in con-
tempt cases growing out of .so-called clvil-
nyhts cases. Trial by jury Ls a minimum
and necessary guaranty for the individ-
ual in lx)th cases. We cannot vary the
right to trial by jury on the basis of the
subject matter of a dispute. The ques-
tion is one of guaranteeing justice to the
individual, and justice Is determined
through guilt or Innocence and not by
the nature of the dispute. The accused
are entitled to their day In court for con-
tempt cases growing out of labor disputes
and for contempt cases growing out of
so-called civil-rights cases. To the
American people, this day in court in
both cases means a trial by Jury.

To dispense with jury trials in the
proposed legislation is contrary to the
Constitution of the United Statefl. exist-
ing statutory authority, and the inherent
conception of American justice.

Mr. NIMTZ. Mr. Chairman. I yield
15 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
[Mr. Alger 1.

Mr. ALGER. Mr. Chairman. I real-
ize the lateness of the hour and the small
number of Members here. In the short
time I have been here my colleagues
have told me of the adage that little In-
fluence is exerted in the speeches we
make. So I say to you that maybe I
am speaking only because I do not want
silence to be misunderstood to mean that
the people of the city that we affection-
ately call Big D and the folks of Dallas
County are voiceless on an issue like
this. I do hope in passing maybe 1 or 2
things I say will have some merit to you.

In the first place, I am not a lawyer.
Still. I have great respect for the things
I have heard. I feel that what I lose in
technicalities I might replace by grass-
roots impressions of this bilL

I am not going to belabor you with a
lot of detail. I am taking the bill, and
that is all I have here, and run quickly
through it and pick out some of the
things the man on the street may have
to say; and I feel that mayl>e some of
you will feel there Ls merit in this posi-
tion. First of all, I would say in obsenr-
Lng this bill, as much as the bill last year.
this is not a racial bill at all. This is
a political bill I do not think anybody
here on either side of the aisle can truth-
fully say, no matter how concerned they

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8553

may be about clvU rights, that there Is
not a lot of politics involved. Insofar as
to the degree that we use politics to solve
this problem. I believe we will all agree
that that will not be as good a solution
as we could have worked out. So far
as civil rights goes, everybody is for civil
rights Just as we are all against sin.
There is no question about that. Last
year, I might say to you, when I speak
of the political implications in this. I did
not sign the southern manifesto which
was put out — again in the independence
of my position; because some of my col-
leagues who signed that and appealed
to the people of the Nation, saying here
was a great States rights violation, very
frankly, as I understood the voting rec-
ords, they have not stood up so firmly
for States rights on other issues other
than the civil-rights issue. So I prob-
ably am a misfit on both sides of the
aisle to some degree. Maybe what I lose
in a lack of camaraderie I may gain in
compea-^ation by some independence.
Now, as I look at the bill, it looks more
like a violation of civil rights than it
does a solution of the civil-rights prob-
lem. First of all. let us speak about the
Commission. I understood that a Com-
mission is to be set up to study pos-
sible violations of civil rights so that
out of that august body's findings leg-
islation can be suggested. What do we
have? We find the two together. We
have legislation which was to follow the
wisdom of the Commission's findings in
the same bill with the Commission. Ob-
viously, the Commission is to have God-
Uke wisdom.

Passing on to page 4, I refer now both
to this bill and the bill of last year. I
have listened to as much of this as pos-
sible and the same was true last year.
We made some changes from last year's
bill which the gentlemen from New York,
both the majority and the minority
leaders of the committee have very ex-
cellently explained to us. I think I un-
derstand them. First of all. many of us
are concerned about the subpena privi-
lege of this Commission because anybody
at the drop of a hat could go anywhere
at his own expense, on his own time, for
any distance and meet the wishes of the
commission. Wha», did we do? We cut
back the distance traveled. Does that
make any difference? How about the
civil rights of the fellow who has to
travel on his own time, which makes it
all the worse, to meet the wishes of the
commission. In any event, who is going
to repay him. How about his civil liber-
ty too?

Allegations are now to be made In
writing. Do you recall the debate last
year when the proponents of the bill
did not feel there was anything wrong
in not having a bill of particulars and
the gentleman from Texas pointed out
to us that having the allegations in writ-
ing this year, they have seen the light
and put it in the bill. Also, they have
taken out the matter of unwarranted
economic pressure. I mention those two
things for this point. They have left in
religion. Could it be that if they had
given any further thought to the bill an
amendment might cause them to think
that just as they amended it from last
year in these other instances, they might

agree to strike out religion too. There
are only two subjects in our lives today
that are not broadly touched by Fed-
eral law. I think one Is the church and
the other Is our children's education.

Let us look here at page 6. Let us
look at the top of the page. I am just
going through the bill. Anyone of you
who has the bill can follow me. On
page 6, paragraph No. 2 it says: "study
and collect Information concerning legal
developments constituting a denial of
equal protection of the laws under the
Constitution."

I stood here, which is one of the few
times I have taken the floor, to unfoll
to you the evidence before our commit-
tee last year which frankly shocked me,
when I saw the evidences of brutality —
the pictures of men being beaten almost
to death with the police standing nearby
in labor dispute and the police not taking
a hand. I simply ask you — is that civil
rights? Why have not my colleagues
and friends from the North had some-
thing to say about civil rights in this
matter of labor violence? I am certainly
not afraid tD mention it. I will do what
I can to see civil rights protected.

Let us pass down on to the bottom of
the page, where the bill provides that the
Commission may accept and utilize serv-
ices of voluntary and uncompensated
personnel.

Think of that a minute. I am no at-
torney— but what contractual obligation
Is there between a person working for
the Commission in this case and the
Commission itself? Would you hire any-
one in your oflSce without pay? Where
would be the loyalty? Would there be
any contractual agreement between you?
Even the people we hired at a dollar a
day get that dollar a day. I will not
labor that point further, but I just want
to ask you these rhetorical questions.
Now the number of people are limited to
15. I wonder why the number Is limited
to 15? If more than 15 were wrong, is
It not equally wrong that we have 15?
Why have any voluntary and uncompen-
sated personnel? On the next page
there is a penalty where there Is a re-
fusal to obey a subpena. and a man can
be taken to jail without a jury trial.
When a man is in jail and has not had
a jury trial, how about his civil liberties?
On the top of the next page, I see we
are going to appropriate money, so much
as may be necessary.

In the next part we are going to add
people, as many as are required to ad-
minister the Attorney General's busi-
ness, an unlimited nimxber.

At the bottom of the page I want to
quote this and see how It soxinds to you,
as it will to constituents.

Whenever any personfi have engaged or
there are reasonable grounda to believe that
any persona are about to engage In any acta
or practices which would give rise to a cause
of action pursuant to paragraphs first, sec-
ond, or third —

And then go back and read the para-
graphs. I simply wonder if there is any-
thing in our lives that caimot be fully
covered by this particular clause. Where,
then, are our civil rights, if the Com-
mission or the Attorney General wants to
file suit for any reason under the sun?

Then, at the bottom of page 10, the bill
speaks of civil rights, including the
right to vote. I want at this point to ask
where anyone has outlined civil rights,
if you take out the right to vote? How
much has been said to us about other
civil rights? What civil rights?

Then we go to part IV, and that both-
ers me particularly. This matter of
States rights. I willJae glad to put up
my voting record against anyone in
the matter of States rights. I^ant to
preserve those rights. As I say, there
is only one reason the Communists
could not by subversion take over our
country. The reason is the balance of
power between State and Federal. There
is no centralized voting, there is no cen-
tral landownership, there is no central
police power in Washington, but it is de-
centralized through the 48 States. But
we will have none of these things if we
transfer our power to the Federal Gov-
ernment, through tampering with our
States voting law because then we will
lose our State balance against Federal
Government.

Then, on the last pagij, is spelled out
how any taxpayer, through the use of his
own money, can be-sued by Uncle Sam.
I ask you how is the fellow who is
irmocent going to be protected? Who is
going to pick up the tab for him? Sup-
pose he is declared irmocent, after he has
engaged an attorney and paid for all
the costs: if he is not guilty, what
does he get out of this? Who repays
him?

I can understand why some attorneys
may not be too concerned about this bill,
because either way I think they will have
more business. Those of us who do not
enjoy a legal practice caimot appreciate
the situation. To us it is a bad bill. We
cannot appreciate the attorneys who say
it is a bad bill, in not speaking out on
the floor.

It seems to me we can kill more civil
rights than we protect. Talk about a
jury trial. It will be difficult to explain
to anybody back home why you are
against jury trials if that is passed.

Mr. COLMER. Mr. Chairman, I make
a point of order.

Bi4r. AIX3ER. Would the gentleman
withdraw that? I am almost finished.
Mr. COLMER. Yes; I will withhold
It for the time being.

Mr. AIX3ER. Finally recognizing what
the Supreme Court has done to us. I
wonder what will be the construction of
congressional intent when we on this
floor have this great difference of opinion
as to what we are actually trying to do.
what the law actually means — I simply
wonder what the Supreme Comt will do
to us now when they construe this bill
later on, as to congressional intent.

Mr. COLMER. Mr. Chairman, I did
not want to interrupt the gentleman
from Texas, but I do tlilnk we should
have a quonmi present, and I make the
point of order that a quorum Is not pres-
ent.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I move
that the Committee do now rise.

The question was taken, and the Chair
being In doubt, the Committee divided
and there were — ayes 28, noes 38.

So the Committee refused to rise.

y

8554

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Jum 7

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will now
count for a quorum. [After counting.]
Eighty-two Members are present, not a
quorum. The Clerk will call the roll. ..

The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to
their names:

( Roll No. 103

Andresen.

Pogarty

Morris

August H.

Prellnghuysen

Muiter

Anfuso

Frtedel

OBrlen. Ill

Arends

Oarmatx

OHara. Minn.

A«hley

Oray

OKonakl

Ayres

Green. P«.

Osmers

BaUey

OreKory

Philbln

Baker

OrlflUi

Pillion

Barden

Orlffltha

Poage

Barrett

Qubftcr

Porter

Beamer

Owiim

Powell

Belcher

Harden

Prouty

Blatnlk

Har<. Ohio

Rabaut

Boltoa

Healey

Radwan

Bosch

Hoffman

Rains

Bow

HoUfleld

Reed

Bowler

Holland

Rhodes, Ariz.

Breeding

Holtzman

Rhodes, Pa.

Brown. Mo.

Horan

Riehlman

Buckley

Jacksun

Rogers, Colo

Byrne. 111.

James

Rogers. Mass

Byrne. Pa

Jenkins

St George

Byrnes, Wis.

Jensen

Schwengel

Ceflerberg

Jones, Ala.

Scott. Pa.

Chamberlain

Judd

Scrtvner

Chlperfleld

Kean

Shelley

Christopher

Keeney

Slmpsof^Pa
Smith. WU.

Chudoff

Kelly. N. Y.

Clark

Keogh

Spence

Clevenger

K.lburn

SiaufTer

Corbett

Klrwan

Taber

Coudert

Knutson

Taylor

Cramer

Krueger

Teague. Tex.

Cretena

Laird

Teller

Cunningham.

Lane

Tewes

Nebr

Lankford

Thompson. La.

Curtis. Ma«.

Latham

Utt

Curtis, Mo.

LeCompte

Vinson

Dague

McConnell

Vor>-s

Dawson. 111.

McCuUoch

Vursell

Delaney

McGovern

Wainwright

Dellay

Mclniire

Westland

Dempsey

Mcintosh

Wharton

Dixon

Machrowlcz

Wldnall

DolUnger

Martin

Wler

Don 0 hue

May

Wigglesworth

Dooley

Miller. Md

Williams, N Y.

Dorn. N Y.

Miller. Nebr.

Wilson, Ind.

Eberharter

Miller. N Y.

Wl throw

Fallon

Mlnshall

Wolverton

Farbstein

Montoya

Zelenko

Flno

Morano

Accordingly the Committee rose; and
the Speaker having resumed the chair,
Mr. FoRANB, Chairman of the Commit-
tee of the Whole House on the State of
the Union, reported that that Committee
having had under consideration the bill
H. R. 6127. and finding itself without a
quorum, he had directed the roll to be
called, when 275 Members responded to
their names, a quorum, and he sub-
mitted herewith the names of the ab-
sentees to be spread upon the Journal.

The Committee resumed its fitting.

PSOCEAM FOB NEXT WEISC

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman. I
yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Indiana [Mr. H.^LLECKl.

Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Chairman. I
should like to inquire at this time of the
majority leader as to the program for
next week.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Chairman,
beginning on Monday the consideration
of the pending bill will be continued un-
til that bill is disposed of. Of course, on
Wednesday next there will be no session.
In accordance with the unanimous-con-
sent request heretofore granted.

If the civil rights bill is disposed of In
time next week — you notice my words of
qualification, limitation, and guarded -

ness — there will be other bills brought
up. They are:

The conference report on the third
supplemental appropriation bill, H. R.
7221.

H. R. 6974, to extend the Agricultural
Trade Development and Assistance Act.

S. 469, relating to the termination of
Federal supervision of the Klamath In-
dians.

H. R. 7168, the Federal Construction
Contract Procedures Act.

I make the usual reservation as to
conference reports and that any further
program will be announced later.

Mr. HALLECK. May I ask if the con-
ference report on the third supplemental
appropriation bill is in agreement?

Mr. McCORMACK. No; there are
two matters in disagreement. There is
one on the disaster insurance and the
other on the tungsten.

Mr. HALLECK. Would it be expected
that in all probability there will be a
separate vote had on those matters that
are in disagreement^

Mr. McCORMACK. I would expect
that there would be a separate vote. We
may take 2 '2 or 3 hours to dispose of
that.

Mr. HALLECK. And as I understand
it that conference report would not come
up until the consideration of the pend-
ins? measure is concluded?

Mr. McCORMACK. Nothing will come
up until the consideration of the pending
bill IS completed.

Mr. CANFIELD. The gentleman re-
ferred to disaster insurance. Does the
gentleman mean flood insurance^

Mr. McCORMACK. Yes; that is what
I have in mind.

Mr. ASHMORE. Mr. Chairman, I
yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carolina 1 Mr. Hemphill).

Mr. HEMPHILL. Mr. Chairman, I
want to join those gentlemen who on
yesterday spoke in favor of a jury trial.
I do not think any words of mine could
add to the wisdom of their argument,
but I do think it might be well to make
one observation. While the judiciary
was set up under the Constitution as a
branch of the Gov»!rnment, the Congress
has the power tc> set up the district
courts. The Congress has the inherent
power to prescribe for these district
courts the rule by which these courts
shall operate. If the Congress of the
United States has the power to legislate,
and if the Congress of the United States
has the power to prescribe the rules for
the courts of this land, as it does, then
the Congress has the right to write into
any legislation the right to a jury trial.
So. it is a question of whether you be-
lieve In a jury trial and whether or not
this fair way of deciding issues shall be
put into this legislation.

But, I want to address myself to one
other point which I think should be
brought to the attention of the House.
This legislation, insofar as I can de-
termine, IS the most dangerous piece of
legislation offered in the last 10 years.
Under this legislation, it is possible, if
not designed, to do away with the sys-
tem of free elections in this great coun-
try. I speak not only of those elections
for seats in the House of Representatives
or in the other body, but I speak of elec-

tions In any branch or\8ubdivlsion of our
national, State, or municipal govern-
ments. My reason for saying so U on
page II of the bill. There is a reference
to secUon 1971, title 42 of the United
States Code. If you have not reftd that
section, I beg you to read It before you
vote On this legislation. I am going to
read it to you because it has not been
read before. It Is not memioned In the
bill and it Is not mentioned in the re-
port in such a way to give the Members
an Idea of what this particular statute
provides. This statute provides:

All cttlMns of the United States vho ar«
otherwise qualified by law to vote In anj
election by the people of any State, Ter-
ruory. district, county, city, p>arUb. town-
ship, school district, municipality, cr other
territorial subdiTtslon shall be entit ed and
allowed to vote at all such election* with-
out distinction of race, color, or \ revloua
condition of servitude. Any custom, .aw. us-
age, or regulation of any State or Territory
by or under Ita authority to the contriiry not-
withstanding.

Then, my friends, we read Into this
legislation the implicatlorj> whlcn have
arisen from certain decisions of the Su-
preme Court of the United States. I
have in mind particularly the cas*- of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania versus
Steve Nelson, wherein the Suprem? Court
of the United States said to the E tate of
Pennsylvania, to your State and to mine,
that insofar as sedition Is concerned the
laws of the Federal Government and the
Smith Act of 1940 preempts or super-
sedes amy other sedition act of :\ State
legislature which prior to that ti.Tie and
since 1940 had been able to pass legisla-
tion against sedition, and It vas not
questioned that the States had th.it right
until the Steve Nelson case was decided
on April 2, 1957,

I want to call attention to certain
things in this Steve Nelson case, because
if they can do It on the question of sedi-
tion they can do It on the question of civil
rights. If they can have a doctrine of
preemption written into the 8m: th Act,
which was not intended by the author,
nor intended by the Congress which
passed the act — and the author of the
bill wrote to the Court and told them
that It was not intended — despite that
fact the Supreme Court said that the
United States statute did preempt.

Now, we are confronted with th-? prob-
lem of voting. We are putting into the
hands of the Attorney General of the
United States the power to direct vari-
ous district attorneys, on the eve cf some
Federal election if you please, or iii those
States where an election might be called
either for Congress or for governor or
some other office which some p^alltical
party might deem necessary to hold, or
some balance of voting in which some
political party might think the Attorney
General should take some actlori upon
for the purpose of either hindering the
election, starting unnecessary propa-
ganda, or making sure that a certain
candidate received or did not re<«lve a
certain block of votes. That is the dan-
ger of this legislation, because we are
putting Into the hands of the United
States district attorney, and people
under him, the power to meddle in State
elections.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8555

If you win remember the 10th amend-
ment to the Constitution, and its provi-
sions and its interpretations, the States
are supposed to be supreme in the laws
on elections.

I have here for the purpose of illus-
tration the laws of my own State, which
I think are inferior to none, having been
tested and approved once by the Federal
courts and approved often by the dis-
trict courts.

Now listen just a minute to something
that came from the Steve Nelson case,
and you will see why I am scared of
the preemption doctrine being put into
the election laws.

In that case the Supreme Court said :

It should be satd at the outaet that the
declalon iiv^thls caae does not effect the right
of the State* to enforce their sedition laws
at times when the Federal Government has
not occupied the field and Is not protecting
the entire country from wdltlous conduct.
• • • Nor does It limit the Jurisdiction of
the States where the Constitution in Con-
gress has specifically given them concurrent
Jurisdiction as was done under the 18th
amendment and the Volstead Act.

On its face that would not seem to
cause any concern here, until we read
the provisions of this bill. On page 10
of the bill, line 8, we start:

The district courts of the United States
shall have JurUdictlon of proceedings Insti-
tuted pursuant to this section and shall ex-
ercise the .vime without regard to whether
the party aggrieved shall have exhausted
any administrative or other remedies that
may be provided by law.

So we do not require under this legis-
lation that the State laws, which have
been recognized by the Constitution,
shall be exhausted before we resort to
Federal district court action. This bill
gives the Federal authorities the right to
bypass the State laws. It gives the dis-
trict attorney in your district the right
to meddle in your election, or defeat you
if he is so minded, or his party is so
determined. It has happened. Only
this week another decision came down
and I want to touch on it Just briefly,
the famous Jencks case. Jencks had
asked that the Court look at certain rec-
ords, and the former Attorney General
of the United States dissented, pointing
out that this Supreme Court across the
way not only said that the Court should
look into the files of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation but that the defendant
himself might look into those confiden-
tial files, when the defendant, by his
original motion, never asked that
authority.

Now you are faced with this proposi-
tion, you are faced with the proposition
of either rejecting this legislation or
bowing down again to the white-marble
palace across the way. telling them that
we are going to have legislation by decree
Just as they have In the Steve Nelson
case, where they wrote into the Smith
Act the doctrine of preemption that was
never intended. And if you pass this bill
you are going to have written into the
legislation the doctrine of preemption
which says that the Federal Government
under this legislation has the right to go
into your State and into your coimty and
your city and say that your State laws
do not apply.

We have all been in elections here.
We know that on the eve of a primary
or a general election after a long and
hard campaign, people are tense, rumors
are on the wings of the wind; propa-
ganda has been spread, the candidates
and their friends are nervous and wor-
ried about the outcome. Then what
happens? One of the provisions of this
bill states that when any person or per-
sons are "about to engage" in ansrthing
which they say might keep some people
from voting that the Attorney General
or the district attorney or whoever else
might be interested for political purposes
shall come in and obtain an injunction
and have other remedies attendant.

Suppose you win an election or are
about to win; the other side knowing It
is going to lose, but having in office a
friend who is a district attorney who
wants him to win because he was district
attorney; he has affidavits made by his
friends to say that certain things will
happen or are about to happen, so he
will keep certain people from voting, or
we will say to the manager of ward 3 or
precinct 4. or to the managers or super-
visors or election commissioners: "You
cannot act tomorrow in this election."
What Is the result? A whole box in that
municipality is out of the picture because
they know that particular part is going
against them.

If you want that sort of thing and if
you believe freedom-loving American
people deserve that sort of treatment at
the polls, then vote for this legislation.
But if you want freedom of elections I
ask you to consider what we are saying
here.

I^t me digress just a minute and tell
you something about elections. In
South Carolina— I can speak for no
other State — every man regardless of his
race, creed, or color, is allowed to vote,
and we have had no difficulty at all.
We have made great progress. This sort
of legislation would be used only as a
vehicle for those who would seek to un-
dermine the very freedom of election
that this bill pretends to seek.

You have seen the endorsements of
this sort of legislation by organizations
which are either pink or red. You have
heard of the Communist Party endors-
ing this sort of legislation and certain
ideologies and certain groups which
have been sponsoring It.

I ask you to think about those things.
I ask you to think, Mr. Chairman, be-
cause I believe that tmder the 14th and
15 th amendments, and under the pres-
ent statutes you have sufficient reme-
dies. I ask the Members over the week-
end to read title 42 of the United States
Code — and those are laws which were
passed In 1866 and 1870 which have been
the civil rights of this land since 1870.
Now, until 1957 those laws which have
been sufficient, and under them this
great land has enjoyed freedom and the
prosperity we now enjoy, its civilization
is the best in the world; the laws sud-
denly become inadequate, yet our indus-
try and our country have flourished un- jj
der the legislation enacted In, and whlch^
has been the law since. 1870. Then why
In 1957 is it necessary to pass In this
Congress the controversial legislation

that you are considering here today?
Why should you incite man against man
at the polls? Why should you add fire
or fuel to the flames which some have
started? I might tell you that we in
the South hold malice toward none. We
do not want difficulty or trouble. We
have neither farmed the fires nor fed
the flames because we want and have
made progress.

You have served with us in the Con-
gress, you know what type of people we
are. Then can you look us in the face
and say: "I recognize the fact that you
sat on the committee with me today, that
you worked in the Congress with me day
before yesterday, that you spoke in the
well of the House, that I welcome your
smile, yet you are the people whom this
legislation is directed against."

I beg of you not to consider this leg-
islation in that light. I would not stoop
to consider legislation against any other
section of the country. I would think it
was beneath my dignity as an American
and against all principles of freedom.
Of course, while this is a federal gov-
ernment, do you realize what the United
States means? It meaps a confedera-
tion of States united. I think the man
from New Jersey or New York, the man
from California or the man from Penn-
sylvania is just as good an American as I
am. I think it is just as important to
him to preserve America. I think it is
important to him to look at this legisla-
tion and see the evils of it.

Mr. Chairman, I ask that this legisla-
tion be defeated.

It is true that this legislation does not
specifically state that the Federal stat-
utes shall preempt the election statutes
already in existence in the various States,
bu^ we are in a period of serious govern-
mental difficulty already arising out of
the unfortunately successful effort by the
Supreme Court to have the judiciary
usurp the powers of the Congress. Some
have correctly termed this "legislation by
decree." If this has taken place before,
and I am going to point out where it has,
it could and would take place again.

I have reference specifically to the
Steve Nelson case in which the Cour'
read into the Smith Act of 1940, as \
amended in 1948, a docket of preemption, >
not originally intended by either the au-
thor of the act or the Congress which
passed the legislation, and since the
passage of the act, never before invoked
to take from the State its right to prose-
cute for sedition.

No one seems concerned that the
checks and balances so sacred to our
forefathers, are now sacred only to the
Congress. Neither the executive nor
judicial branches of this Govenmjent
longer recognize, or subscribe to original
conception that each branch of the Gov-
ernment, supreme in Its own sphere,
would be checked by the other branches.
It concerns me here that some of those
who propose this legislation, or support
It, are so blind as to its effects. Either for
political expediency, or for a cause they
believe just, but which promises as Its
Impact Injustice to all America, they
blindly follow Attorney General Brownell
on his civil-rights bill.

The dissenting opinion by Mr. Justice
Reid, Mr. Justice Burton, and Mr, Justice

:.f^

8556

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

Minton, recof?nized the necessity for ad-
herence to constitutional principles, and
quoted from Chief Justice John Marshall
and others, whose real thinking on the
Court was to preserve the Nation. They
repeated, for the Nation, from title 18.
section 3231 of the United States Code:

Nothing in this Utle shall be held to take
away or impair the Jurisdiction of courts
of the several States under the laws thereof
(18 U 3. C. 3231 ».

These dissenting Justices knew, and
perhaps other know, that it is necessary
that a State have adequate penal law.

To Interfere with the penal laws of a State.
where they • • • have for their sole object
Internal government of the country, u a
very serious measure, which Congress can-
not be supposed to adopt lightly, or Incon-
aiderately • ♦ • It would be taken deliber-
ately, and the intention would be clearly ami
unequivocally expressed {Cohens v. Virginia
(6 Wheat 264. 443i ).

Finally we find this in the opinion:

The law stands against any advocacy of
violence to change established governments.
Freedom of speech allows full play tu the
processes of reason. The State and national
legislative bodies bave legislated within
constitutional limits so as to allow the wid-
est participation by the lav enforcement,
officers of the respective governments. The
individual States were not told that they
are powerless to punish local acts of sedi-
tion, nominally directed against the United
States. Courts should not interfere. We
would reverse the judgment of the Supreme
Court of Pennsylvania.

Now you must remember, considerins?
this Nelson case, Ikat the Department of
Justice, through the Solicitor General
of that day, now a distinguished jurist,
filed a brief, as a friend of the Court, and
our United States Government took the
position. l)efore the Court, that the Smith
Act did not supersede or preempt the
Pennsylvania Sedition Act. I quote
from paste 5 of the argument of the
Solicitor General:

The Smith Act itself and its legislative
history are barren of any suggestion that
supersedure of similar State laws was In-
tended. On the contrary, there Is clear evi-
dence that Congress was well aware of the
existence of the State legislation and there
Is no evidence that it Intended the Smith
Act to affect such legislation Moreover, the
Smith Act Is Included In the Federal Crimi-
nal Code as reenacted In 1948, which in-
cludes a general saving clause to the effect
that nothing In the code "shall be held to
take away or Impair the jurisdiction of the
courts of the several States under the laws
thereof 1 18 U S C 3231).

Then the Solicitor General knew the
Inherent dangers in decisions such as
was issued, and on page 7 of that brief
I find the following language:

Moreover the field Is that of criminal Jus-
tice, which, in our Federal system. Is pri-
marily committed to the care of the gtates.
This Court has stressed that It will ni)t
lightly Infer that Congress, by the mere
passage of a Federal act. has impaired the
traditional sovereignty of the States Allen-
Bradley v Board (315 U. S. 740, 749 1. It Is
settled that there Is no constitutional ob-
stacle to the punishment by both the States
and the United States of the same acts.

Further on page 18 of that brief I find
the bold statement In bold print:

Congress has not preempted the field of
punishing seditious activities.

Let us recollect also, that there was
no showing, in the Nelson case, that the
State statutes as administered by the
State, in fact was an obstacle to the ac-
complishment of the full purposes and
objectives of the Smith Act. If such
appeared. Congress would be free to
eliminate such conflict.

The concluding statement in the brief
spells out the dangers involved. The
usurpation of the powers of Congress by
the Court was predicted, and has hap-
pened. We have done nothing about it.
The Communists do not want us to do
anything about amending the Smith Act
so that the States can prosecute also.
They are happy and satisfied, "fhey
know that the Congress is close to the
people, and that once the inherent powers
of any branch of this Government is
undermined, the Government as a whole
is weakened. I quote from the brief
agam:

We have spelled our In this brief our rea-
sons for concluding that Congress has not
sought to displace State legislation prescrib-
ing advocacy of the violent overthrow of
Government Doubts as to the wisdom of
such legislation or the possibility that it
might be abused in practice should not be
permitted to obscure the fact that within
an area such as this, were Congress and
not the courts to determine, within the
constitutional framework, the extent. If any.
to which the traditional sovereignty of the
States must yield to the paramount Federal
power. We have found no Indication, express,
or by Implication, that Congress has at any
time considered It In the public Interest to
displace State sedition laws. Of course,
should It at any time appear to Congress
to be In the public Interest to limit the
operation of such State laws. Congress is
free to legislate to that end The problem.
If there be one. Is a legislative problem to
be dealt with by Congress

For years the election laws have been
the exclusive sovereignty of the States.
Whenever any difficulty over election
arose, it was handled in the State court,
under proper authority and proper de-
cree. There is no necessity of changing
form and practice of Government in this
regard.

But, some would say, the States have
the right to handle elections, and this
bill IS de.siyned at civil rights, instead of
elections. I tell you that the States do
have the right to hold elections, and to
legislate concerning them, and I also tell
you that this bill is designed to break
down those rights, alcng with the pur-
ported civil rights theory of the bill.

Some may say. Well. Mr. Brownell
would never do anything like that. I
do not pass on that here, but who can
say who will be Attorney General next,
and what his motives may be. or whether
the Communists will 'slip one in on us,"'
as they have done in other instances,
namely, Alger Hiss.

We have been talking about the Smith
Act. and the doctrine of preemption.
While It may not be the intent of the
legislation, and the distinguished chair-
man of the committee might well write
the court that it was never the intention
of this legi.<;lation to preempt the rights
of the States over elections, the men
across the wa'y might do like they did in
the Steve Nelson case, disregard what
the lawyers call stare decisis, which

means the guiding opinions of former
years, and usurp the powers of Cor>gress
agWh to preempt the Federal Govern-
ment into the election field. Then, what
happens.'

We know of the lu.^t of power, wr men
who serve in the Congress. We havf seen
It through the years, some of you have
had far more experience along this line
than I ever hope to have. Suddenly there
is thrast in the hands of the Attorney
General of the United States — and he
controls most of the District Attorneys,
the Federal Bureau of Investigatiori, and
a bureaucracy waiting to do his will — the
duty or opportunity to stop a series of
elections which will determine the con-
trol of the Congress, the naming of the
Piesident. or else, and he finds himself
in a po&ition of great power — he d<K:ides
to capitalize upon it. The probabilities
and pos.^ibilities are fantastic, but they
are there.

But you are going to say to me that our
Supreme Court, in past years ha:; said
that the States have the right to deter-
mine the maimer and means of voting,
except where there is discriminition.
But I tell you that the decisions ha^e im-
plication, from which decisions, o;- pre-
emption, such as the Steve Nelson case.
could easily be drawn.

The power of Congress to leglsh.te on
the subject of voting at purely State
elections is entirely dependent uptm the
I5th constitutional amendment, und Is
limited by such an amendment to the
enactment of appropriate leglslat.on to
prevent the right of a citizen cf the
United States to vote, from being denied
or bridged by a State on account of race,
color or condition ; since the amen<iment
is. in terms, address to the action by the
United States or a State, appropriate
legislation for its enforcement mast also
he addressed to State action, not to the
action of individuals — Carem v. U. .?. < 121
Federal 250, 57, C. C. A. 486, 61 L. R. A.
437'.

In a case from my own State, South
Carolina in 1871. the Supreme Cotrt de-
clared that Congress has the po^ver to
interfere for the protection of voters at
Federal elections, and that power existed
before the adoption of the 14th and 15th
amendments to the Constitution — U. S.
v. Crosby (Federal Case 14, 893, 1
Hughes 448 > .

The power of Congress to lei?islate
upon the right of voting at State elec-
tion rests upon the 15th amendment, and
is limited to prohibitions of such dis-
crimination by the United States, the
States, and the officers, or others (Claim-
ing to act under color of laws within the
prohibition of the amendment — U. S. r.
Amstein (6 Federal 819 (Indiana 1381)).

In case of U. S. v. iMckey. Kentucky
decision originally (99 Federal 952, 107
Federal 114. 46 Circuit of Appeals. 189. 53
L. R. A. 660. 21 Supreme Court 925, 181
U. S. 621, 45 Law Edition 1032 > , our Court
has held that the 15th amendment was
meant to guarantee and secure to the
Negro as such the same right to vote that
the white man, as such, has: and under
the power conferred upon Congress to
enforce the same by appropriate legisla-
tion, any legislation having In view the
sole object of protecting that right, if

1957

I

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8557

adapted to that end, not otherwise un-
constitutional, is valid.

These then are the implications.

Just suppose for one Instance, that a
State was marginal in some Federal elec-
tion. A person of design, upon^flldavits.
could be Informed that the election
commissioners of the State, and of the
various subdivisions of the State, were
about to engage in some activities
which would prevent some alleged seg-
ment of the population from voting. Im-
mediately, In order that the State be out
cf the picture Insofar as the election was
concerned. Injunctions, or writs, could
issue, under the guise of civil rights and
under this legislation, against those In
charge of the election. After the elec-
tion was over It would not make any
difference, but confusion would come
rampant, and the worst in American
conception become possible.

It would do us no good to claim the
State court had jurisdiction.

I know of no State which does not have
adequate election laws. There is no com-
plaint, openly In the bill, to this end.

But If we have l)een preempted In the
field of sedition, is It not possible we will
be preempted In the field of election?

It may appear to you that I have made
here a lawyer's argument. I admit that
I have, but this bill has come from the
Judiciary Committee, whose members
are acknowledged leaders of the legal
profession, but I have endeavored to put
It In language the other businessman can
understand.

In order to accomplish preemption. In
the Steve Nelson case, the Supreme
Court of the United States overlooked
similar questions which had been before
the Court from other States.

In Gitlow V. New York (268 U. S. 652),
the Court said :

And the State may penalize utterances
which openly advocate the overthrow of the
representative constitutional form of govern-
ment of the United States by violence or
other unlawful means, {People v. Lloyd (304
ininolB 2324) ) . Bee also. State v. Tachin (92
New Jersey Law 269, 274); and People v.
Bteellk (187 California 361. 375). In short
this freedom does not deprive a State of the
primary In an essential right of self-preserva-
tion; which, so long as human governments
endure, they cannot be denied,

Whitney v. California (274 U. S. 357
(1927) ) was a case in which the United
States Supreme Court sustained the con-
stitutionality of the California statute
which made It a felony for anyone know-
ingly to become a member of any organ-
ization advocating unlawful acts of force
and violence as a means of accomplish-
ing change In Industrial ownership or
any political change.

In Gilbert v. Minnesota (254 U. S. 325
(1920)). the Supreme Court upheld a
Minnesota statute making it a misde-
meanor to advocate the citizens of the
State should not aid or assist the United
States in prosecuting or carrying on a
war.

As Pennsylvania was denied and de-
prived the right of prosecution, so may
your State, and mine, be deprived of
the right of having Its own election law,
and the doctrine of preemption takes
us further down the road toward stat-

Ism, and. eventually, socialism and de-
struction.

In Rochin v. California (342 U. S. 165)
Mr. Justice Frankfurter said:

In our Federal system the administration
of criminal or Justice is-predomlnately com-
mitted to the care of the States.

In Jerome v. The United States (318
U. S. 101 (1943)), Mr. Justice Douglas
said:

since there is no common-law ofTense
against the United States, the administra-
tion of criminal justice under our Federal
system has rested with the States, except
that criminal offenses have been explicitly
prescribed by Congress. In that connec-
tion. It should be noted that the double-
Jeopardy provision of the fifth amendment
does not stand as a bar to Federal prose-
cution though a State conviction based oa
the same acts has already been obtained.

In his argument in the Steve Nelson
case, the distinguished attorney general
of Pennsylvania contended that the
States have always had and still have
the power of self-preservation, and this
includes the power to prohibit advocat-
ing the overthrow of the Govenunent
by force and violence. He went on to
say that for Congress to occupy the
field and supersede the State's sedition
law would completely reverse the well-
established principle just discussed and
deprive the State of the right to protect
this very existence, its right of self-
preservation.

Can you not see what may happen?
Perhaps it is designed. This legislation
bows the head of Uncle Sam to an or-
ganization known as the NAACP. I be-
lieve that it is a known fact that the
Communist support, help in every way
they can. and promote the NAACP.

I do not intend any implication to the
authors of the bill that they are other
than sincere American Congressmen.
But tiie legislation is unnecessary; it is
dangerous, and may well be the means
toward the end of our system . of free
election.

Mr. ASHMORE. Mr. Chairman. I
yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from
Mississippi [Mr. Abernetht].

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Chairman,
one knows little about a particular prob-
lem unless he has lived with it. Since
the Negto seems to be the subject of this
legislation, I, having lived in his midst
all of my life, believe I know something
about him. Sponsors of this bill actu-
ally know little about our colored people.
Their espousal of the bill is simply an
expedient in the realm of make-
believe — an attempt to make the Negro
believe that he is acceptable to them in
all respects, socially and otherwise. The
object is to curry political favor. A Cas-
ual glance at the ghettos of northern
cities belles their statements. There the
colored man is shunted further away
from the white society than he is in the
most segregated southern community;
and when he does settle in a northern
white community the whites flee the
neighborhood in frenzied horror.

There are some who espouse the idea
of enforced association between the
races. Social contact between people of
different races, or even within a single
race, must be by mutual consent, of mu-

tual desire, and of mutual will if it is to
succeed. The mere passage of a law will
not make people happy with one an-
other. Unfortunately, however, there is
a segment of our society which always
shouts, "There ought to be a law," when
they observe something they profess to
be wrong. And if their position is one
which can be pressed via political chan-
nels, as is the pending bill, the machin-
ery is promptly set in motion. By po-
litical coercion and the enactment of
laws they are trying to make us all
alike— socially, economically, culturally,
spiritually, and in every maimer known
to man. That is the objective.

Enforced integration, enforced social
mingling, enforced association of any
kind or character can never be a suc-
cess. It makes no difTerence whether
the eflfort is made between the races or
within any particular race. The human
being just happens to have individual
and discriminating taates. And these
he will have throughout the ages. Laws
will not change man's individuality.
Laws will not change his color or his
characteristics.

People of different races, different
colors, and even of different faiths, seg-
regate themselves. Every large Ameri-
can city has its racial segregated areas,
although they are not referred to as
such. It is not imcommon to find sec-
tions of our cities which are completely
Jewish, or Protestant, or Catholic, or
Chinese, or Negro, and so forth. It all
comes from the desire of men of differ-
ent races, colors, creeds, and character-
istics to live among their kind. Per-
sonally, I think that was the plan of our
Creator. Had He intended us to all be
alike — an amalgamated, mulattoed mix-
ture of man — surely he would have so
created us.

Stripped of all of its lace and trim-
mings, this bill is purely political.
While there are those here who force-
fully espouse integration and mixology,
they will, after this debate is concluded,
withdraw to their own circle and con-
tinue their normal segregated way of
living.

Although I have personally discussed
the bill with many Members of the
House. I do not find many who are really
serious about it. There is widespread
admission throughout the House mem-
bership that the measure is political.
Everyone knows that without mention
being ras^ of it; and everyone also
knows that if the vote were secret the
bill would receive at most only about 50
votes.

Now, Mr. Chairman, if it be that there
are those here who are serious and with
whom civil rights is not a political issue,
if they are serious about the desire to
completely desegregate the country, if
they are serious about accepting the
Negro socially and in every other man-
ner, then they should be willing to as-
sume their fair share of the problem.
There can be no dispute about the fact
that a Negro problem does exist in our
country; that it exists in each and every
section where Negroes have collected in
numbers; and that the problem is in pro-
portion to the number in each area or
city.

8558

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

Nine men of the Supreme Court, Influ-
enced by various forces, some well in-
tended and some sinister, have told us
that we must abolish segregation, thus
changing our way of life. For nearly
200 years we have lived in peace with our
black brethren in the South. True,
many of our Negroes have poor living
standards, but so do many of our white
people. I have observed comparable
poor living conditions in Harlem, on Chi-
cago's South Side and similar sections of
our northern, eastern, and western cities.

The 1950 census will show that 70 per-
cent of our country's Negroes prefer to
live in the South. If the situation is so
bad down there, if they are receiving
treatment which is so unbearable, so in-
tolerable, so inhumane, why is it that
most of them continue to remain in the
South? The fact that they do should
be proof sufiicient that their segregated
life there is neither harsh nor undesir-
able. There is no restriction on migra-
tion to the North.

It is noteworthy that practically all of
the agitation for integration, for civil
rights, comes from Congressmen of
States which have no Negro problem or
from States which have a limited Negro
population due to residential segregation,
but have a powerful Negro bloc vote.

It would be a fine thing if those States
who share their solution with the South
would offer to share the problem. Let
the State governments of those States
whose representatives and press advo-
cate integration and civil-rights legisla-
tion, make available accommodations
for the number of Negro citizens neces-
sary to bring their Negro population up
to the national average of 10 percent.
This includes housing and employment,
as well as school and church facilities.

We will give their message wide pub-
licity throughout -he South so that our
unfortunate segregated Ner;roes may mi-
grate to their States. No fairmmded
American could object to this plan.
Even the NAACP, the ADA, and both po-
litical parties could throw their tremen-
dous weight toward this solution of this
national problem. The plan is logical,
.practical, humane, democratic, and
sound. Our northern friends will be
given an opportunity to practice the
civil rights, the equality, and the inte-
gration which they preach.

Industrialized agriculture is leaving
many Ne^^roes in the South without work.
Thousands of them are moving north-
ward each month in search of employ-
ment. I am told that Chicago alone is
receiving as many as 3. COO per month,
with comparable numbers to Detroit, St.
Louis, Baltimore. Washington, and other
upcountry metropolitan areas. A great
number are moving west, to Los Angeles.
San Francisco, Oakland, Seattle, and so
forth. As the black hordes move in. our
northern friends are having to dip deep-
er for more and more ta.x money to pro-
vide public services, housing, schools, and
public welfare. Unfortunately, in the
inieiirated North, East, and West, the
Negro bears no larger share of the tax
burden and cost of government than he
docs in the South. So. the problem is
shifting but not as rapidly as it should in
order to effect equitable sharlnir among
all cities and States of the country.

An examination of this debate might
give would-be Negro migrants an ex-
cellent clue as to what cities, congres-
sional districts and States are extending
the heartiest welcome. Of course, they
cannot be too sure because we all know
this is political. On the other hand, a
degree of profound concern for the un-
fortunate southern Negro might be
gleaned from some of the Members'
statements. If so. it would be in the
districts of those Members that the mi-
gratory Inclined Negro might well estab-
lish a new residence.

Mr. Chairman, the thing which con-
cerns me tremendously about this bill
is the apparent willinsne.ss of so many
in this House to take another step — a
serious step, if ynu please — toward a
strong centralized Federal Government.
We are rapidly getting away from the
principles which our forefathers wrote
into the Constitution and particularly
the principle that the States have re-
served unto themselves all riehts not spe-
cifically delegated to the Federal Gov-
ernment.

The snooping Federal Commis.^icn
authorized by this bill, the personnel to
be assigned to it. the additional person-
nel to be assigned to the office of the
Attorney General, the voluntary em-
ployees of the Commission and all of the
others that go along with this all-power-
ful investigatory establishment — all pos-
inc; rs the protectors of civil rights — will
be nothing short of an assemblage of
powerful Federal meddlers and spies cre-
ated far the purpose of tormenting, abus-
ing, and embairassmg southern white
people.

It is clear that a governmental system
containing investigators, spies, and Fed-
eral agents and Federal injunctions is-
sued by Federal judges, without charge,
jury trial or hearing, against persons who
are miles away and have never been m
the presence of the court, is a far cry
from the United States Government we
knew only a few years a«o. If this bill
Is passed by Congress and the machinery
contained therein is put into effect, we
will have a government that even Russia
will envy. It will be simpler and far
more honest just to pull the veil of pre-
tense and hypocruy aside and say we
are adopting the Russian method of deal-
ing with the people. Such methods as
are proposed in the pending bill will
J leave the people at the mercy of Federal
spies, to be rubbed of their liberties and
freedom of choice, for all time to come.

I have noted with profound concern
that it will be within the authority of
the Commission to investigate allega-
tions Uiat Citizens are being deprived of
the right to vote by reason of religion.
I am told that since no evidence was sub-
mitted to the committee that any citizen
was, because of rehgion, being denied
such a right, the committee struck this
authority from tiie bill but later rein-
serted same by a very close vote.

Who are the people and of what reli-
gious faith do they belong that caused
the committee to authorize such an in-
vestigation? The record Is completely
silent as to whom they are. We know
that the bill is an appeal to curry favor
with bloc voters but we do not know just
what religious group it Is with which

some are undoubtedly attempting to
placate and curi-y favor.

We are going far afield when we estab-
lish a Commission of the Federal Gov-
ernment armed with attorneys, agent*,
and spies and the power of subpena. and
send it en a fishing expedition Into the
field of religion. And the followers of
that faith which Insists on the use of
such power, when everyone knows that
religious freedom in the United States
remains inviolate, are asking for trouble.

I regret. Mr. Chairman, that the time
has come in this Congress when we play
one race against another, religion
against religion, section against section,
and even man against fellowman. These
are grave times through which our Na-
tion is passing. The very supporting
principles on which our Government was
founded and on which it developed are
being attacked. In a persistent and subtle
manner, from all sides by organized and
sinister forces.

We are surrounded and engulfed In
an atmosphere of .so-called social science
and onc-worldisms. The masses of the
people have t)een misled. They are not
informed about what is taking place and
for that reason they are not much con-
cerned about the situation. Thoy do not
generally know that the provisions of our
Constitution which guarantee their lib-
erties are being whittled away by court
decrees or are being abandoned, side-
stepped, and by -passed.

In recent years large sums of money
have been provided by the foundations
that have sprung up tax-free all over
the country to bring foreign Socialists,
leftwing advocates and ideologists, and
even Communists into our own country,
together to labor 'or yenrs to develop
their un-American stuff and wTite a
1,500-page book. The American Dilemma,
a term for a necessary choice between
equally undesirable alternatives; a per-
plexing problem. This was done by the
schemers for the purpose of selling the
people on the idea, that our basic Gov-
ernment Is wrong; that our Constitution
is unfair and oppres.«ive to the masses
and ought to be changed as outmoded.

The same social philosophers have In-
duced the Supreme Court to minimize
the provisions which retain to the States
and to the people powers not delegated
to the United States, and they have
caused the Supreme Court and other
Federal courts to overrule sound and
well-considered decisions that have l)een
the law of the land for generations.
They have caused the Supreme Court to
hand down decisions which were shock-
ing to those learned In the law — the law
under which our Nation in 170 years has
grown to become the greatest nation the
world has ever known. These recent de-
cisions by our present Supreme Court
were based not on law and precedent, but
solely on propaganda, sociological con-
siderations and modern scientific au-
thority as developed and propounded by
the social scientists, the one-world ad-
vocates, the Communists and leftwing
freethinkers. Such are the authorities
cited by the Supreme Court for the new
philosophy It adopted In Its strange
course on which it has launched our
people.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8559

It may be good and opportune that
this civil rights question has come on
for discussion at the present time. It
may be that the publicity given the issues
and the nationwide interest that has de-
veloped through the attempt of certain
minority and pohtlcal influences to push
through Congress such monstrous pro-
posals brought forward by Its advocates,
will arouse the people from coast to
coast, and from the North to the South,
to the dangers with which they are con-
fronted and cause them to rise up in
their might while there Is yet time and
defend their dearest possession, the Con-
stitution of the United States of Amer-
ica.

This clvll-rlghts business Is all accord-
ing to a studied and well-defined plan. It
may be news to some of you. but the
course of the advocates of this legislation
was carefully planned and outlined more
than 45 years ago. Israel Cohen, a lead-
ing Communist in England, in his A Ra-
cial Program for the 20th Century, wrote,
in 1912, the following:

We must realize that our party's mo«t pow-
erful weapon la racial tension. By pro-
pounding Into the consciousness of the dark
races that for centuries they have been op-
pressed by the whites, we can mould them to
the program of the Communist Party. In
America we will aim for subtle victory.
While Inflaming the Negro minority against
the whites, we will endeavor to InstUl In the
whites a guilt complex for their exploitation
of the Negroes. We wlU aid the Negroes to
rise In prominence in every waik of life, in
the professions and In the world of sports
and entertainment. With this prestige, the
Negro will be able to Intermarry with the
whites and begin a process which will deliv-
er America to our cause.

What truer prophecy could there have
been 40 years ago of what we now see
taking place in America, than that made
by Israel Cohen? The plan was outlined
to perfection and is being carried out by
politicians who have fallen into the trap.
Many thousands in America today who
are In no sense Communists are helping
to carry out the Communist plan laid
down by their faithful thinker. Israel Co-
hen. Truly, vigilance is the price of
liberty.

The grievances heaped upon the Colo-
nies by George III and his Parliament
sound almost like conditions in the
United States Government t^ay. They
certainly would be very typical If this
clvll-rlghts legislation should become
law. What were some of the grievances
pointed out in the Declaration of Inde-
pendence? Quoting therefrom we find
the following :

He has erected a multitude of new oflJces.
and has sent hither swarms of officers to
harass our people.

He has combined with others to subject
u« to a Jurisdiction foreign to our Consti-
tution.

Giving assent to their acts of |M-etended
legislation (he is) depriving us in many cases,
of the benefits of trial by Jury.

How striking the similarity.

These are but a few of the complaints
contained In the Eteclaratlon of Inde-
pendence which brought on Revolution-
ary War. It is now proposed to reacti-
vate, by so-called clvil-rlghtfi legislation,
many of the evils mentioned, and to sur-
render the wholesome provisions of the

law put Into the Constitution by the
Pounding Fathers to protect the liberUes
of th(> people.

I would seriously direct your attention
to the right of trial by jury. No people
can remain free and happy without It.
This legislation plans to bypass and, by
indirection, to rob the people of tWfiright
through scheme and trickery. Itwmfld
substitute Federal district judges— some
200 of them— to take the place of juries.
These, with all the faults, frailties, prej-
udices, and weaknesses common to hu-
man nature, armed with the power of
Injunction to enforce their decrees, with
the legal force of the Attorney General
to prosecute in the name of the United
States, would proceed against the help-
less citizen as he Is selected by the Attor-
ney General to be placed upon the sac-
rificial altar to satify some disgruntled
person who might claim that he had
been deprived of a civil right. Then
by injunction such selected person would
be summarily hurried off to prison with-
out his constitutional right to trial by
jury being exercised. He would not, as
is the law In all criminal cases, be
"presumed Innocent until proven guilty
beyond every reasonable doubt." He
would be subjected by his Government,
on being selected by the Attorney Gen-
eral, to this cruel and oppressive pro-
cedure. This is not America. Such leg-
islation. If enacted and attempted to
be enforced, I fear, would create a long
period of unusual turmoil and oppres-
sion.

There was a period in England about
1685 known as the "Bloody Assizes"
when a Judge Jeffries, and others, who.
because of their cruelties, arrogance, and
oppressive procedures against the people,
are looked upon with Ignominy to this
day. We are told by history that upward
of 300 persons were executed after short
trials; that very many were whipped and
Imprisoned and fined; nearly 1,000 were
sent to America to the plantations as
slaves. History tells us that through the
ages where justice Is attempted to be ad-
ministered in criminal or quasi-criminal
matters without the right of trial by
jury that oppression Is the ultimate re-
sult. Prom what we have already seen,
and this thing is not yet started, we
could expect nothing better In America
over the years.

The right of trial by Jury Is of ancient
origin. It developed in England during
the Saxon period before the coming of
the Normans. Most authorities say It
was first used extensively about 886 dur-
ing the time of Alfred the Great. In the
Magna Carta — 1215 — juries were Insisted
upon as the great bulwark of the peo-
ple's liberties. The historian Redpath
tells us: "In general terms Magna Carta
was Intended by Its authors to prevent
the exercise of arbitrary authority over
the subjects by the English king. The
royal prerogatives were limited in sev-
eral particulars so that it became im-
possible, save in violation of charter
rights, to practice desiMtism. Of the
positive rights conceded and guaranteed
in the charter, the two greatest were
habeas corpus and the right of trial by
jury. The first was the salutary pro-
vision of the English common law by
which every free subject of the kingdom

was exempted from arbitrary arrest and
detention; and the second was that
every person accused of crime or mis-
demeanor should be entitled to a trial
by his peers in accordance with the law
of the land."

J^W* was the first firm foothold the
Vffme obtained against the autocratic
power of the kings. The right of trial
by jury has gone through many struggles
with despots and those who are un-
willing to risk juries doing the things the
ruling political class wants done. The
right of trial by jury is a sHTeld, and the
only safeguard and guaranty of the
people against oppression. Should this
right be removed from the people, for
whatever excuse offered, the keystone
to the arch of their liberties is taken
away and the superstructure of their
freedom would surely crimable. Federal
courts, with injunctive power to enforce
their decrees was never the plan of the
framers of the Constitution for the
Government of America.

I submit that this bill should be de-
feated; and, to say the least, it should
iiot pass without fully safeguarding the
rights of our citizens by assuring them
of a trial by jury.

Mr. ASHMORE. Mr. Chairman. I
yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from
Alabama [Mr. Httddleston].

Mr. HUDDLESTON. ISx. Chairman,
at the proper time. I intend to offer an
amendment to this bill to strike out sec-
tion 121 of part m. This Is a matter of
great concern not only to the people of
my district, but to our citizens all over
the coimtry.

I am opposed to all of the provisions of
H. R. 6127. I am opposed to the entire
bill for the reasons which have been
so ably stated by its opponents In the
course of this debate. Of particular con-
cern to me. however, is section 121 of
part m of this bilL This section pur-
ports to empower the Attorney General
to institute civil actions for redress or
Injunctive relief in cases in which it is
alleged that persons have engaged or
there are reasonable grounds to believe
that persons are about to engage in ac-
tions or practices In violation of the civU
rights of other individuals.

As many of you know, I represent the
Ninth Congressional District of Alabama.
This district comprises Jefferson County
and the city of Birmingham. Birming-
ham is recognized throughout the coun-
try as the industrial center of the South-
eastern States. With a population of
over 600,000, we play a vital role in the
Industrial economy of this country. In
fact, we produce 9 percent of the total
iron and steel production of the coun-
try and believe it or not, 80 percent of
the caat-iron pipe. My district Is one of
the few economically complete districts
In the Nation. I have 70,000 members of
organized labor numbered among my
constituents and I also have the man-
agement for that labor located in my
district.

Because of the tremendous Industrial
and manufacturing activity In the Ninth
District of Alabama, I, as as Its Repre-
sentative, have a great deal In conunon
with many of the northern Congressmen
on my side of the aisle who represent
labor districts in northern citieB and also

8560

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

many of the Members on the other side
of the aisle who count among their con-
stituents sizable segment* of the Indus-
trial management of this country.

It Is my contention that section 121 of
part III of H. R. 6127 applies to labor-
management relations just as it applies
to race relations and, if you will bear with
me for a few moments, I would like to
explain to you why I have this view.

Section 121 reads as follows:

Sec 121 Section 1980 of the Revised Stat-
utes i42 U S. C. 1985) la amended by adding:
thereto two paragrapha tn be designated
••rourth" and "flfth.' and to read as folKiws:

•'Fourth. Whenever any persons have en-
traged or there are reasonable urouuda to be-
lieve that any persona are about lo engaje
In any ac^s or practices which wuuld give
rise tu a cause ot action pursuant to para-
Krapha first, secund, or third, the Atturnoy
General may Institute for the tTnited States,
or in the name of the United States, a civil
action or other proper proceeding for pre-
ventive relief, includlni? an application for a
permanent or temporary Injunction, restraln-
lni< order, or other order In any proceedlnsc
hereunder the United SUtea shall be liable
for coats the same as a private person

• Fifth. The district courts of the United
States shall have Jurisdiction of proceedings
Instituted pursuant t.> this sectl-'in and shall
exercise the same with ut regard to whether
the party aestrteved shall h.we exhausted ap.y
admlr.l.strative or other remedlea that may
be provided by law •

You Will note that thi.s section refers to
paragraphs first, second, and third of title
42. United States Code, section 1985, and
adds paragraphs fourth and fifth. In
order to better under'^tand what I am
talking about, let me read paragraph
three of the existing; law. title 42. United
States Code, section 1985. It says, among
other things

If two or more persons conspire for the
purpoae of depriving any person of the equil
protection of the lav(r^ or of equal prlvilev'ea
and Immunities under the laws, the party so
Injured or deprived may have an action for
the recovery of damages.

As you will see. paragraph 3 makes no
mention of race, creed, color, or national
origin. It is not Intended that the bene-
fits of this section should be extended
only to those who 1 ave been deprived of
the equal protection of the laws becau.«:e
of race, creed, color, or national origin.
In fact, beginning in 1877. the Supreme
Court — in what have been called the
Granger cases — applied the 14th amend-
ment and statutes enacted pursuant
thereto to all "persons." Including cor-
porations. In the case of Yick Wo v.
Hopkins (118 U. S. 356 il886)>. the
Court, acting through Chief Ju.>tice
Walte, settled once and for all the ques-
tion of the extent of the 14th amendment
and of the existing civil-rlghts laws.
using these words In the opinion :

These provisions. I. e.. equal protection
of laws, are universal In their application.
to all persons within the terrltorl;'! Juris-
diction without regard to ar.y dlflerencea
of race, of color, or of nationality

It Is a common mlsconceptli r. among our
people that the l4th amendment and the
present clvll-rlghts laws apply only to those
who have been deprived uf the equal pro-
tection of the laws because of race, color.
or national origin. But this la not so. They
apply to all persona, and all persona are pro-
tected by them. This even includes cor-
poratioua «hlcb have been defined, for the

purposes of the 14th amendment and clvU-
rlghu statutes, as ■persons."

Mr. Chairman, you will note that In
paragraph 3 of the present title 42.
United States Code, section 1985. the
term "equal protection of the laws" Is
lised. Just what does this phrase mean?
The Supreme Court long ago. In the
case of Barhier v. Connolly ill3 U. S.
27 (1835' >. defined it as the protection
of equal laws. It requires — and I quote:

Th..t equal protection and security should
be given to all under like clrcumstanci's In
the enjoyment ot their personal and clvtl
rights.

Based on what I have Kaid before. I
am sure that you will agree that the
term equal protection of laws" is not
hmit'^d to race relations only. It em-
braces all other ptrsonal and civil rights
wh;ch have been extended to the people
in this country by the Constitution and
also by the laws of the United States.

Now I get down to one of the major
reasons why I oppose section 121 of part
III of H. R. 6127. As I have said, the
term 'equal protection of UiwE" applies
to all laws of the country which extend
nehts and privileges to citizens and
other persons The rights which I have
particular reference to are those which
\fcere initially spelled out in the Wacner
Labor Relations Act and later in the
Labor-Management Relations Act of
1947, otherwise known as the Taft-Hart-
ley Act. The.se rights appear in title 29.
United Slates Code, section 157. With
your indulgence. I would like to read
this section.

RIGHT or rMPt-OrXK-n AS TO OaCANIXATlOM.
COLLITTIVE BAECAININO, STC.

Employees shall have the right to self-
orRanizatlon. to form. Join, or assist labor
organizations. to t)ikc;aln coUectlvely
through representatives of theU own
choosing, and to engage In other concerted
activities for the purpose of collective bar-
gaining or other mutual aid or protection,
and shall also have the rl^ht to refrain from
any or all of such activities.

The first set of rights were extended
by the Wagner Act. and the right to re-
frain from activities first mentioned was
extended by the Labor -Management Re-
lations Act of 1947.

It is my contention that these rights
conferred by the Wasner Act and the
Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947
are Included withm the meaning of the
term "equal protection of the laws."
These are laws of this country.

Section 121 of part III of H. R. 6127
extends to the Attorney General the au-
thority to intervene in case of acts or
practices which would give rise to a cause
of action pursuant to the existing civU-
nghts laws. In other words. If two or
more persons conspire to deprive another
of eqvial protection of the laws, the At-
torney General may institute a civil suit.
He can do this without the consent of the
alleged aggrieved party and even over hia
strenuous objection.

The Attorney General Is given by this
section 121 the authority to intervene In
matters Involving violations of the rights
extended and conferred by the Wagner
Act and the Labor-Management Rela-
tions Act of 1947. As I have quoted from
these acts above, the right to Join a labor

organization is one of these rights. Also
U the right to refrain from Joining a
labor organization. These are only two
of the righu which are conferred on em-
ployees and employers by these acts; and
if persons are deprived of these rights by
others, they are denied the equal protec-
tion of the laws.

You can see what the result would be.
All cases of complaints on behalf of a
company against a union or a union
against a company would be subject to
Intervention by the Attorney General.
By ^;lvlng the Attorney General this
poorer, the bill. In effect, circumvents
the National' Labor Relations Board.
which has a statutory Jurisdiction over
labor-management relations, and gives
the Attorney General concurrent Juris-'
diction with the Board.

Section 121 of H. R. 6127 puts labor-
management relations into the middle of
politics. Instead of the Government be-
ing the umpire, as It presently is. the bill
would actually make it a party litigant.
A politically minded Attorney General
could use section 121 of this bill to de-
stroy either union oi management, de-
pending upon what would best serve the
interests of the administration of which
he is a part.

Let me give you an example. If an
employee Is fired for allegedly Joining
a labor union, he has a right guaranteed
by the Wagner Act and as such, is de-
prived of his equal protection of the
laws. The Attorney General could sue
the company for this deprivation and
have the unlimited resources of the
country at hLs disposal

On the other hand. If a union allegedly
violated the rights of employees to re-
frain from Joining labor organizations,
as granted In the Labor -Management
Relations Act of 1947. they will have
been deprived of their equal protectldn
of the laws. The Attorney General could
file suits against the union, even with-
out the consent of the alle«red aggrieved
employees, under the provisions of sec-
tion 121 of this bill.

These rights, which I have mentioned,
are protected by the National Labor Re-
lations Board as are all othy rights and
privileges guaranteed by the Wagner Act
and the Labor-Management Relations
Act of 1947.

By plaguing either company or union-
with suits, the. Attorney General could
destroy or bankrupt either or tx>th. This
double-edged sword which is created by
section 121 of H. R. 6127 could be used
to persecute and hamstring labor or
management, depending on what best
suited the administration In power at
that time. H. R. 6127 is a dangerous btU
In many respects and I feel that one of
the most Important of these is the effect
which section 121 will have In putting
labor-management relations into poll-
tics.

In my humble opinion, the members
of the committee from the North and
West would do well to give careful con-
sideration to the arguments I have pre-
sented. I believe that these arguments
have force and substance and that H. R.
6127 will have a serious effect on our
traditional concept of labor-manage-
ment relations. Who knows, but that. If
this bill Is approved by the House and

1937

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8561

the Senate, and is signed Into law by the
President, a year or so from now those
who are presently supporting this legis-
lation may come back into Congress cry-
ing for its repeal. I wouldn't be at all
surprised.

It is for the reasons I have outlined
that I intend to offer an amendment,
at the proper time, to strike section 121
of part IH from this hill. H. R. 6127.

Mr. ASHMORE. Mr. Chairnaan. I
yield 15 minutes to the geutleman from
North Carolina I Mr. Wmrnm].

Mr. WHITENER. Mr. Chairman, we
are told that the bill now under con-
sKleratlon. H. R. 6127. is a bill designed
to protect the civil rights of persons
within the jurisdiction of the United
States. President Eisenhower and At-
torney General Brownell have vigorously
proclaimed that this legislation is nec-
essary if the citizenship of this Nation
is to enjoy fuD civil rights.

At the outset. I would like to make
one thing abundantly clear: the people
of the southern part of the United States
are not depriving any persons of their
constitutional and civil rights as Las
been so recklessly asserted by^he Pres-
ident, the Attorney General, and the
pioponents of this legislation.

I believe that I can spealc with some
authority on this subject t)ecause of the
experiences I have had In my private
and professional life.

It has been my privilege to serve as a
member of the North Carolina General
Assembly where the problenis-of our
entire citizenship were dealt with on the
legislative front. It was my further
privilege to serve for 11 years iwior to
entering tne Congress in January of this
year as district solicitor — which position
Is referred to in other States as district
attorney — where an intimate associa-
tion with the problems of aU the people
in the criminal courts was had.

In neither the legislative nor the ju-
dicial field did I find that there was any
expression or any intimation on the part
of any of our people to deprive their
fellow citizens of the full rights of citi-
zenship.

Needless to say. through my Interest
In the political life of the State, I had
the further opportunity to observe the
attitude of the people of the South to-
ward the voting privileges of members
of our society. In that fWd there has
been no limitation Imposed by law. cus-
tom, or practice upon the people in any
social, religious, or racial group in the
State of North Carolina.

The State of North Carolina has been
a leader in the Nation in the field of edu-
cation. It would be of interest to the
memt)ers of this body to know that the
public schoolteachers of North Carolina
are paid salaries on a schedule which
results in the average Negro school-
teacher In North Carolina earning higher
compensation for their services than is
( arned by the average schoolteacher who
Is a member of the white race. Also, you
v/ill find that for many years members
of the Negro race have served as mem-
bers of the State board of education— the
r oveming body for the educational pro-
prara provided by the SUte of North
Carolina.

I would further point out to my friends
of the House that practically every major
city in the State of North Carolina has a
member of the Negro race upon the-city
council or governing body. In my own
city one of our outstanding Negro dtlaens
is now serving his fourth term on the
city council and has in the past served
as treasurer of the city. He was elected
by his white colleagues to this post.

Jiow many of you members from sec-
tions outside of the South can say that
your people have been as considerate to-
ward the members of the Negro race as
has been true in North Carolina?

Much has been said in my private con-
versation with members of this body
from other sections of the country about
Negroes serving on the juries in the
South. These questions by intelligent
and information-seeking men lead me to
the inescapable conclusion that there is
an aura of complete misunderstanding
hovering over the Monbers of the House
who have not had firsthand opportunity
to observe the true picture.

During my 11 years as prosecuting at-
torney in the 14th judicial district of
North Carolina, I can say to you that
there was never any discrimination in the
selection of jurors by reason of race, sex.
creed, or color. We had male Jurors of
both races. We had female jurors of
both races. Seldom, if ever, was there a
grand Jury panel that did not have mem-
bers of the Negro race.

Perhaps you would be faiterested in
the experience of several years ago
which we had in the courts of my dis-
trict. A Negro man was indicted for
the capital felony of murdM' in the first
degree arising out of the death of one
of tlie fine white citizens of Mecklenburg
County, N. C. Tlie defendant was
financially tmaUe to provide his own
counsel The distinguished preskling
judge appointed two attorneys to rep-
resent him. One of those attorneys was
a leading criminal lawyer of the white
race. The other attorney was a Negro
attorney of great learning and ability.
The Jury panel was c(»nposed of a white
and 4 Negro jurors. In addition, the
13th, or alternate juror, was a member
of the Negro race. When the jury of
12 commenced its deliberatioQs it im-
mediately elected as foreman and
spokesman for the jury an outstanding
Negro educator who had received his
master of arts degree from the Univer-
sity of Cincinnati. This jury returned
the verdict which carried with it the
death penal^, and the defendant was
later executed.

I point this out merely to show the
attitude of fair play which exists be-
tween the races tn my native Soutii-
land. This was not any uniKual ex-
perimce, except that it involved the
death penalty. Similar experience in
lesser cases, as well as in other caiiital
cases, is the rule, and not the exception.

In 1M4 while seeking reelection to
the position of district solicitor, I was
caDed upon to speak to an alliance of
Negro ciergymtn tn one of the cities of
my district After completing my pres-
entatioD the chahman of the meeting
asked if I would be wflUng to answer
questions which some of the ministers
would like to propoimd to me.

It was surprising to me to find that
the Questions most on the minds of those
Negro ministers was ttaeir belief that
imdue leniency was being shown to
members of their race by the judges in
the criminal courts of North Carolina.
There was not one word of complaint
that the members of the N^ro race
had been unfairly treated. The com-
i:^aint which they expressed was that the
courts were not dealing as firmly with
their race as was being done with mem-
bers of the white race. They felt that
their race should be held accountable
to the same extent as members of the
white race, and in that view I concur.

My friends. I could continue for many
hours with examples and facts ot the
harmonious race relaUons which are now
enjosred in that section of this Nation
toward which this vicious legislation is
directed — the South.

Do you believe In good race relations?
Do you believe in fair play? If so, it
is my firm conviction that you will not
participate in foisting upon the Nation
this legislation pnoposed by President
Eisenhower and Attorney General
Brownell in the language otH.K. »27.

No decent citizen of the South en-
gages in the sort of conduct which this .
bill seelcs to prevent. Its very language
is an affront to the God-fearing, law-
abiding. Christian people of our ««yt^^^
of the cmmtry. '<^-

What does this bill purport to do? ;
First, it would establish the Commission :
on Civil Rights. Second, it would pro- .
vide an additional Assistant Attortey
General with no duties to perform other
than deal with the enforcement of the
proposed legislaticHu Third, it would re-
vise and amend the present civil-rights
statutes that have been on the books
for many years. And, fourth, it would
sedE to put the Federal Grovemment in
charge of every local election in this
Nation.

The appointment of such a Commis-
sion would constitute an additional ex-
pense to the taxpayers of the country
and would confer no new authority upon
tlie Federal Government in any respect.
It would merely create a new group to
ntake those investigations which can
now be made by the D^;>artment of Jus-
tice.

This Commission could become
the greatest witch-bunting organization
since the Salem massacre. It could be-
come a gestapo organization which
would breathe down the backs of the
people of every area of this Nation.

It is my considered opinion that this
Commission would be a stadced Com-
mission which would close Its eyes to
the real problems confronting the peo-
ple of this Nation and direct its atten-
tion merely to the forcing of the socio-
logical opinions of the membership of
the Commis^on upon the pec^^xle of the
United States.

To the same effect is the provision, for
an additional Assistant Attorney Gen-
eral. This is an unwarranted pi^oiic of-
fice whieh the bQl sedcs to create and
would o(uutitute an unnecesssuy e^iense
to the people of this Nation.

The present Attorney General has full
authority to recommend the creation of

CIII-

-539

8562

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

additional positions of Assistant Attor-
neys General. Such Assistant Attorneys
General would be subject to the direc-
tion and supervision of the head of the
Department of Justice. Certainly it is
not proper that there should be one per-
son set up to engage solely in stirnng up
strife between the people of the various
races in this Nation.

The third part of the proposed act is
the one which gives even greater con-
cern to those of us who believe in con-
stitutional government. It is noted
that this provision of the bill would au-
thorize the Attorney General of the
United States "in the name of the United
States" to bring a civil action and seelc
a permanent or temporary injunction
against any citizen of the Nation whether
the alleged injured citizen requested
such proceedings or not. This portion
of the bill further seeks to vest in the
District Courts of the United States ju-
risdiction of such proceedings, and, in
effect, wrests the historic jurisdiction of
State courts away from them and ig-
nores the time-honored jurisdictional
requirements which have noiinally ap-
plied to Federal court jurisdiction.

Have we reached the stage in our
American life at which thinking people
would destroy the constitutional right of
trial by jury?

Are the proponents of this leatslation
unwilling to recognize that the American
system of having a cause adjudicated by
a jury of 12 persons is worthy of perpetu-
ation?

Are the proponents of this legislation
saying to the Nation that while we rec-
ognize the labor unions have the right
of trial by jury when injunctions are
sought, that all other classes of our citi-
zensjiip are not so entitled?

Mr. Chairman, in trying thousands of
cases in my capacity as an attorney and
as District Solicitor I have on several
occasions been shocked by the decision
made by a particular jury. Many times
I have felt that the State had made out
a case which pointed unerringly to a
verdict of guilty. But on many occasions,
to my great astonishment .the jury, in
the exercise of its authority, determined
that the defendant was not guilty. To
be sure. I experienced temporarily a
sense of deep disappointment and felt
that the jury had made a very bad mis-
take. Then, upon mature reflection, I
Invariably came to the conclusion that
the jury system has its frailties but that
as a democratic institution it should be
preserved.

Human experience has divulged no bet-
ter method of fairly. Judiciously, and
properly adjudicating claims between in-
dividuals and between governments and
individuals than the system of jury trial
which we have so long cherished in this
land of ours.

Of course, we can point out cases
which have shocked the public conscience
when the verdict was returned. Is this
sufficient ground for condemning and
jury system?

A few days ago my attention was at-
tracted to a news story with reference
to a criminal trial In the State of CaM-
fornia. The defendants were charged
With kidnappmg a lady. The case

was tried in an atmosphere of great pub-
lic interest. The jury determined that
the defendants were not guilty. There-
upon, accordmg to newspaper reports,
the presiding judge of that court in
California expressed his shock and dis-
approval of the decioion made by the
jury. But. my friends. I would un-
hesitatingly predict that an inquiry of
that trial judge would bring the answer
that in spite of this decision which fail-
ed to conform with his ideas of justice
that he would still advocate the Amer-
ican system of trial by jury.

You and I as co-architects of the
future course of this democratic govern-
ment of ours have grave responsibilities
which transcend political expediency as
we arrive at a decision on this pending
legislation.

I am astounded that part 4 of this pro-
posed act would seek to put the Federal
Government into control of the voting
and ballot boxes of this Nation. It would
do this through providing for injunctions
by the Federal courts and Federal sui>er-
vision of elections.

Are we to surrender to the Federal
Government the right to regulate every
phase of human life? Is there any tan-
gible evidence which would show that the
States of North Carolina. California. New
York. Oregon, or any of the other 48
States have reached the point at which
they are incapable of managing their own
elections?

The present Federal law is completely
adequate to take care of any misconduct
in the elections where there is an election
involving a position in the Federal Gov-
ernment. No further legislation In this
field is needed.

I observe that the proponents of this
legislation casually point out some par-
ticular instance in some community in
the South where they contend that a
member of some minority group has been
deprived of the right to vote in an unlaw-
ful manner. But, even in their great
zeal they are unable to support their
argument with valid proof that it is the
custom, law. or practice.

I can take you into any county in
North Carolina at any election and show
you three white people to each Negro
person who feel that the election officials
have not dealt fairly with them at elec-
tion time in connection with their right
to vote. This question frequently arises
because of the lack of understanding of
a particular person as to whether they
are properly registered and also as to
whether they are registered in the proper
voting place. These questions are
brought up at evei-y election, but. unfor-
tunately, no attention is paid to them
unless it involves some member of a
minority group. Then there is a great
hue and cry by professional agitators
who would try to make it appear that
some misconduct was being engaged in
by the local election board or officials.

Let us be fairminded. Let us rec-
ognize that all of the propaganda that is
dispensed is not the gospel truth. And
let us not indict the American people by
the enactment of this proposed legisla-
tion which will cause our neighbors in
other lands to Interpret it as a recogni-
tion of the truth of false accusations
which have been hurled about so freely.

In conclusion. Mr. Chairman, let me
urge all of our colleagues to approach
the decision on this critical legislation in
the light of the preservation of the way
of life which has made this Nation great.
Let me urge upon you that you not trade
American principles for trtimped-up
arguments of political expediency in this
time of great concern in this land of ours.

America has prospered under consti-
tutional government. There are many
who wonder how much longer constitu-
tional principles can stand up against
the onslaughts of our present Supreme
Court and those in our legislative branch
who would recklessly whack away time-
honored principles.

Mr. Chairman, in opposing this legisla-
tion I am compelled to point out to its
proponents that their entire thinking is
based upon misinformation and false
charges.

There is no satisfactory evidence to
support the position that this harsh and
rash legislative act is needed.

Its enactment will not merely penalize
the Southland, as many seem to think.
It will penalize people of good will in
every section of the Nation.

It will rise up to haunt those who today
propose it because it is national in scope
in spite of the apparent feeling of the
proponents that it applies merely to one
section of this Nation.

I am opposed to H. R. 6127 and every
part of it and urge that the Members of
this body aid those of us who believe in
constitutional principles and strike it
down at the conclusion of debate.

Mr. Chairman, as I conclude my re-
marks I would express the hope that in
this atmosphere of great concern po-
litically and otherwise we here today
have the same courage as we approach
our duty to our country and to its Con-
stitution SiS we have had in other pur-,
suits as we have gone through life to
meet those attacks upon our Nation and
those things for which it stands.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Mr. Chairman. I
ask unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point in the Record.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?

There was no objection.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Mr. Chairman, I
am In favor of this bill. H. R. 6127. I
am in favor of providing the means of
securing and protecting the riglit to vote
of any American citizen, whether he
comes from Virginia or Ohio, whether
he comes from New York or Mississippi.
This bill is a far-reaching and explosive
bill. This bill will determine whether
we legislators have a pure heart to com-
prehend our American* people and the
rectified will to choose our hii;h course
of action.

I was Impressed yesterday by the
speakers of Mississippi and Virginia. I
admired their forensic ability and was
moved by their emotional appeal. I
was impressed by the gentleman from
Mississippi who declared that he was a
Thomas Jefferson Democrat, and that
we should not be the followers of Alex-
ander Hamilton, but shoull follow
Thomas Jefferson.

y

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8563

Well, let us analyze what he said. On
July 4. 1776, the colonies declared their
independence. The Declaration of In-
dependence was written by the founder
of the Damocratic Party, Thomas JefTer-
son. who among other things, declared
all men are created equal and endowed
by their Creator with certain Inalienable
rights, that among these are life, lib-
erty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Do the Ne^oes In Mississippi have lib-
erty and the untrammeled right to vote?
Do the Negroes have in the southern
States of Texas. Mississi];H>i> Virginia,
Arkansas, and Alabama, those States
which have poll taxes, the equal oppor-
tunity to vote? Let us look at the record.
Tlie hearings in connection with the
civir rights bill disclose very interesting
and alarming situations — page 24. In
Mississippi, a poll-tax State. In one
county alone of 16.885 Negro voters, only
147 were registered voters, and out of a
population of 10.344 whites, over 3.000
were registered roters. In Washington
County. Miss., where 48,831 colored per-
sons lived, only 126 were registered, while
out of a total of 18.&68 whites in the
county, over 5.000 were registered.

One fact is crystal clear. Through
changes in election laws, through trick
questions, through economic pressures.
the number of colored persons who are
permitted to vote are restricted. It was
estimated in the spring of 1955 that Ne-
gro reglstratk)n had been reduced from
20.000 to about 8.0O0. In one county.
Himiphreyt County, the number had
dropped from about 400 to 91.

What does this bill do? It simply pro-
tects the Negroes' right to vote in Missis-
sippi, in Texas, in Virginia, in Alabama.
in Arkansas, and throughout these
United States. It permita our Govern-
ment through our Attorney General to
obtain an order to stop any man or group
of men. or any local body, from inter-
fering with the Negroes' right to register
and to vote.

When you gentlemen talk about the
sacred right of trial by jury, you raise a
bogua iasae, you raise a phony issue.
You oppose this bill on the ba^ of dis-
trust and fear of our Federal Judges,
who are appointed by our President for
life. I have confidence In our system
of law. I have confldmce in our Federal
Judges. I have faith in their integrity
and in their honesty and In their wlsdonx
For 70 long years Congress has stood
still and has not enacted any civil-rights
law. Our progress in the field of civil
rights has come from the Supreme Court
of the United States and through our
Executive orders. The legislature haa
failed to act. Time has marched on and
changes have occurred, but the Congress
has not recognized the needs of an ex-
panding America, the needs of a rising
people. Let us show this Nation that
we in Congress seek by leglslatlre means
the realization of our American dream —
equality of opportunity for all. Pass this
bUL

Mr. ASHMORE. Mr. Speaker, I move

that the Committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed ta

Accordingly the Committee rose; and
tl^e Speaker having resumed the chair,

Mr. FosAND, Chairman of the Committee

of the Whole House on the State of the
Union, reported that that Committee,
having had under consideration the bill
(H. R. 6127) to provide means of fur-
ther securing and protecting the civO
rights of persons within the Jurisdiction
of the United States, had come to no
resolution therecoi.

REDUCTION OF BENEFITS RE-
CEIVED BY CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS
I'ARTICIPATING IN THE OLD-AGE
AND SURVIVORS INSURANCE
FTIND

Mr. COAD. Mr. Speaker. I ask unani-
mous consent to extend my remarks at
this point in the Reccmid.

llie SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Iowa?

There was no objection.

Mr. COAD. Mr. Speaker, sections 402
and 403 of title 42 of the United States
Code deal with the reductions of bene&ts
received by those Individuals participat-
ing in the old-age and survivors insur-
ance who earn more than $1,200 in any
one taxable year.

The procedures for calculating and
deducting extra earnings are very com-
plicated and archaic, and in my opinion
involve unnecessary administrative at-
tention and expense. These costs are
borne by the trust funds of social-secu-
rity payments made by the participants
in this program.

It is my contention that this is an
insurance program as presently set up
and operated and should not be contin-
ued as a forced retirement system. Once
a person fuMlls his obligations to the
program through pasrments and other
qualifying provisions of age he should re-
ceive full benefit without reductions be-
cause of what he may earn, regardless
of the amount. These are the twilight
years of these persons, and the present
restrictions are unnecessary and serve
only as penalties to our aged who have
borne the burden of labor during the
preceding generation.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I am today
Introducing a bill which wIH amend title
II of the Social Security Act so as to
remove the limitation upon the amount
of outside income which an individual
may earn while receiving benefits there-
under.

table and, under the rule, referred as
follows:

a. 1141. An act to authorize and direct the
Administrator of General Services to donate
to the Philippine Republic certain records
captured from insurrectos during 1699-1903;
to the Committee on Government Opera-
tions.

S. 1408. An act to proylde allowances for
transportation of house trailers to civilian
employees of the United States who are
transferr^<j from • one official station to an-
other; to the Committee on Government
Operatlans.

S. 153&. An act to amend the Federal Prop-
erty and Administrative Services Act of 1949
to anthortse the Administrator of General
Serrices to make contracts for cleaning nnrf
custodial services for periods not exceeding
5 years; to the Committee on Governioent
Operations.

S. 17TO. An act to facilitate the payment of
Oovemment checks, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Government Opera-
tions.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. EOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I move
that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; acccH-dingly
(at 6 o'clock p. m.), under its previous
order, the House adjourned vmtil Moo-
day, June 10. 1957, at 12 o'clock noon.

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

By unanimous consent, permission to
extend remarks In the CoHGaxfisxoNAL
Record, or to revise and extend remarks^
was granted to:

Mr. Waltkr and include an article he
UTOte in a recoxt publication.

Mr. Smith of Wisconsin and to include
related matter.

Mr. Roosxvelt and to include extrane-
ous matter.

Mr. Nkst (at the request of Mr. Hal-
LECK) and to include extraneous matter.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS. ETC.

Under clause 2 of rule XXiV, executive
communications were taken from the
Speaker's taUe and referred as follows:

930. A letter from the Administrator,
Bousing and Home Finance Agency, trans-
mitting a draft of proposed legislation en-
ticed "a bill to transfer certain property and
functions of the Housing and Home Finance
Administrator to the Secretary of the In-
terior, and for other purposes'*; to the Com-
mittee on Banking and Currency.

931. A letter from the Chatrman, Fsderal
Communications Commission, transmitting
a report on backlog of pending applications
and bearing eases in the Federal Communl-
cations Commission as of April 30, 1957, pur-
suant to Public Law 554, 82«1 OongrcEs; to tlM
Oommlttec on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce.

932. A letter from the Secretary of Com-
merce, transmitting a draft of proposed leg-
islation entitled "a bill to amend the act of
Augiut 5. 1955. authorizing the construc-
tion of two surveying ships for the Coast and
Geodetic Survey, Department of Commerce,
and for other purposes*^ to the Conmilttee
on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.

933. A letter from Ross. McCord, Ice ft
Miller, of Indianapolis, transmitting the
annual report of the Board for Fundamental
Education for the year 1956. which was pre-
pared by George S. Olive ft Co., Independent
certified public accountants, pursuant to
Public Law 507. 8Sd Congress; to the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary.

934. A letter from the Deputy Postmaster
General, transmitting a report on three
occurrences of overobllgatlon of aUotments
by operational units within the Post OfBce
Department for the two postal gu<irters end-
ed January 11. and April 5. 1957. pursuant
to section Sfl79 of the Revised Statutes (SI
U. S. C. 9C^) ; to the Committee on Appro-
priations.

935. A letter from the Administrator. Gen-

SENA'ts BILLS REFERRED
Bins of the Senate ol the toMomfag

titles were taken from the Speaker's

eral Services Admlnlstratlori;- transmitting
a draft of proposed legislation entitled "a
bin to fmther amend the Federal Property
and Admtnlstj'atlve Services Act of 1949. as
amended, and for other purposes"; to the
Committee on Government Operations.

8564

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

936. A letter from the Comptroller Gen-
eral of the United States, transmitting th*
first report on the audit of the Forest Service.
Department of Agriculture. 19o./-56; to th«
Committee on Government Operations.

937. A letter from the Assistant Secretary
of the Navy, transmitting a draft of proposed
legislation entitled "A bill to provide im-
proved opportunity for promotion for certain
ofBcers in the naval service, and for other
purposes"- to the Committee on Armed
Services.

REPORTS OP COMMITTEES ON PUB-
LIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XIII. reports of
committees were delivered to the Clerk
for printing and reference to the proper
calendar, as follows:

Mr. COOPER: Committee on Ways and
Means. H. R. 7954. A bill relating to the
exemption of furlough travel by service per-
sonnel from the tax on the transportation
of persons: without amendment (Rept. No.
543). Referred to the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of thr> Union.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRI-
VATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of
committees were delivered to the Clerk
for printing and reference to the proper
calendar, as follows:

Mr. HILLINGS: Committee on the Judi-
ciary. House Joint Resolution 339. Joint
resolution to waive certain provisions of sec-
tion 213 (a) of the Immigration and Nation-
ality Act in behalf of certain aliens: with
amendment (Rept. No. 541). Referred to
the Committee of the Whole House.

I*:. FEIGHAN: Committee on the Judi-
ciary. House Joint Resolution 340. Joint
resolution to facilitate the admission into
the United States of certain aliens: with
amendment ( Rept. No. 542 » . Referred to
the Committee of the Whole House.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 4 of rule XXII. public
bills and resolutions were introduced
and severally referred as follows:

By Mrs BOLTON:

H R. 7988. A bill to amend the Veterans'
Readjustment Assistance Act of 1953 to
make the educational benefits provided for
therein available to all veterans whether or
not they serve during a period of war or of
armed hostilities; to the Committee on Vet-
erans' Affairs.

By Mr. DAWSON of Utah:

H. R. 7989. A bill to provide for the survey
and establishment of the Glen Canyon rec-
reation area In Arizona, Utah, and New Mex-
ico, and for other purposes; to the Commit-
tee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
By Mr. DELLAY:

H. R. 7990. A bill to change the method
of computing basic pay for members of the
uniformed services, to provide term reten-
tion contracts for Reserve officers, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Armed
Services.

H. R. 7991. A bill to amend titles I, 11, and
ni of the Inunigratlon and Nationality Act,
and for other purposes; to the Committee
on the Judiciary.

By Mr. DURHAM:

H. R. 7992. A bill to amend the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and for
other purposes; to the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy.

By Mr. HARRlSf^

H R. 7993. A bill to [kovlde for Govern-
ment guaranty of private loans to certain
Rlr carriers for purchase of aircraft and
equipment, and for other purposes: to the
Committee on IntersUte and Foreign Com-
merce.

H. R. 7994. A bill to amend section 902 of
the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938. as amend-
ed, so as to prohibit certain practices re-
garding passenger ticket sales and reserva-
tions; to the Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. HOLMES:

H. R. 7995. A bill to authorize the Secre-
tary of the Army to sell certain lands at the
McNary lock and dam project. Oregon and
Washington, to the port of Walla Walla.
Wash.; to the Committee on Public Works.
By Mr MCCARTHY:

H R 7996. A bill to amend section 2 (b>
of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 to
exclude from coverage under such act certain
corporations the entire Income of which, less
expenses. Is turned over to an exempt organi-
zation; to the Committee on Banking and
Currencv.

By Mr MAHON:

H R. 7997. A bill to amend section 31 of
the Trademark Act approved July 6. 1946;
to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr MONTOYA'

H. R. 7998 A bill providing for a national
advisory committee of county officials to
facilitate coordination of county highways
in the Federal-aid highway system, to the
Committee on Public Works.

By Mr. O'BRIEN of New York :

H R. 7999. A bill to provide for the ad-
mission of the State of Alaska into the Union;
to the Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs.

By Mr PERKINS:

H R. 8000. A bill to provide disability re-
tirement benefits for civilian employees of
the Government In certain additional cases;
to the Committee on Post Office and Civil
Service.

By Mr REUSS:

H R. 8001. A bill to alleviate conditions of
excessive unemployment and underemploy-
ment in depressed industrial and rural areas;
to the Committee on Banking and Currency.
By Mr. ROGERS of Florida:

H. R. 8002. A bill to provide for improved
methods of stating budget estimates and
estimates for deficiency and supplemental
appropriations; to the Committee on Gov-
ernment Operations.

By Mr. DLTIHAM

H R 8003. A bill to amend the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954. as amended, to increase
the salaries of certain executives of the
Atomic Energy Commission, and for other
purposes; to the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy.

By Mr McGOV'ERN:

H. R. 8004. A bill to provide for registra-
tion, reporting, and disclosure of employee
welfare and pension benefit plans; to the
Committee on Education and Labor.
By Mr. OBRIEN of Illinois:

H R 8005 A bill to provide for the con-
veyance of an interest of the United States
In and to fissionable materials in a tract of
land In the county of Cook and State of
Illinois; to the Committee on Government
Operations.

By Mr. BECKWORTH:

H R 8006. A bill to amend title I of the
Social Security Act to provide Increased Fed-
eral matching of State old-age assistance ex-
penditures thereunder; to the Committee on
Ways and Means.

By Mr. COAD:

H R. 8007. A bill prohibiting lithograph-
ing, engraving, or printing on envelopes sold

or furnished by the Foot Office De])artment;
to the Committee on Post Office and Civil
Service.

H. R 8008. A bill to amend title II of the
Social Security Act so as to remove the limi-
tation upon the amount of outstc.e Income
which an individual may earn wh le receiv-
ing benefits thereunder; to the Committee
on Ways and Means.

By Mr. BROOMFIELD:

H J Res. 353. Joint resolution proposing
an amendment to the Constitution of the
United States relative to equal rlgh'^ for men
and women; to the Committee oa the Ju-
diciary.

By Mr McCORMACK:

H J Res. 354. Joint resolution to authorize
the designation of October 19, I9.)7, as Na-
tional Olympic Day; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.

By Mr HALEY:

H Res. 276. Resolution expreaslni; the sense
of the House of Representatives with respect
to the trial of Army Sp3c. William S. Girard
by a Japanese court; to the Committee on
Foreign Affairs.

MEMORIALS

Under clause 4 of rule XXII, nemorials
were presented and referred as lollows:

By the SPEAKER: Memorial of the Legis-
lature of the State of Florida, memorializing
the President and the Congret^a of the
United States to Improve the channel from
Panacea. Wakulla County. Fla.. through King
Bay and Apalachee Bay to the Gi If of Mex-
ico; to the Committee on Public Works.

Also, memorial of the Legislature of the
State of Florida, memorializing tbo President
and th*- Congress j?f the United SUttes calling
for tiie relinquishment by the Federal Gov-
ernment of certain of Its tax sources so that
States will be revested with Inherent taxing
power to carry out their own tradltonal func-
tions; to the Committee on Ways und Means.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 1 of rule XXII. private
bills and resolutions were intrdluced and
severally referred as follows:
By Mr. BUCKLEY:

H R. 8009 A bill for the relit f of Josef
(Szaja-Szznul) Inowlockl; to the Committee
on the Judiciary.

H. R. 8010. A bill for the relief c f Giovanni
Dl Nardo; to the Committee on thu Judiciary.

H. R 8011. A bill for the relief of Jacques
Isaac Bukszpan, to the Committee on the
Judiciary.

Bj Mr. rKRN6S-ISERN:
H R 8012. A bill for the relief of Alda
Amnely Soils de Benltez; to the Committee
on the Judiciary.

By Mr. GREEN of Pennsylvi nia:
H. R8013 A bill for the relief of Zol
Volonakl Clcalo; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.

By Mr. HIESTAND:
H. R. 8014. A bill for the relief of Miss
Edith Dorn; to the Committee on the Judi-
ciary.

By Mr, McINTOSH:
H. R. 8015. A bill for the relief ol the Harmo
Tire k, Rubber Corp.; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.

By Mr. OSMERS:
H. R. 8016. A bill for the relii'f of John
Constantlne Faf alios; to the Coiomlttee on
the Judiciary.

By Mr. PERKINS:
H. R 8017. A bill for the relief of Wiley J.
Adams; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

1957.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8565

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

Tedmical Assistuce Is No Oath
Profram

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. UWRENCE H. SMITH

or WISCONSIN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Friday, June 7. 1957

Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak-
er, we will soon have for consideration
another so-called foreign aid bill. There
is one phase of that program which, in
my opinion, has considerable merit and
I refer to technical assistance. This
program was designed originally to serve
much as our agricultural extension pro-
gram has served the American farmer,
only this principle would be applied to
nations who desired assistance In the
field of agriculture, health, and sanita-
tion.

Mr. Speaker, as the program has de-
veloped over the years, technical assist-
ance, as originally planned, has been los-
ing its character and has become in-
volved as part of a huge giveaway and
is now mostly economic assistance.

The administrators of this program
have too often considered technical as-
sistance as a crash program, one de-
signed to bring quick and everlasting
results, something akin to the spec-
tacular.

In 1953 it was my privilege to have
been a member of a subcommittee of
the House Foreign Affairs Committee
which was authorized to visit the Middle
East and check on the Arab refugee
problem and also other programs that
had been set up in that part of the world.
During our visit to Egypt and specifi-
cally Cairo the chief of the ICA mission
at that time was anxious to show what
had been done under his direction and
he arranged a trip outside of Cairo for
our inspection. In the automobile in
which I was riding was the chief of the
mission and an Egyptian who had sev-
eral degrees from American universities
and who had returned to his homeland
to serve his people. On the way out the
Egyptian and the American were dis-
cussing phases of the work and the prog-
ress being made at that time. I listened
attentively while these two gentlemen
talked and finally the chief of the mis-
sion turned to me and he said, "Congress-
man, you have been very quiet. We have
been doing all the talking." My reply
was that I had come to look and to listen
but then I said, "However, I do have a
question. Your conversation has been
most interesting. My question is: 'How
long do you think it will take to achieve
its objectives?' "

Before the American could answer, the
Egyptian replied quite promptly and vig-
orously, "Oh. It'll take about 200 years."
My American friend and the chief of
mission was flabbergasted. He turned
to the Egyptian and said, "Oh, Doctor,

you don't mean that." The doctor re-
pUed, "Well, it'll take at least 100
years."

We are not fooling our foreign
friends — they are realists. It is time that
we quit trying to fool the American tax-
payers.

Mr. Speaker, I relate this experience
solely for the purpose of pointing out that
a technical assistance program, if or-
ganized as originally conceived, is a long,
long time project. It can never be re-
lated to the so-called crash programs.

The Story of tlie Montk

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. JAMES ROOSEVELT

or CALirounA
IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVKS

Friday, June 7, 1957

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Speaker, our
colleague from Pennsylvania, the Hon-
orable Elmer J. Holland, recently wrote
a newsletter which, in part, covers a
subject which is all too little understood
by many people. I am sure that it will
be of great interest to many Members.
Therefore, with the permission of Con-
gressman Holland, I am inserting it in
the Record.

The newsletter follows:

Thi Stoit or thi Month — Wages, Pboftts,
Prices

E\'eryone who buys food and clothes — and
a few of the luxuries — knows that It toeta
more to live today.

Why? There are several reasons, but the
one we always hear about, the one that
gets the greatest blame, Is that wages are
too high. It is because of them that prices
are so high. This Is not true.

The main reason for higher prices Is that
most of the big companies after granting a
wage hike. Increase the price of their goods
many times more than the amount of the
wage Increase.

Look at United States Steel. In 1956 steel-
workers gained wage and fringe benefits of
approximately 20 cents an hour plus a lat«r
cost-of-living adjustment of 3 cents an hour.
These gains cost the steel corporation about
•94 million — even If there had been no in-
crease In output per man-hour (which re-
duces cost of production).

What happened? Steel prices were raised
•8.50 a ton last year, and another $i a ton
this year. This totals to an increase of
•12.50 a ton in boat of steel and brought
in (SM minion a year more for United
States Steel. That new income amounts
to 314 times the ^94 million allowed in wage
and fringe benefits.

The steel price Increase was passed on to
all of u» as purchasers of steel. They were
felt in higher prices for food, which was
canned; for automobiles; for transportation,
for just about everything we buy as steel la
used in every business and industry.

The industry could have absorbed thosa
wage and fringe benefit costs and still hava
reported enormous profits. But prices were
raised and the unions were blamed because
they secured better wages for steelworkers.

As a result of the price hike. United States
Steel will get $246 million more in gross
profits, and they will get an extra •118 million
In net profits after taxes, even after paying
higher wages and better fringe benefits.
Net profits after taxes for first 3 months in
1955, 1956. and 1957

1955 __ $72, 652, 000

195«-~ 104, 160, 945

1957 115, 478, 109

The more wages paid and better fringe
benefits provided means higher profits be-
cause the steel comp>anles Increase steel
prices far more than enough to cover the coat
of the higher wages and benefits.

Look at Ford and General Motors, the
giants of the auto Industry. They said In
1955 and 1956 {M-lces would be higher on
cars because they were forced to pay more
wages. The gains in wages and benefits
cajne to 20 cenu an hour. However, in 1955—
before prices were raised, but after the wage
increase — General Motors' prciflt. after taxes,
was •1.41 for each man-hour for 400,000 em-
ployees. Ford's profit after taxes was •1.47
per man-hour.

You can see then, it is not the wages and
fringe benefits that the big corporations pay
that cause prices to go up. The true cause
is the fact that the companies Jump their
prices far more than enough to meet the cost
of wage and fringe benefits.

Immi^atioo Controls Spell National
Secnrky

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. FRANCIS E. WALTER

or PENNSTXVANIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Friday. June 7, 1957

Mr. WALTER. Mr. Speaker, under
leave to extend my remarks in the Rbc-
ORD, I include the following article from
the National Republic, June 1957. issue:

iMMicaATiON Controls Spell National

Secuutt

(By Hon. Francis E. Walter, of Pennsylvania,

chairman. Committee on Un-American

Activities, Subcommittee on Immigration,

U. S. House of Representatives)

Another richly financed and highly organ-
ized campaign against the basic principles
of our American immigration policy is now
In full force. This campaign strikes not
alone at our immigration policy, but en-
dangers both the national security and sound
cultural development of our country.

The number and type of immigrants com-
ing into the United States has been a mat-
ter of Federal concern for more than a cen-
tury. Throughout all our history immigra-
tion laws have been based on the premise
that one of the first functions of sovereignty
Is control of both quality and quantity of
prospective new citizens. The only yardstick
in arriving at this determination has been
the interest and welfare of the American
people. Under international law. the right
of every nation to control rigidly its Im-
migration flow is recognized universally.

Immigrants coming into the United States
ara entering into the bloodstreton of the
Nation. It is like an Injection into the
bloodstream of au Individual. It can be

8566

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 7

beneficial to him. Increasing his strength and
vitality. But, U the Injection la one of Im-
proper quality or Improper quantity — It
could be fatal.

A comprehensive picture of our current
problems cannot be presented without an
outline of the historical background of
American Immigration

Prom the first settlement of the North
American colonies to the end of the Revo-
lutionary War in 1783, Immigration to the
New World was regulated, not by the colonl.sts
but by the governments of Europe. The
Interest of the European ruler was enhanced
by the size of the population of his domain.
The more abundant the labor force, the
greater his power, and the more gold a<--
cumlated !n the royal coffers. Consequently.
•11 European rulers tried to prevent the exo-
dus of their subjects, the peons, who were
already attracted by the magnificence of
the wide open land and the opportunities
beckoning trom across the seas.

The new ser.tiers on this side of the At-
lantic deliberately encouraged immigration.
Here, more people meant more pruduccrs.
more ccn.sumers. and more wealth to b*
extracted from the newly acquired soil and —
last but ndt least — more people on the In-
dian frontiers meant increased safety of life
and property.

It is estimated that In 1640. the popula-
tion of the North American colonies num-
bered 25.C30 and by 1700. had risen to
200.000. It took another 50 years to bring
the population figure to the first million.

When the Articles of Confederation were
adopted in 1777. the population of the
13 colonies was well over 3 million, and
the first census taken in 1790 put it at
4 million .\bout two-thirds of the white
population were of English. Scotch, and
Welsh origin, ab^jut one-third were I>utch.
French. German. Scandinavian. Spanl£h. and
Portuifupse

Except for a short-lived restrictive period
created by the alien and sedition 1 iw of
1798. immlerntlon flowed Into the United
States unfettered by any legislation. The
vast growth of the new American economy.
Its progTes.slon to the limitless frontiers nf
th« West, and the ready acceptance of the
newcomer by the thriving communities — al-
ready established — exerted an Increasing at-
traction on poverty-stricken Europeans In
the countries devastated by the Nap»)leonlc
wars. Recurring famines and the great In-
dustrial revolution resulted In Increased
population pressures and caused a gradual
relaxation of the restrictive attitude of the
European rulers, who suddenly reversed
themselves and began to encofltage emigra-
tion.

As a consequence, the first official record
of arriving immigrants, established in 1820.
Indicated that the population of the United
States had Jumped to almost 10 miUiun
persons.

By that time public opinion In both Eu-
rope and America became aroused by re-
ports of appalling conditions on vessels
carrying Immigrants on the transatlantic
Journey. Thousands were crowded in steer-
age space, where many died of hunger, thirst,
and disease. In 1819. a law was enacted In
the United States limiting the number of
passengers a sbip could carry, and prescrib-
ing the minimum amount of water and food
to be aboard. The master of every ship
reaching oar shores was called upon to re-
port the number of passengers and their
personal data, such as age. sex. occupation.
and country of origin. Thus originated our
first immigration statistics.

The first legislative enactment which may
be considered as relating to the quality of
Immigrants was passed In 1863. It pro-
hibited Americans from carrying on the
trade in Chinese coolies. Later laws, still
qualitative in nature, established rules lor

the exclusion of Immoral persons, paupers,
and criminals.

A tremendous Influx of Chinese immigrants
after the discovery of gold in California
prompted the enactment of the first Chinese
exclusion law. in 1883. That trend of legis-
lation continued, as witnessed by the enact-
ment, in 1885. of a restrictive immigration
measure aimed at prohiblUng the importa-
tion of cheap labor from abroad.

A few years later, in 1891. Congress ex-
cluded Insane persona, persons likely to be-
come public chark;es. felons, feebleminded
persons, polygamlsts. and persons cf.nvlcted
of crimes Invo In? moral turpitude

The ethnic pattern of <nir immigration be-
gan to change in the last two decades of the
19th century About 1890. there appeared
for the first time an appreciable number of
immigrant.^ fmni eastern and southern
E>.irnpe They came from the Balkans. Italy,
and from Rus.<!:a. where the c:'arl.st persecu-
tion of Jews began to drive out refugees in
ever-Increasing numheri;.

T^ese changes In the ifflTWI^T-atlon pattern
continued until after World War I. In the
decade of 1871 80 almt'st 74 percei.f >■'. our
m.nii^rar.ts came from northern and we>-'ern
Burooe. and only 7 percent from southern
and eastern Europe. But. in the decade of
i&OO-lO. only 22 percent came from northern
and western Europe, while Immlizrsnts
originating In s«iu*hern and eastern Euro|)e
contribuied ab<ut 71 percent

It »•<».<< about that tlm^ that the Congress
turned lt« attention from qualitative re-
strtctl ins to quantitative restrictions. The
first law establishing a celling on the num-
ber of immlvtranta — a quota — was enacted In
1921 The se^-ond quota law was passed In
1924 and renialued in effect with very llttls
change until the enactment ul the present
law In 19'i2

The 1924 art established the much dls-
cu.'sed national -orlKlns system. alli<r«tlng
to every natlona; group a fixed proptjrtion of
immlK'ranus based on that uatioruil groups
pro.portion to the total population of the
United States as of 1920 1 he purpose Wiis to
expand the p<;pulatlon In orderly fashion
from y^ar to year, with roughly the same
pr.jportion of each immigrant strain as pre-
vailed in 1920

The 195i law was not a step lightly taken
In dial form the Walter-McCarran Act
represented a comprehensive codification and
modernization of some H8 immigration and
uaturuiization statutes then on our books.
The Congressional studr group which pro-
duced this codification had been at work on
the problem since 1947 Scores of hardship
inequities were ironed out oif the old hodge-
podge of piecemeal legislation, as enacted
during the preceding century.

Ail countries of the globe were granted
Immigration quotas without discrimination,
under a formula equally applicable to all
areas, regardless of the color of the skin or
th" shape of the eyes of their inhabitants.

At the same time, the new law made It
Infinitely easier to rid this country of
foreign-born subversives, criminals, racket-
eers, narcotic peddlers, professional gam-
blers, and aliens who had originally entered
Illegally.

These. In brief, are the major features of
the law so many fellow-traveler groups have
been trying for 5 years to uproot and de-
stroy Pew measures In all our national
history have afforded the United States so
much protection against criminal and sub-
versive elements at so little cost.

Nor may it be said that the law was
passed by parliamentary sleight of band.
The bill passed the House on April 25, 1962,
by a vote of 206 to 6S. The Senate peissed
It by a voice vote on May 22. President
Truman vetoed the measure on June 25.
But on June 26 the H^^use repa.-sed it 278-

113. and on June 27 the Senate o'errode the
veto 67-26. The act became efiectlve De-
cemt)er 24. 1952. Any measure ci. acted over
a Presidential vct.j must comn.and over-
whelming national support.

The House Committee on Un-American
Activities disclosed in its 1956 innual re-
port that the Communist Pa.-ty has created
or sponsored no less thsn 180 different fel-
low-traveler organizations In the United
State.*, having as their pilnclple purpose
the repeal or destruction of tiie Walter-
McCarran Act

One cf these organizations, styled the
American Committee for Protect on of For-
eign Born, has been formally branded as
completely dominated by tiie Communist
Party It la al.-^o described as the oldest
creation of the Communist Party still active
In the United Sta'es. Tae con.mlttee re-
port added: "The American Ccmmlttee for
Protection -of Foreign Born, while dealt with
here as a single organization. l.< In fact a
complex of organlratlons at^tlmrs number-
ing more than 300 "

Three central policies of the law are under
attack from this and other leftist groups.
The International campaigr for repeal seeks
first to destroy the natlonal-or.glns prin-
ciple Second, the repeal mc\jnent seeks
t.> admit an estimated 1 mllliim new Immi-
grants a year ln.<tend of the aven'ge of 225-
(KX) annually under the p.-ev-illlng svstem
Third, the Communist-front sec Ion of the
repeal movement seeks to strike out of the
law every provision for screening .mmlgranta
for subversive activities or B''vocacy of rev-
olutionary tactics in their natlv* lands

History demonstrates clearly that there
have been but few native Amrrl ana In the
top ranks of the United States Communist
Party World -wrecking communism In
America Is purely an Import. Without effec-
tive Immigration controls, communism easily
might gain a free hand In Anie: lea

No country In the world has received de-
sirable immigrants more hospitably tlian
the United States Since World War II we
have extended the hand of welcome to 8»ime
1 million permanent immlgranti. Including
recently many Hungarian refugees from
Communist terror.

In addition, we have welcom*>d In tem-
porary residence some 200.000 students from
127 countries, many of these under direct
grants from the United States Treasury

Nf> American ever should allow himself to
be chagrined that our Immigration policies
are in any way wanting In consldermUons of
humanity and Christian decency.

The sole purpose of our immigration con-
trols has been to exclude undesirable crim-
inal, revolutionary, and anarchistic ele-
ments from the national blocxlstream.

Since the wnj. this country has taken one-
third of all the displaced persons resettled
throughout the world We have but 6 per-
cent of the world's land area, but we have
taken more than 33 percent of Europe '■
refugees.

The world's population Is growing In-
finitely faster than Jobs and food supply.
Human fertility is heading for what the
census experts call a "population explosion "
Japan today has 88 million people crowded
Into an area the slxe of Montana. Try to
Imagine, If you will, half of the United
States population living In Montana.

Communist China has more people than
abe can count — somewhere In the nelght>or-
bood of 600 maUon.

Here In the United States, our own popula-
tion growth currently adds a new city of
Chicago to our total every year. New Jobs
are needed to keep pace.

It Is not difficult to demonstrate statis-
tically that our current population Incre^e
to entirely out of proportion to our rate of
new capital accumulation. We have not yet
begun tj expand our production facilities,

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8567

houalng. schoolB, and highw&ys to accom-
modate our own foreseeable population in-
crease. Unless we do expand new capital
plant steadily In step with population
growth, every American cI\lMn faces the
prospect of a lower standard of living some-
where in the not too distant future. Sound
public policy would appear to dictate, there-
fore, that population Increase should b«
held rigidly in line with our traditional
American conceptions of living sta^^ards,
education, and opportunity. In this equa-
tion our first consideration ahould be for the
welfare of the American people.

Larger Immigration quotas by the United
States could never hope to solve the world's
population problem. But careless handling
of this explosive situation easily might
undermine American prosperity and sectirlty
for many generations.

No land in the world shows higher regard
th*n the United SUtes for the rlghU and
privileges of Immigrant minorlUes. But this
noble tradition does not mean that the
American people are ready to turn the coun-
try over completely to alien domination.

American citizenship for immigrants never
has been a right granted by our Constitution.
It always has been a high privilege, to be
earned and retained by earnest support of
our inspiring American traditions of free-
dom under law.

Only thus may we hope to grow in national
strength and moral stature. -

"The Importance of foreigners Into a
country that has as many Inhabitants as the
present employments and provisions for sub-
BlsUnce wlU bear, will be in the end no
increase of people, unless the newcomers
have more Industry and frugality than the
natives, and then they will provide more
lUbelstance. and increase in the country; but
they will grsduaUy eat the natives out. Nor
Is it necessary to bring in foreigners to fill
up any vacancy which will soon be filled by
natural generation." (Benjamin Franklin.)

Allief' Pdk7 Towtf4 Re4 Ckma

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. WILL E. NEAL

OF WKST VnCINIA

IN THE HOUSE OF RBPRKSENTATTVBS
Friday. June 7.1957

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, within the
past week the citizens of the United
States were dumfoimded. it I may make
it even stronger, shocked, when some of
our stanchest allies deserted us on our
fundamental position that Red China
shoiild be commercially quarantined
from the Free World. I do not need to
remind you that we adopted this policy
In regard to the Pelplng regime because
of China's Inhuman and barbaric treat-
ment of Americans in China at the time
the Communist masters assumed controL

It was a policy of some 10 years' dura-
tion and our desertion by the British,
French, Norwegians, and others of the
Free World community serves to under-
line the changing picture of America's
poeitl(m today and what it amounted to a
decade ago.

At the time we adopted our no-trade
policy, America's poeltlim was secure as
the financial and Industrial giant on this
planet. True, by loons, grants, and as-
sorted forms of aid, we were able to

maintain adherence to the China b<^cott
policy. Now, it is of some concern to me
when I cOTisider the fact that perhaps
we, imwlttlngly, have weakened ourselves
to a point where our erstwhile stanch
friends see fit to disregard and turn away
from a basic American foreign policy.

During the 10 years In which we clung
to commercial and diplomatic ostracism
of the Communist masters of Russian
and Chinese millions, we sacrificed a con-
siderable portion of our own industrial
capacity through liberalized tariff rates
and trade agreements, in order to bol-
ster and maintain the dollar balances of
foreign countries. They, our allies. In
turn used such dollar balances to come
Into our market for the purchase of ma-
chine tools and heavy duralrie equipment
which enabled them thiu to manufacture
goods for the world imrket and with
their cheap labor undersell American
manufacturers.

It is my considered opinion that it will
never be known just how much of Ameri-
can manufacturing costs of producing
this export material for foreign aid have
been absorbed by the United States
Treasury. It seems to me, however, that
throughout the years there has been a
steady stream of America's wealth that
has flowed outward In the form of gifts,
grants-in-aid, and highly questionable
loans. This growing stream is a highly
Important factor In high taxes which the
American people are made to pay.
Meanwhile, recipients of these gifts have
attained the point of real, and, in some
cases, crushing competition for the
American businessman In world markets.

As a result of these strengthened econ-
omies, given sinew by successive admin-
istrations pledged and devoted to con-
tinue foreign aid, we are turning now to
mass production of war materials for
export purposes, hoping that such war
materials will eventually give us firm re-
cruits In. our fierce determination to pre-
vent extension outward of Russia's Iron
Ctirtaln. This Is, of coiirse. a highly de-
batable policy and only time can show Its
worth.

A second result that has come to pass
from our prosperous friends Is that they
have assiuned various postures of diplo-
matic independence which led to last
week's Instant case of their desertion of
the United States on the China question.

I do not know what the will of this
Congress will be on OATT and OTC but
I do know that Members of this House
will be under increasingly heavy pres-
sure from producers of durable goods,
international bankers and the prophets
of "one world" in future weeks to lower
tariff barriers and generally to laxmeh
this Nation upon s(»iething approach-
ing free trade. When that day comes
we will see a vast importation of foreign
goods which will undersell products
made at home. Thus our foreign
friends will accumulate dollars to their
credit In our own country with which to
pay for the export materials which we
supply them.

It might be timely to point out that
while it was a great blow to have our
friends repudiate our Chinese policy,
there occurred another event almost

parallel with it, which showed even bet-
ter how anti-American blow the interna-
tional winds. It was on Formosa that
anti-American sentiment flared up into
astonishing proportions, leaving even
some of our most determined supporters
of Nationalist China here on the Hill con-
siderably shaken and taken aback. This
riot occurred in one place where it had
been almost automatically assumed that
one of our best friends resided. If such
violent anti -American feeling could
flame up on Formosa, what of the situa-
tion in other countries which have been
shored up and sustained by American
dollars and aid?

It seems to me that much of what we
have sought to accomplish in the way
of a stable and peaceful world at such
a staggering cost during the.|past post-
war period may have come to naught.
It is true that we have saved many a
country from being gobbled up by the
Russian bear but it is even truer that
gratitude among nations, as among men,
is a fragile thing.

I do not believe that America can
stand totally alone in a hostile world.
To exist as a Nation we must have al-
liances, but to have enduring and profit-
able alliances we. as a senior partner,
must be strong Internally. Even now
while we enjoy xmprecedented prosperity
there are disquieting but abundant
signs that the time of reaping of the
economic whirlwind may not be too far
in the future.

You may recall that during the week
of May 12 the United States Treasury's
offer of several million dollars' worth of
bonds was a failure. While oflScially it
was said that the low-interest yield was
largely responsible for the lack of in-
vestors, it may be an ominous sign that
private capital Is Increasingly afraid of
Federal securities because of the stagger-
ing size of our $270-billlon national debt.
If that be true, then It means that public
confidence in the fiscal policies of the
United States Government has been
severely shaken, and a shaken con-
fidence in Government means a diminu-
tion of confidence In our economy and
the political machinery of the Republic.
I think it is time for some stocktaking
upon the part of those entrusted with
making national policy. I. for one. be-
lieve that the entire question of foreign
aid should be gravely and thoroughly re-
examined and a new assessment of its
true worth as an instrument of foreign
policy be arrived ^t. I beUeve. further,
that some consistency should be restored
to the operation of the Federal estab-
lishment. By this I would strike a bknr
for the taxpayers by ruthlessly eliminat-
ing waste and extravagance to the dou-
ble purpose that we might effect tax re-
ductions and apply some of our savings
to a reduction of our overwhelming na-
tional debt which hangs like the sword
of Damocles over the heads of us all.

With a strengthened economy and our
domestic economic household put in
order. America need have no fears for
the future; our labor and Industry, pos-
sessing confidence In our way of life, can
easily produce for the world market so

8568

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

efficiently and cheaply that we can hold
our own In any competitive situation.
However, labor and industry, debilitated
by the knowledge their taxes are being
iised to subsidize their competitors to the
point where American goods can be un-
dersold and shut out. have lost half the
battle before it starts.

There Is still time for us to redeem
much of our past folly. It is not too late
to restore the United States to its domi-
nant position of world leadership which
it had enjoyed immediately following
World War II. But to redeem our past
errors we in this 85th Congress must
show the way. We have been amply

SENATE

Monday, June 10, 1957

Rev. S. Baxton Bryant, pastor, Wha-
ley Memorial Methodist Church.
Gainesville, Tex., offered the following
prayer :

Our Father God, we thank Thee for
the hunger for peace Thou hast placed
in every human heart. In these trying
days help us to keep faith that this
hunger will make it possible for peace
to come to all mankind. Never let us
forget that Jesus prayed, "Thy kingdom
on earth." Forgive us for sometimes
growing "weary in well doing." Give
us the patience, direction, and dedica-
tion that will lead the world to become
a friendly neighborhood of nations.

We are thankful for our coxintry and
this able body that meets today. Bless
each one of the Members as individ-
uals. Be with them in their lonely hours
of decision. Keep fresh in their hearts
the high ideals and faith which burned
so brightly when the oath of office
was first taken. Make them daily con-
scious of the millions of prayers of their
fellow countrymen. Be so present with
them that after a hard day's work with
trying and difficult problems they will
feel that their labor has not been in vain.

Save us as citizens from being selfish
and unreasonable in making demands
upon our public servants. Give us the
grace to pray more and criticize less.
We make our prayer in the name of
Him who loved us and gave himself for
us. Amen.

THE JOURNAL

On request of Mr. Johnsov of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the Journal
of the proceedings of Thursday. June 6.
1957. was approved, and its reading was
dispensed with.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES SUB-
MITTED DURING ADJOURNMENT *

Under authority of the order of the
Senate of May 13, 1957, the following
reports of a committee were submitted
on June 7, 1957:

By Mr. MAGNUSON. from the Committee
on Appropriations:

H. R. 6070. A bill making appropriations
for sundry Independent executive bureaus,
boards, commissions, corporations, agencies,
and offlces. for the fiscal year ending June
30. 1958. and for other purposes; with amend-
ments (Rept. No. 414).

By Mr. RUSSELL, from the Committee on
Appropriations :

H.R. 7441. A bill making appropriations
for the Department of Agriculture and Farm
Credit Administration for the fiscal year
ending June 30. 1958. and for other purposes;
with amendments (Rept. No. 415).

Mr. HILL, from the Committee on Appro-
priations:

H. R 6287. A bill making appropriations
for the Departments of Labor, and Health,
Education, and Welfare, and related agencies,
for the fiscal year ending June 30. 1988. and
for other purposes, with amendments ^Rept.
No. 416).

Under authority of the order of the
Senate of June 6. 1S57. the following re-
port of a committee was submitted on
June 7, 1957:

By Mr. G.'^EEN, from the Committee on
Foreign Relations:

S.2130. A bill to amend further the Mu-
tual Security Act of 1954. as amended, and
for other purposes; with an amendment
(Rept. No. 417); ordered to be printed with
an illustration.

MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT

Messages in writing from the President
of the United States submitting nomina-
tions were communicated to the Senate
by Mr. Tribbe, one of his secretaries.

LEAVE OP ABSENCE

On his own request, and by unanimous
consent, Mr. McClellan was excused
from attendance on the sessions of the
Senate until next Thursday, because of
official business.

COMMITTEE MEETING DURING
SENATE SESSION

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the Commit-
tee on the District of Columbia and the
Subcommittee on Public Roads of the
Committee on Public Works were au-
thorized to meet during the session of
the Senate today.

ORDER FOR SENATE TO CONVENE
AT 9:30 A. M. THE REMAINDER OP
THIS WEEK

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate convene at 9:30 a. m., for the re-
mainder of this week.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without
objection, it is so ordered.

VISIT TO THE SENATE BY HIGH

SCHOOL STUDENTS FROM

GAINESVILLE, TEX.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the Christian gentleman who
opened our session with prayer this
morning, the Reverend S. Braxton Bry-
ant, pastor of the Whaley Memorial
Methodist Church at Gainesville. Tex.,
has with him in Washington a fine group
of high school students.

These young people are seated in the
gallery, and it is with pride in being their

warned 'by international events since the
first of this year that perhaps, after all.
we have been living in a fools paradise
and continually deluding ourselves that
all is right with the world. I hope the
time has come when we can see the hand-
writing on the wall. The letters are
large enough for all to see.

fellow Texan that I welcome them to the
Senate. Nobody can look Into their faces
and talk with them without feeling a
renewed confidence that the future of
our country is in good hands.

To these young Texans and to their
parents I extend my most cordial good
wishes.

I ask unanimous consent that a list
of those present from Gainesville be
printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the list was
ordered to be printed In the Record, as
follows :

Whalet MriiouAL Mxthqdist Chukch, R,

Baxton Betant, Ministzb, Gaincsvuxz.

TEC.

Sponsors: Reverend and Mrs. Bryant. Rev.
Charles Ray Peters, and Bilrs. R. L. Bandy, Jr.

Toung people: Miss Jo Haynes. Miss Syl-
via Allbrltton. Miss Judl MUler, Miss Lacrlsha
Bryant, Miss Jan Bandy. Miss Sue Swlck,
Miss Ann Sulllvant. Miss Kay SulUvant. Miss
Judy Sproles. Miss Emma Lou Beavers. Miss
Patsy Schneider. Miss Rosalie Davis. Miss
Jane Carroll, Ralph Bullard. Charles Huney-
cutt. Watt LeRue. Johnny Simpson, Ronny
Meeks, Ernest Perkins, Bobby West.

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I should hke to inform all Sen-
ators again that this week the Senate
will meet early and run late. We shall
have a Saturday session, if It Is neces-
sary, in order to take care of four ap-
propriation bills which were reported by
the Appropriations Committee last week,
and the mutual aid bill, which I hope it
will be possible to have the Senate con-
sider by the middle of the week. We will
try not to have rollcalis early in the
morning or, any more than necessary,
late in the evening, but we do expect to
have long sessions.

There have been reported to the Sen-
ate appropriation bills for the District
of Columbia; Independent Offlces;
Agriculture: and Labor, Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare. We shall expect to
proceed to their consideration tomorrow
morning, at 9:30, following the morning
hour.

The 1958 budget estimates for these
4 biUs totaled $13,081,043,998. The rec-
ommendations of the Senate Appropria-
tions Committee total $12,128,830,459,
representing a reduction of $952,213,539,
almost $1 billion, or 7V4 percent below
the budget estimates.

It is my Information that the ap-
propriation bills which have previously
been sent to the President refiect a re-
duction of some 8 percent below the
budget estimates. ^

In the case of the four bills referred io,
the Senate committee recommendations
are $11,377,121 above the amounts ap-
propriated by the House. The principal
reason for the Senate figures exceeding
the House figures is that the committee

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECX)RD — SENATE

8569

has recommended Increases of almost
$40 million for health and social welfare
purposes over the figures approved by the
House.

Theee increases are In line with the
traditloQs of the S4th Congress. We
have always felt deep concern for and
have been willing to take efTectlve action
in the interests of the health and gen-
eral welware of the people.

The Senate Appropriations Commit-
tee has studied these appropriation bills
with extreme care and thoroughness. It
has further reduced items which it be-
lieves are not essential for this year.
Such reductions enabled it to recom-
mend the increases In the fields of health
and welfare, and still keep the bills 7 per-
cent below the budget estimates.

I coinmend the committee for Its care-
ful and thorough work. I am confident
the Senate will support the committee in
all its recoinmcndatioQs.

It is anticipated that we shall begin
the consideration tcxnorrow morning of
the District of Columbia appropriation'
bill. We may have to change the
rchedule, but It Is our present plan to
follow that bill with the appropriation
bill for the Department of Agriculture.

Either tomorrow or Wednesday the
Senate will consider the Independent
Of&ces and the Labor, Education. Health,
and Welfare appropriation bills.

It is believed possible that by Wednes-
day we shall be able to take up the mu-
tual security authorization bill, which
has been reported to the Senate and Is
on the calendar.

I am hopeful that at an early date the
atomic energy treaty will be reported, so
that it. too, may be called up for con-
sideration.

I announced last week, that we expect
to have a heavy schedule of work this
tieek. I hope all Senators will arrange
their plans accordingly, so that the work
of the Senate may proceed expeditiously
and with a maximum number of Sena-
tors available on the floor at all times
during the consideration of these im-
portant measures.

If all Senators cooperate, I am confi-
dent it will be to the advantage of each,
since, while we have many important
bills to act upon. If we can avoid delays
on the floor, we should be able to con-
sider them in a minimnn^ number of
days.

There are many other important
measures which will follow the bills I
have annoimced. As soon as I am able
to announce the schedule for such meas-
ures I rfiall do so on the floor.

I have called upon the chairmen of
the standing committees to supply me
with a schedule of measures they expect
to act on and have available for the
consideration of the Senate. As soon
as I have their reports I shall announce
it to the Members of the Senate.

I again c&U attention to the fact that
tomorrow the Senate will convene at
9:30. and, after a morning hour and a
quorum call, will proceed to the consid-
eration of the appropriation bills.

ment, there is the customary morning
hour.

MORNINO HOUR

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senate
having met today following an adjourn-

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS,
ETC.

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the
Senate the following letters, which were
referred as indicated:

BXFOBT OM OratOBLICATlaNS CV

Appropriations
A letter from the Deputy Postmaster Gen-
eral, reporting, pursuant to law, on the dter-
obllgatlons of appropriations within the Post
Office Department, d-arlng the two postal
quarters ended January 11, arid April 5, 1957;
to the Committee on ApproprlatlonB.

PaOPOBED TaANSFEB BT Nav\ DXPASTMINT OF

OsaourrK Canisxa to Ckuises Oltmpu
AssocUTiOM, Philadixfhia, Pa.

A letter from the Acting Secretary of the
Navy, reporting, pursuant to law, that the
Navy proposed to tranafer the obsolete cnilaer
Olympia to the Cruiser Olympla Aaaodatlon,
at Philadelphia, Pa., for the purpose of a
public memorial; to the Oommlttee on Armed
Services.

AUTHORITT FOR EnISISTMENT OF ALIENS IN

TIIZ Reculak Asmt

A letter from the Secretary ot the Army,
transmitting a draft of proposed legislation
to extend the authority for the enlistment of
aliens In the Regular Army, and for other
purposes (with accompanying papers); to
the Committee on Armed Services.
TftANsrES OF CstTAiir PaonatTT anb Fukc-

Tioifs OF Houaofc Am Horn Puraifcs Ai>-

KINISIXATOB to SCCRVrAXT OF THX iKTZEIOa

A letter from the Administrator, Housing
and Home Finance Agency, Washington.
D. C, transmitting a draft of proposed legis-
lation to transfer certain property and func-
tions of the Housing and Home Finance Ad-
ministrator to the Secretary of the Interior,
and for other piirposes. (with an accompany-
ing paper); to the Committee on Banking
and Currency.

RKFoar or Pbdoui. Homs Loam Baitx Boasb
A letter frcnn the Chairman and members
of th« FMeral Home Loan Bank Board,
Washington, D. C, transmitting, pursuant
to law, the annual report of that Board
covering the operations of the Federal Home
Loan Bank System, the Federal SavingB and
Loan System, and the Federal Savings and
Loan Insurance COTporatlon, for the calen-
dar year 1956 (with an accompanying re-
POTt); to the Committee on Banking and
Corrency.

RzpoBT ON Intzrnatiomal Educationai.

EXCBANGX PbOCKAIC

A letter from the Secretary of State, trans-
mitting, pursuant to law, a report on th«
international ed\icatlonal exchange program,
covering the period January 1 through June
30, 1956 (with an aeoompttnylng report): to
the Committee on Foreign Belations.
Attdit Rzpokt on Foxbst Sntvicc

A letter from, the ComptroUer General of
the United States, transmitting, pursuant to
laW. an audit report on the Forest Service.
Department of Agriculture, dated 1B&5-66
(with an accompanying report) ; to tha Oom-
mlttee on Govenunent OperaUoos.
Amendiixnt of Fedbul PaopcaTT anb Ad-
mimibtratits Sxancn Act or 1940

A letter from the Administrator. General
Services Administrator. Washington. D. C,
transmitting a draft of proposed legislation
to further amend the Federal Property and.
Administrative Services Act of 1949, as
amended, and for other purpotes (with an
accompanying paper) ; to the Coaunlttee on
Government Operations.

CiAnr OF UcGahct Bans of Choctaw
Inikuns v. tmx Unitkd States

A letter from the Chief Commissioner,
Indian Claims Commission, Washington.
D. C, reporting, pursuant to law, that pro-
ceedings in the case of the MeGahey Band of
Choctaw Indians, descendants of Alexander
p. McGahey, Sussana Graham, and John B.
Stewart, v. The United States have been fi-
nally concluded (with an accompanying pa-
per) ; to the Committee on Interior and
Inisular Affairs.

Construction of Subviting Ships for Coast
AN1 Geodxxic Scrvet
A letter from the Secretary of Commerce.
transmitting a draft of proposed legislation
to amend the act of August 5, 1965. author-
ising the construction of two surveying ships
tor the Coast and Geodetic Survey. Depart-
ment of Commerce, and for other purpwses
(with an acocxnpanying paper) ; to the Com-
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

Rkpobt ON BAcmuOG OF Penbtwi Applications
AND Hearing Cases, Federai. Commdnica-
tions ComcissicN

A letter from the Chairman, Federal Com-
munications Commission, Washington, D. C,
transmitting, piu-suant to law, a report on
backlog of pending applications and hearing
cases in that CommlssLon, as of April 36, 1957
(with an accompanying report) ; to the Com-
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
Refokt of Board for Fundamental

BUU CATION

A letter from Harry T. Ice, of the tirm of
Roes, McOord, Ice * lifiller, Indianapolis.
Ind., transmitting, pursuant to law, the audK
and annual report of the Board for Funda-
mental Education for the year 1»56 (with
aeeompan3rtng documenU); to the CommK-
t«e on the Judiciary.

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS

Petitions, etc., were laid before the
Senate, or presented, and referred as
indicated:

By the VICB PRBSnHENT:
A Joint resolution at the Legislature ot the
State of Oregtm; to the Committee on Inter-
state and Foreign Comineroe:

"Senate Joint Memorial 8
"To the Honorable Senate and the House of
Hepresentatives of the United State* of
America, in Congress assembled:

"We. your memorialists, the Forty-ninth
Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon.
In legislative session assembled, most respect-
fully represent as follows:

"Whereas a large volume of nonsecurlty
cargo is regularly shipp>ed by the United.
States Government and particularly by the
Army and. Navy through marine terminal
facilities owned and operated by the Govern-
ment, and very little of such cargo is routed
over comm^clal marine terminal faclUUes
owned or operated by public and private
ports in the State of Oregon; and

"Whereas the public and private ports con-
stitute an impor^^uit part of the Nation's
transportation facilities as proven by their
capacity use during World War II; and

"Whereas the maintenance and operatioa
of commercial marine facilities in a healthy
condition adequately staffed with competent
and experienced personnel are essential to
the general welfare azKl defense of our Natiaa
In time of war or emergency; and

"Whereas the public and private porta are
ready, willing, and able, and should be per-
mitted to handle a fair share of nonsecurlty
Government cargo at the regularly eatab-
lisbed tariff rates af^iroved by the appn^jMlate
State and Federal regulatory agencies, or at
fait and reasonable uniform negotiated rates:
Now, tho^ore, be It

"Resolved by the Senate of the State of
Oregon (the House of Representatives jointljf

8570

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

concurring therein). That the Legislature of
the State of Oregon does hereby respectfully
urge and memorialize the Congress of the
United States to enact legislation similar to
H. R. 2229, 85th Congress, which would re-
quire the appropriate agency or agencies of
the United States Government to take such
steps as may be necessary and practicable to
assure that nonaecurlty Government cargo
shall be transshipped by the use of publicly
or privately owned commercial marine termi-
nal facilities, to the extent that such marine
terminal facilities are available at fair and
reasonable rates, In such manner as will
Insure a fair and reasonable particlpatioii
of such commercial marine terminal facili-
ties in the transshipment of such cargoes by
geographic areas: and be It further

"Resolved, That copies of this memorial be
■ent to the President and Vice Pr^aldent of
the United States, the Secretary of the
United States Senate, the Clerk of the United
States House of Representatives, and to all
members of the Oregon congressional dele-
gation.

"Adopted by senate May 11, 1957.

"Zylpha Zell Burns,
-Chief Clerk of Senate.

"30YD R. OVERHULSI.

"Presid'^nt of Senate.
"Adopted by house May 16, 1957.
"Pat Doolet,

"Speaker of Howe"

A Joint resolution of the Legislature of
the State of California, to the Committee
on Foreign Relations:

•"Senate Joint Resolution 17, relative to crim-
inal Jurisdiction by foreign governments
over United States members of armed
forces and their civilian components
"Whereas the members of our Armed Forces
serving abroad, their civilian components
and the dependents of each, are now subject
to the crminal Jurisdiction of more than 50
countries In which they may be on duty, by
reaaon of the NATO Status of Forces Treaty,
the administrative agreement with Japan,
and executive agreements with other nations;
and

"Whereas these agreements penalize our
servicemen for foreign service by depriving
them of many of the rights granted by our
Constitution, which they are sworn to de-
fend: and

"Whereas it is impossible for any service-
man accused of transgression in a foreign
country to receive a fair and Impartial trial
because of the varying systems of Jurispru-
dence which make it impossible for him to
receive the protection of all of the rights and
guarantee's which our Constitution i?lves to
every citizen, and because of the prejudice
and animosity sometimes existing against our
men: and

"Whereas legislation has been introduced
In both the Senate aittd the House of Repre-
sentatives of fhA TTpfgH States to direct the
President to seek a modification of all such
agreements so that the United States may
regain exclusive Jurisdiction over the mem-
bers of its Armed Forces for all purposes, or
If such a modification la refused, then to ter-
minate or denounce the agreements accord-
ing to the terms of each : Now. therefore. b«
It

'Resolved by the Senate and Aitr'nblj/ of
the State of California t jointly \, That the
members of this body deplore the arrange-
ments now existing which make service In
our Armed Forces abroad a hazard by depriv-
ing our servicemen, their civilian compo-
nents, and dependents of each, of the right.'*
and guaranties of our Constitution when
they are stationed in other lands: and be It
further

•Reiolved. That we respectfully ur^e the
Congress of the United States to immedi-
ately enact the legislation now pending or
similar legislation which will secure a nvKll-
licatlon or denunciation of the provisions of

the NATO Status of Forces Treaty and all
other agreements which surrender to foreign
nations criminal Jurisdiction over our serv-
icemen; and be It further

■Resolved. That the secretary of the sen-
ate is hereby directed to transmit copies
of this resolution to the President and Vice
President of the United States, and to^ach
Senator and Representative from California
la the Con.:ress of the United States."

A Joint resolution of the LeKlsliiture of the
State of California; to the Committee on the
Judiciary

'Senate Joint Resolution 33. relative to the
proclamation of Senior Citizens Day

"Whereas the citizenry of the United
States of America is composed in part of
person.s who have reached the gulden age of
sagacity, tranquility, and past memories, and

"Whereiis th^utih iilci In years. pers'Uis whii
hnve reached the zeiuth of life have gnined
wisdom and knowledge commensurate with
tl^r ye.trs. and

^Whereas the deeds of their youth, when
coupled with the kncwledkre of their »Ke.
provides a wisdom of which this country can
be Justly proud: and

"Whereas these citizens have richly con-
tributed their full measure to the welfare
a: d priispenty cf the United States through
tl^? years, and

"Whereas In consideration of their past
and present labtirs and sacrifices for the
well-bem? of not only the State but each
citizen thereof. It Is only fitting that a day
be set aside fur the rec<i«nltion of the herit-
age which they have left and the wisdom yet
available: and

"Wherea.s the Governor of the State of
California has been requested to proclaim
the fourth Sunday oi each September as
Senior Citizens Day In the Su.te of Cali-
fornia: Now. theref'ire. be It

' Resolved by the Senate and A^^embly of
the State of CaliforTiia i jointly], That the
Lekjislature of the State of California respec-
tively memorializes the President and the
Congress of the United States to establish
and proclaim the fourth Sunday of each
."September as Senior Citizen.'^ Day In the
United States; and be It further

Ren:)ived. That the Secretary of the Sen-
ate be hereby directed to transmit copies of
this resolution to the President and Vice
President of the United States, the Speaker
of the House <if Representatives, the chair-
man of the appropriate committees of the
Congress, and to each Senator and Repre-
sentative from California in the Congress of
the United States "

The petition of Edna D James, of Oakland.
Calif , praying for the enactment of House
bill 3.58, to provide increased pensions for
Spanish War widows, to tue Committee on
Finance

Resolutions adopted by the Pennsylvania
Department of Veterans" Affairs. Interna-
tional Benevolent Protective Order of Elks.
Philadelphia. Pa. rela'inij to Increases in
service-connected disability compensation,
and so forth: to the Committee on Finance.

A resolution adopted by the Verdugo Hills,
Calif , Republican Woman's Club, relating to
the trial of Specialist 3d Class William S.
Glrard in a Japanese court, and the Status
of Forces Treaty, to the Committee on For-
eign Relath n».

A resolution adopted by the Long Island
General A.ssembly Fourth Degree (Patriotic),
Knights of Columbus. Brooklyn. N Y , relat-
ing to the Status of Forces Treaty: to the
Committee on Foreign R«latlon».

A resolution adopted by the American
Legion. Department of Alaska. Skagway,
Alaska, relating to the so-called open-skies
Inspection affecting Alaska and other strate-
gic areas of North America, to the Commit-
tee on Foreign Relations

A resolution adopted by the board of di-
rectors, chamber o< commerce of Honolulu.
Hawaii, relating to airport and terminal con-

struction at Honolulu International Airport:
to the Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs.

A resolution adopted by the American
Legion, Department of Alaska, at Skagway.
Alaska, favoring the enactment of legisla-
tion to provide statehood for Alaska: to the
Committee on Interior and Insular AfTalrt.

A resolution adopted by the annual cou-
vention of the American Defenders of Ea-
taan and Ct)rregidor. Inc., Albany, N. Y.,
favoring the enactment of House bill 4742.
providing coverage under the War Claims Act
of 1948, of veterans of Bataan and Corregl-
dor; to ^he Committee on the Judiciary.

A telegram In the nature of a petition
from the district stewards and pastors of
the Philadelphia district of the Methodist
Church, Jamaica, N. Y., signed by Rev.
Charles L. Carrlngton. reporter, relating to
the President's civil rights program, to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

A letter in the nature of a memorial from
the Manor Park Citizens' Association, Wash-
ington, D C , signed by Ernest H. PuUman.
corresponding secretary. remonstrating
against the proposed demolition of the State.
War, and Navy Department Building In the
city of Washington, to the Committee on
Public Works.

A resolution adopted by the American In-
stitute of Architects, at Washington. D. C,
favoring the enactment of legislation to es-
tablish the position of Federal Coordinator
of Public Works Planning In the Executive
Office of the President; to the Committee on
Public Works.

A resolution adopted by the College Caucus
of the Massachusetts Council of Young Re-
publican Clubs. Boston. Mass. expressing
sorrow at the death of the late Senator
Joseph R McCarthy, of Wisconsin; ordered
to lie on the table.

A resolution adopted by the Board of Di-
rectors of the Verendrye Electric Cooperative.
Inc. of Velva. N. Dak, relating to the con-
struction of the Hells Canyon project;
ordered to lie on the table.

RESOLUTIONS OP FLORIDA
LEGISLATURE

Mr HOLLAND. Mr. President, on be-
half of myself, and my colleague, the
junior Senator from Florida I Mr.
Smathers 1 , 1 present for appropriate ref-
erence, and ask unanimous consent to
have printed In the Record, House Me-
morial 1290 of the Florida Legislature.
1957, memorializing the Congress of the
United States to Improve the channel
from Panacea. Wakulla County, Pla.,
through King Bay and Apalachee Bay to
the Gulf of Mexico.

There being no objection, the resolu-
tion was referred to the Committee on
Public Works, and. under the rule, or-
dered to be printed In the Record, as
follows;

House Memorial 1290
A memorial requesting the Congress of the

United States of America to Improve the

channel from Panacea. Wakulla County,

Fla . through King Bay and Apalachee Bay

to the Gulf of Mexico

Whereas Panacea la an unincorporated vil-
lage In Wakulla County, Fla., situated on
King Bay; and

Whereas the past several years hare seen
King Bay become almost landlocked because
of silting and sand bars building up. blocking
navigation to Apalachee Bay and the open
Gulf of Mexico; and

Whereas the majority of residents of
Panacea. Florida, rely upon having access to
the Gulf of Mexico for their livelihood; and

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8571

WheretB the Cocstltiitlon of the United
States of America places the authority and
reBponftlblllty for oontfol and regulation of
navigation In the Federal Governnient and
bars action In this Jurisdiction from the sev-
eral States, Florida Included; and

Whereas these people have no relief except
and through action of the Congrew of the
United States of America: Now, therefore,
be it

Reiolved by the Legislature of the State of
Florida, That the Congress of the United
States of America Is hereby requested and
memorialized to take Immediate steps toward
Improving the channel from Panacea, Fla.,
through, King Bay and Apalachee Bay to the
Gulf of Mexico, to the end that the same
may be navigable and safe for the passage of
boats and other veaaels and that at least a
6-foot channel at Vow water be maintained;
and be It furtlicr

Resolved. That copies of this memorial be
dispatched to the President of the United
States Seruite; to the Speaker of the United
States House of ReprescntatlTea; to each
member of the Florida delegation to the
Congress of the United States and to the
Chief of Engineers, Corps of Bnglnecrs, Wash-
ington, D. C.

Filed in oiBce, secretary of state, June 3,
1»57.

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the
Senate a resolution of the Ijeglslature
of the State of Florida, identical with the
foregoing, which was referred to the
Committee on Public Works.

Mr. HOLLAND. Mr President, on be-
half of myself and my colleague, the
Junior Senator from Florida [Mr.
Smathkss], I present for appropriate ref-
erence and ask unanimous consent to
have printed in the Record, House Me-
morial 223 of the Florida Legislature.
1957, providing for the relinquishment
by the Federal Government of certain
of its tax sources so that States will be
revested with inherent taxing power to
carry out their own traditional functions.
There being no objection, the reso-
lution was referred to the Committee on
Finance, and, imder the rule, ordered
to be printed in the Rkcokd. as follows:

House Memorial 223
Memorial to the Congreee of the United
States ealllng for the rellriqulshment by
the Federal Goremment of certain of its
tax sources so that States will be revested
with inherent taxing power to carry out
their own traditional functions
Whereas the Congress of the United States
has enacted legislation levying a tax upon
virtually every oonceivable eource of our
economy which ooutd be subject to taxa-
tion; and

Whereas the tax so levied upon these
sources by the Congress of the United States
is so extreme In almost every case that no
reasonable opportunity remains for the
States to levy a tax upon these same sources;
and

Whereas the soureee of revenue remaining
to the States are so limited and so few that
the efficiency and scope of State activity is
Impaired and limited beeauM of the lack of
EufBclent f onda; asd

Wtaereae It has tMocoie neoeesary for th«
Federal Oovemmeot to. tn many instance*,
malte avaUabla to the 8Ut*s certain Federal
funds thereby making the States dependent
upon and eabjeet to the requirements of the
I'^Bderal Government in the exjaendlture c<
these fond*; and

Whereas this situation violates the letter
and Intent of the Federal form of govern -
m«it adopted by these United States of
America m that the States are thereby de-

nied the inherent rigtts of sovereignty, spe-
cifically the right of taxation: and

Whereas the powers of governing the peo-
ple of these United States at Anoolca is rela-
tion to both national and International af-
fairs has become dangerously and unwisely
centralized In the Federal Government; and

Whereas It Is declared to be detrimental to
good govenmient for States to be dependent
upon Federal aid in order to exercise their
traditional governmental functions: Now,
therefore, be It

Reaolted by the Legislature of the State of
Florida, That the Legislature of the State of
Florida does hereby memorialize the Congress
of the United States to malce, or to cause to
be made, a review of Federal taxation and
Federal-aid programs with the view of a re-
linquishment by the Federal Government of
certain of its tax sources for the nurpose of
making those tax sources available to the
States, thereby enabling the States to finance
their own traditional functions and thus
eliminate Federal aid and control, reestablish
State sovereignty, and eliminate the threat
of poeslble despotic, inefflclent, and chaotic
oentralixatlon of government at the national
level; and be it further

Resolved, Tbut a duly attested copy of this
memorial be mailed to His Excellency, the
President of the United States, a copy to
the Honorable Governor of Florida and the
Governors of the other States, a copy to the
Honorable President of the Senate, a copy to
the Honorable Speaker of the House of Rep-
reeentatives, and a copy transmitted to each
United States Senator and Member of Con-
gress In Washington, D. C, from Florida.

Filed In the office of secretary of state,
June 3, 1957.

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the
Senate a resolution of the Legislature
of the State of Florida, identical with the
foregoing, which was referred to the
Committee on Finance.

DIVERSION OF WATER FROM THE
GREAT LAEES— RESOLUTIONS

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, I was glad
to receive in the morning mail two reso-
lutions from the State of Wisconsin In
opposition to increased diversion of water
from the Great Lakes.

As Senators know, I have strongly op-
posed, and shall continue to oppose, any
attempts to divert water from the Great
Lakes.

To unwisely lower the water level would
Jeopardize shipping; increase costs of
harbor development around the Great
Lakes; seriotisly Impair the fine progress
of work on the St. Lawrence Seaway;
jeopardize our relations with our good
neighbor, Camjla; and create other
problems. ^^"'^^

Regrettably, H. R. 2, to provide In-
creased diversion of water at Chicago,
has passed the Houae of Representatives.

In eonsldering this proposed leglsla-
tfon, however, I hope my colleagues to the
Senate and on the Senate Public Works
Committee, will remember the President
has tAxt^Aj twice vetoed this bill, as be-
ing contrary to the national Interest.

As I mentioned, public ofBcials and
other Individuals, as well as a great many
communities In Wisconsin have, again
and again, expressed their opposition to
Increased diversion of water from Lake
Michigan.

I am pleased now to bring to the atten-
tion of the Senate resolutions adopted by
the common council of the city of Racine,
and the Racine Chamber of Commerce.

I ask nnanimous consent that the reso-
lutions be printed in the Congressionai,
Record, and appropriately referred.

There being no objection, the resolu-
tions were referred to the CcMnmittee on
Public Works, and ordered to be printed
in the Record, as follows :

Whereas the House of Representatives has
adopted a bill authorizing Increased diver-
sion of Great Lakes waters at Chlca-jr- , 111.,
which bill Is now pending before the talted
States £ nate; and

Whereas the city of Racine and other'^rt
cities and maritime interests on the Great
Lakes have long supported the develop-
ment of the St. Lawrence Seaway, together
with the deepening and Improving of the
connecting channels of the Great Lakes, with
particular reference to the Detroit River.
Lake St. Clair, the St. Mary's River, and some
shoal spots in the Straits of Mackinac; and
Whereas some of the aforesaid port cities
have already undertaken substantial port de-
velopment and other cities are plapnlng Im-
proved facilities to permit handllrig of large
vessels, all of which are dependent upon
maintaining adequate channel depths; and
Whereas increased diversion of Great Lakes
waters £t Chicago will gradually lower lake
levels, reduce channel depths and substan-
tially Interfere with the full realization of
the economic benefits to be derived from the
St. Lawrence Seaway and connecting channel
projects; and

Whereas the benefits to be derived in the
Chicago area through Increased llverslon are
minimum when compared to the substantial
damage to all of the communities bordering
upon the Great Lakes; and

Whereas the ultimate solution to the Chi-
cago Sanitary District problem Is the con-
struction of additional facilities and the use
of Improved methods and controls, other
than simply fiushlng with the waters of Lake
Michigan, which in itself is merely passing
the Chicago Sanitary District problem on
to the other communities bordering upon
the Mississippi watershed; and

Whereas with particular respect to the city
of Racine the proposed increased diveraton
of Great Lakes waters will substantially in-
terfere with the Racln£ harbor and facilitlea
already constructed as well as the proposed
development of the entire south shore of
the city: Be it

Sesolved, That the mayor and oonunon
council of the city of Racine do hereby go
on record opposing legislation the purpose
of which Is to authorize Increased diversion
of Great Lakes waters at Chicago, and we do
hereby urge Senator Alexandkx Wn.ET to op-
pose said legislation; and be it further

ReatiLved^ That should it be deemed advis-
able the mayor or some otlier representative
of the city selected by him. be autborlaed
to appear and testify before the Senate com-
mittee expressing the oppoaltlon of the city
of Baclne to the proposed legislation; and
be it further

Resolved, That the city clerk be and hereby
la authorised and directed to transmit a
certified copy ot this resolution to Senator
AuoaMoaa Wnxr.

Resolution of Baeine Chamber of Ckmuneroe.
Racine. Wis.

Whereas It has oome to the attention of
the Racine, Wis., Chamber of Conunerce that
the House of Representatives hae approved
a bill to anthorize Increased diversion of
Great Lakes Waters at Chicago, 111.; and

Whereas the bill Is now pending before the
Uhlted States Senate; and

Whereas the city of Racine, Wis., and other
port cities and maritime interests on the
Great Lakes have expressed Interest In and
supported wholeheartedly the development
of the St. Lawrence Seaway, Including the
deepening and improving of connecting
channel^ of the Great Lakes, all of^ whkrh

8572

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

have been endorsed ^ the Racine. Wis..
Chamber of Commerce; and

Whereaa a number of port cities have
made substantial Improvements and Invest-
ments \x\ harbor facilities and others. In-
cluding Racine, are making surveys and lay-
ing basic ground work for a realistic ap-
proach to permit maximum use of present
and expanded facilities, all of whicli are
predicated on the maintenance of adequate
channel depths: and

Whereas further diversion of Great Lakes
waters at Chlcat^o could seriously aJIect and
reduce channels depths, and thereby ad-
versely afTect the economy of the Great Lakes
ports. Including Racine, by tax reduction of
benefits to be gained from the St. Lawrence
Seaway Be it

Resolved. That the Board of Directors of
the Racine Chamber of Commerce, do hereby
oppose legislation which would cause fur-
ther waters to be diverted from the Great
Lakes at Chicago, and do hereby urge Wis-
consin Senator Alexander Wilkt. to oppose
any such legislation; and be It further

Re.tolved. That the mayor of the city of
Racine orwi representative of the city, ap-
pointed by him, should It be advisable, be
authorized^ to appear before the appropriate
Senate committee, expressing the opposition
of the Racine Chamber of Commerce to
the proposed legislation; and be It further

Resolved, That the Secretary be authorized
and directed to send copies of this resolu-
tion to Senator Alexander Wiley. Claude
Ver Duln, executive secretary. Great Lakes
Harbors Association. Mayor Jack H. Humble,
William D. StansU. executive secretary. Man-
ufacturers' Association of Racine, and to
Other Interested parties.

Darrux Wright.
Manager, Racine Chamber of Com.'
merce. Racine. Wis.

Resolved. That the officers of said coopera-
tive send copies of this resolution to all Sen-
ators and Representatives In Minnesota,
North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wlsconsia.

RESOLUTION OP WILD RICE ELEC-
TRIC COOPERATIVE. MAHNOMEN,

MINN.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President. I
have received a resolution from the Wild
Rice Electric Cooperative of Mahnomen,
Minn., protesting any raise in the in-
terest rates on REA loans.

I ask unanimous consent that the res-
olution be printed in the Record, and ap-
propriately referred.

There being no objection, the resolu-
tion was referred to the Committee on
Agriculture and Forestry, and ordered to
be prinled in the Record, as follows:

Wn-D Rxcx Electric Cooperative, Inc..
Mahnomen, Minn.

Mr Sam Paskewltz. Mahnomen. Minn, of-
fered a resolution that It was the sense of
the membership that Interest rates on REA
loans should not be raised. Said motion was
duly seconded and upon being put to a vote
was duly carried.

A motion was then made by Henry Herfln-
dahl. Lake Park. Minn . and seconded by A.
C O'Banion. Fertile. Minn., that the chair-
man appoint a committee of three to draft
said resolution objecting to increasing of in-
terest rates. That the chairman appoint
Mrs. Sam Paskewltz, Mahnomen, Minn.. Mrs.
Olav O Berge, * Posston, Minn., and Mr.
Henry Herflndahi, Lake Park. Minn, who
presented to the meeting a resolution as
follows:

Whereaa It has come to the attention of
the members of the Wild Rice Electric Co-
operative. Inc.. that a movement is afoot to
Increase the interest rate paid by said co-op:
Now. therefore, be It

Resolved. That the membership of the
Wild Rice Electric Cooperative, Inc , go on
record as wholeheartedly opposed to any la-
crease, and be it further

RESOLUTION OP MOOSE LAKE.
MINN.. LOCAL FARMERS UNION

Mr. HUMPHREY'. Mr. President, I
have received a resolution from the
Moose Lake Local, Farmers Union, en-
dorsing St-nate bill 555, the Hells Janyon
bill.

As a cosponsor of this propo*d legis-
lation, I am gratified to have the sup-
port of Minnesota Farmers Union
groups, and I ask unanimous consent
that the resolution be printed in the
Record, and appropriately referred.

There being no objection, the resolu-
tion was ordered to lie on the table and
to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Whereas Senate bill 555, which would au-
thorize a high Federal dam at Hells Canyon,
is shortly to be put to a votfe. and

Whereas a favorable vote in the Senate
will revive the chances for the full utiliza-
tion of the natural resources of the middle
Snake River fi>r the benefit of the entire
Northwest; and

Whereas these benefits will reach Into the
mldwestern runil ureas, including Minnesota,
and will definitely result in a tremendous
saving ill lower cost phosphate fertilizer to
the farmers of this area, and

Whereas defeat of Senate bill 555 will re-
sult in permanent loss of the peoples' right
to benefit from a development of one of our
country's greatest remaining natural re-
sources: Now, therefore, be it hereby

Resolved by the McKtse Lake Local of the
\fiTinesota Farmers Union tn regular meet-
ing as-ternbled. That we go on record in sup-
port of Senate bill 555. and that we petition
our Senators, the Honorable Edward J Thte
and tne Honorable Hcbert Humphret, to
support the Federal Hells Canyon bill and
to cast a vote in favor of Senate bill 555
whenever the opportunity is presented and
to work 'or its passage on behalf of the en-
tire Midwest and NortMwest United Stales.
Archie Keith, PrestdenC.

THERMONUCLEAR BOMB TESTING-
PETITION AND LETTER

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President. I
have just received from some constitu-
ents of mine in Minnesota a petition
containing 1,200 names which was cir-
culated in the Minneapolis and St. Paul
area during the past 10 days. This peti-
tion asks the President of the United
States and the Senators from Minnesota
to take every step in their power to halt
thermonuclear bomb testing.

I have just returned from Minnesota
after a weekend visit and I can assure the
Senate that the people of Minnesota are
indeed concerned about this issue. A
public opinion poll in our State so in-
dicated.

As a symbol of their growing concern
for the situation, I call to the attention
of the Senate this petition, signed by
1,200 citizens. The signatures have all
been verified. I call to the attention of
the Senate a letter which accompanied
the petition. I ask unanimous consent
that the letter be printed in the Record,
and I suggest that, rather than to burden
the Record with the number of names
I have mentioned, which would Involve
a considerable amount of printing, the

Vice President refer this petition to the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
where the hearings relating to the effects
of thermonuclear bomb testing are being
held. I had hoped that those hearings
would bring to the American people the
knowledge and Information which Is so
important, as to whether or not these
tests are injurious, and whether or not
they should be continued.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, the letter and petition will be
printed In the Record, and the petition
will be referred to the appropriate com-
mittee.

The letter is as follows:

Minneapolis. Minn..
St. Paul. Minn ,

_June6,1957.
Hon Hcbert H Humphret,
United States Senate.

Washington. D C.
Sir: Enclosed are copies of a petition which
was circulated In the area of Minneapolis
and St. Paul during the past 10 days. The
original copies, signed by 1.200 persons, are
in the office of the President, and the au-
thenticity of the signatures may be con-
firmed there. This petition asks you and the
President to take every step in your power to
end thermonuclear testing.

From the reception given this petition
among those to whom It was presented, one
can conclude that there is considerable sup-
port for such a request. No group, scientific,
political, or religious, has sponsored the pe-
tition. It was circulated and signed by per-
sons who, acting only in their capacity as
private citizens, are concerned with the po-
tential danger resulting from rudloactlfe
fallout.

The widely critical attitude among many
scientists toward the Information on fallout
published by the Atomic Energy Commission
has led us. the signers, to the conclusion that
when there Is a possible threat to the Ameri-
can people and to people everywhere, the
truly scientific and moral attitude requires
the elimination of that threat. Even in
cases where there Is doubt, the benefit of
that doubt should be given to mankind.

The Representatives from the State of
Minnesota have been Informed by letter that
the enclosed copies are in your hiinds. and
that the signed copies have been sent to the
President. We urge you to heed the request
of the 1.200 citizens who have indicated
their wishes to stop thermonuclear testing.
Sincerely yours.

Mrs Nanette M. FtosEiTa.
Mrs. JUDrrH P. Vel^.
Edgar V. Roberts
John W. Velz.

The petition presented by Mr. Htm-
PHREY was referred to the Joint Commit-
tee on Atomic Energy, and ordered to be
printed In the Record, without the signa-
tures attached, as follows:
To; Dwlght D. Elsenhower, President of the
United States; Hubert Humphrey, United
States Senator from Minnesota; Edward
Thye. United States Senator from Min-
nesota.
Gentlemen:

In the light of recent disclosures made bj
a University of Minnesota scientist that the
Midwest Is the globe's top radioactive fallout
area, we urge you. in the interests of our own
personal safety and that of the generations
to come to take every measure in your power
to bring about the immediate and perma-
nent end of thermo-nuclear testing. The
tests In Nevada endanger our hetUth, that
of our children, and that of peopls all over
the United SUtes; ultimately these and any
such teats endanger the Uvea of mankind
everywhere.

1057

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8573

In the Interests therefore of humanity —
Interests which transcend those of State and
Nation — we p>etltlon that you end thermo-
nuclear racial suicide.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

The following reports of committees
were submitted:

By Mr. EASTLAND, from the Committee
on the Judiciary, without amendment:

S 904. A bill for the relief of Chrlsoula
Antonlos Chegaras (Kept. No. 418);

H. J.Ree. 272. Joint resolution for the re-
lief of certain aliens (Re[tt. No. 426); and

H J. Res 308. Joint resolution to waive
certain provisions of section 212 (a) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act In behalf
of certain aliens (Rept. No. 427).

By Mr EASTLAND, from the Committee on
the Judiciary, with an amendment:

S. 336. A bin for the relief of Angela Fer-
rlni (Rept. No. 419);

8.418 A bill for the relief of Elisabeth
Trout (Rept. No. 420);

S 627. A bill for the relief of Wllhelmlne
Aldrldge, and her minor children, Irene S.
Aldrldge and Ingeborg Kathe Aldndge (Rept.
No. 421):

S 660. A bill for the relief of Ursula Rosa
Pazdro (Rept. No. 422): and

H R. 1454. An act for the relief of Jeffrey
Charles Medworth; (Rept. No. 423).

By Mr. EASTLAND, from the Committee
on the Judiciary, with amendments:

8. 520. A bill for the relief of Eleanor M.
Horton (Rept. No. 424);

S. 1083. A bin for the reUef of Maria
Manlates (Rept. No. 425);

H J Res. 274. Joint resolution to waive the
provision of section 212 (a) (9) of the Im-
migration and Nationality Act In behalf of
certain aliens (Rept. No. 428); and

H. J. Res. 290. Joint resolution for the re-
lief of certain aliens (Rept. No. 429).

By Mr. MORSE, from the Committee on
the District of Columbia, without amend-
ment:

S. 2194. A bin to Increase the authoriza-
tion for appropriations for the Hospital Cen-
ter and facilities in the District of Columbia
and for other purposes (Rept. No. 430).

BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
INTRODUCED

Bills and joint resolutions were intro-
duced, read the flrst time, and. by unani-
mous consent, the second time, and re-
ferred as follows:

By Mr. MURRAY:

8 2242. A bill to provide for the leasing of
oil and gas deposits In lands beneath inland
navigable waters in the Territory of Alaska;
to the Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs.

By Mr. ANDERSON:

8.2243. A bill to amend the Atomic En-
ergy Act of 1964, as amended, and for other
purposes; to the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy.

By Mr. ELLENDER (by request) :

8. 2244. A bill to facilitate and simplify
the work of the Forest Service, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture
and Forestry.

By Mr. DIRKfiEN (by request) :
S 2245. A bUl for the relief of Moy Tong
Poy; and

8. 2246. A bill to confer Jvirlsdlction upon
the Court of Claims to hear, determine, and
render Judgment upon the claims of Gubblns
tc Co., of Lima, Peru, and Reynaldo Gubblns;
to the Comjiittee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. ERVIN:
S 2247. A bin for the relief of George John
Coutsoubinas, Olga G. Coutsoublnas, Spyrl-
don G. Coutsoublnas. and Agatha G. Cout-
soublnas; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. NEUBEROER (for himself and
Mr. McNamasa) :
8. 2248. A bill for the relief of James Rich-
ard Scarlett (Richard Kurosawa); to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

(See the remarks of Mr. Nettbkrgeb when
he introduced the above bill, which appear
under a separate heading.)
By Mr. COTTON:
8 2249. A blU to authorize the sale of a
certain number of merchant type vessels to
Austrian citizens for use in the trade of
Austria; to the (Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. MAGNU80N (by request) :
S. 2250. A bin to amend the act of August
5, 1955. authorizing the construction of two
surveying ships for the Coast and Geodetic
Survey, E>epartment of Commerce, and for
other purposes; to the (Committee on Inter-
state and Foreign Commerce.

(See the remarks of Mr. Magnuson when
he introduced the above bill, which appear
under a separate heading.)
By Mr. 8TENNIS:
8 2251. A bill for tbe relief of Manley
Francis Burton; and

S. 2252. A bin for the relief of Mrs. Fuml
Ishikawa Clark; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.

By Mr. JACKSON:
S 2253. A bill to amend the act of May 4.
1956 (70 Stat. 130), relating to the establish-
ment of public recreational facilities in
Alaska; to the Committee on Interior and
Iiuular Affairs.

By Mr. MAGNUSON:
8. 2254. A bill to eliminate the time limi-
tation on certain grants under section 4 (a)
of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act; to the
Committee on Labor and Public Welfare.
By Mr. MAGNUSON (by request) :
8.2255. A bill to amend section 607 (d)
of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as
amended; to the Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce.
By Mr. DOUGLAS:
8. 2256. A bin for the relief of Luz Poblete
and Robert Poblete Broaddus, Jr.; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

8.2257. A bill to provide for the convey-
ance of certain Interests of the United States
in a tract of land in the State of Illinois; to
the Committee on Government Operations.
By Mr. FULBRIGHT:
8. J. Res. 100. Joint resolution relating to
the inability of the President to discharge
the powers and duties of his office; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

(See the remarks of Mr. Fulbkight when
he introduced the above Joint resolution,
which appear under a separate heading.)
By Ui. SALTON8TALL:
8. J. Res. 101. Joint resolution to author-
ize the Secretary of Commerce to sell a cer-
tain war-buUt cargo vessel and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce.

SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO ACT AS
OBSERVERS AT TRIAL OP WIL-
LIAM S. GIRARD BEFORE A JAPA-
NESE COURT

Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President. I
submit, for appropriate reference, a
resolution creating a special committtee
to act as observers for the Senate at the
trial of William S. Girard before a Japa-
nese court.

I should like to spend a moment ex-
plaining this resolution, in the hope that
others of my colleagues may be Interest-
ed in Joining with me in sponsoring It.

Mr. President, the entire coimtry has
been made aware of the plight of Army
Sp3c. William S. Oirard. This young
soldier, in the performance of his duty,

accidentally killed a woman. He is now
confined, awaiting trial in a Japanese
court. This procedure is provided for in
a section of an executive agreement.

There has been much debate about
these executive agreements. This is one
of the first instances brought to our
attention of what can happen when
agreements are made having the effect
of treaties, and the Senate does not know
anything about them.

Mr. President, there will be much dis-
cussion about this case before any sug-
gestion is made that the Status of Forces
Treaty be resorted to again. I think
it is right that the Senate should concern
itself with this matter, and devote much
time to the discussion. To enable the
Senate not only to have more informa-
tion on this case, but also to insure that
this boy gets a fair trial, the resolving
clause of my resolution states in part :

Resolved, That (a) the President of the
Senate of the United. States is hereby directed
to name a special committee of four Members
of the Senate of the United States to act
as observers for the Senate of the United
States at and during the course of any trial
of the said William S. Girard before any
Japanese court or courts. Such committee
shall select a chairman from an^ong its
members.

(b) Such committee shall be composed of
two Members of the Senate Committee on
Armed Services (one member to be from the
majority party and one member to be from
the minority party) and two members of the
Senate Committee on the Judiciary (one
member to be from the majority party and
one member to be from the minority party).

Mr. President, I am submitting this
resolution in the hope that the commit-
tee will act on it quickly so that the peo-
ple of the United States may have the as-
surance that the Senate is interested in
this case, and will perform its duties in
respect to its constitutional pledges to
keep the Constitution intact for all its
citizens.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The resolu-
tion will be received and appropriately
referred.

The resolution (3. Res. 145) was refer-
red to the Committee on Armed Services,
as follows:

Whereas Army Sp3c. William S. Girard has
been charged with actions which allegedly
caused the death of a Japanese citizen in
Japan; and

Whereas the incident giving rise to such
charges occurred while the aforesaid William
S. Girard was on active duty with the Armed
Forces of the United .States in Japan and
acting under the orders of his commanding
officer; and

Whereas the Department of Defense of the
United States is reported to have issued an
order that the aforesaid William S. Girard
be turned over to Japanese authorities for
trial in Japanese courts for the alleged offense
hereinbefore referred to; and

Whereas it Is charged that the above re-
ported order of the Department of Defense
of the United States is in violation of the
terms of treaties now existing between the
Government of the United States and the
Government of Japan, said treaties having
been approved by the Senate of the United
States: and

Whereas there is alleged to be considerable
differences between the court proxxAvae* and
rights of defendants in Japan and the United
States; and

Whereas it is the duty of the United States
Senate, which approved said treaties brt^reeu

8574

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

\i

the Governmenta of the United Statei and
Japan, to have a complete and detailed report
on all matters relevant to the order turning
the aforesaid WliUam S. Glrard over to Jap-
f, neee authorities and to any trial of the
aforesaid William S. Glrard before any Jap-
anese court or courts: Therefore be It

R'"!0.'fd. That la) the President of the
Senate of the United States Is hereby directed
t-rt name a special committee of four Members
of the betiate of the United States to serve
es observers for the Senate of the United
States at and during the course of any trial
oi the said WiUi.-.m S Glrard before any
Japanese court or courts. Such committee
shall select a chairman from among Its
members

tb) Such comm.lttee shall be composed of
2 members of the Senate Committee on
Armed Services ( 1 member to be from the
majority party and 1 member to be from the
minority party i and 2 members of the Senate
Com.mittee on the Judiciary ( 1 miember to b?
from the majority party and 1 member to be
from the minority party).

(c) All expenses Incurred by the special
committee under this resolution. Incl'.idlng
travel and costs of necessary staff and ad-
visers, shall be paid out of the contingent
fund or the Ser.ate of the United States upon
vouchers approved by the chairman of the
committee.

HARVEY-WHIPPLE. INC — REFER-
ENCE OF SENATE BILL 2122 TO
COURT OP CLAIMS

Mr. SALTONSTALL submitted the
following resolution iS. Ras. 146 1. which
was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary:

Resolved. That the bill iS 2122i entlUM
•*A bin for the relief of Harvey-Whipple.
Inc ." now pending In the Semite, together
vlth all the accompanying papers, is hereby
referred to the Court of Claims: and the
court shall proceed with the same In accord-
ance with the provisions cf sections 149'J and
2609 of title 28 of the United Slates CVxie
and report to the Senate, at the earliest
practicable date, giving such findings of fact
and conclusions thereon as shall be sii;T';clent
to Inform the Congress of the nature and
character of the demand as a claim legal or
equitable, again.st the United States and the
amount. If any. legally or equitably due from
the United States to the claimant.

CONTINUANCE ON PAYROLL FOR A
FURTHER PERIOD OF CLERICAL
AND OTHER ASSISTANTS OF THE
LATE SENATOR MCCARTHY

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, on May
2. 1957. Senator McCarthy passed on.
Under the rule of the Senate, his payroll
Will be extended some 60 days.

In th.e meanwhile. I have been in-
formed by his oaice directly and a,(so in
conversations with the minority leader,
the Senator from California IMr.
KnowlandI, and the Senator from New
Hampshire IMr. Bridges 1. that much
work remains to be done in Senator
McCarthy's office. It has been suggested
that a resolution be submitted — and I
have adopted the suggestion— to the ef-
fect that the period be extended until
September 3.

The newspapers have released an
article that on August 27. a special elec-
tion will be held in Wisconsin to fill the
vacancy created by the death of Sena-
tor McCarthy.

I submit a resolution and ask that It
be referred to the Committee on Rules
and Administration.

There being no objection, the resolu-
tion tS. Res. 147) was referred to the
Committee on Rules and Adminustraticn,
p..~ follows;

Rc^jlied, That the clerical and other a.=;-
slstants of the Honorable Joseph R McCar-
thy, late a Senator from the State of Wts-
ronsln, on the payroll of the Senate on the
date of his death, shall be continued on such
payroll at tlieir respective salaries f -"r a fur-
ther period of 60 days from July 3, 1057, to
be paid from the contingent fund of the
Senate: Proiided. That any such a.ssl's'ants
continued on the payroll, while so continued,
shall perform their duties under the direc-
tion of the Secretary of the Senate, and he
hcieby is authorized and directed to remove
from such payroll any such assistants who
are not attending to the duties for which
Hi).!/ ser. ices are continued.

JAMES RICHARD SCARLETT
i RICHARD KUROSAWA •

Ml-. NEUBERGER. Mr. President. De-
fense Department officials have advised
me that there are many hundreds of
military families living abroad who have
adopted orphan children of other na-
l.cr..-i. The.<;e adopted children have be-
come member? of the family, attached to
their adoptive mothers and fathers.
Many of these families are scheduled for
rotation to the United States- ulth the
movement of military units over the next
several months. In most cases these
families are unable to bring their adopted
children with them because the fourth
preference immiaration quotas under
which the adopted children could be ad-
mitted to our country- are heavily over-
subscnljed.

Thus,' we have a most tragic situation
which results in the breakup of many
p.^tabhshed families. Defense Depart-
ment officials are giving most careful
cor.siderat:cn to this problem. With the
1-t.tacion of military units, the husband
retu'-ns to the United States, while the
wife either remains abroad with their
adopted child or placea the child in an
orphanage and return.s with her husband.

This most serious human and military
problem only emphasizes the urgent need
for general legislation to admit to the
United States orphan children who have
b:cn adopted by American families. Pri-
vate bills do not present an adequate
remedy, and 2;eneral legislation is needed.

Mr Pre.sident. last Januarv- 25 I intro-
duced general legislation to admit 10.000
orphans who have been or will be adopted
by American families, similar to the
orphan section of the Refugee Relief Act
which expired at the end of last year. I
know of no opposition to admitting these
orphan children to our country, and I
hope that the Senate Judiciai-y Commit-
tee Will be able to give prompt and favor-
able consideration to my bill or similar
legislation.

Mr. President, on behalf of myself, and
the distinguished Senator from Michi-
gan [Mr. McNamar.\!, I introduce, for
appropriate reference, a private bill to
permit Army Sgt. and Mrs. James L.
Scarlett, a Michigan serviceman, who is
stationed at the Army Garrison. Camp
Schimmelpfennig, Japan, to bring their

adopted 20-month-old Japanese-Ameri-
can son to the United State? . Unless
this private bill or general legislation is
pa.ssed, this Army fpmily will be unable
to bring their son into the United States.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill will
be received and appropriately referred.

The bill iS 2248" for the relief of
James Richard Scarlett fRlchf.rd Kuro-
.«:awa > , introduced i:y Mr. Neub!;rcer ' for
himself and Mr. McN.'.M.xnAi, was re-
ceived, read twice by its title, and re-
ferred to the Committee on tlie Judiciarv.

CONSTRUCTION OP TTVO SURVEY-
ING SHIPS FOR COAST AND GEO-
DETIC SURVEY

Mr MAGNUSON. Mr Pre.sidenf, by
request, I introduce, for appropriate
reference, a bill to amend the act of
August 5, 1955, authorising tiie construc-
tion of two surveying "^hips for the Coast
and Geodetic Survey, Depar.ment of
Commerce, and for other purposes. I
a.^k unanimous consent that a letter
from the Sccretai-y or Commerce, re-
questing tlie proposed lenslf-.tion, to-
pother with a statement of iti purpose
and need, may be printed in the RECoriD.

The VICE PRESIDLNT. The bill will
be received and appropriately referred;
and. without objection, the l*tter and
statem.ent will be printed in th.e Record.

The bill <S 2250' to amend '.he act of
August 5. 1955. authorizing the construc-
tion of two surveying ships for the Coast
and Geodetic Survey. Department of
Commerce, and for other purxjses. in-
troduced by Mr M.^cnuson. by requestf
was received, read twice by its title, and
referred to the Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce.

The letter and statement presented by
Mr. Macnuson are as follows;

JUNi; 7. 1957.
H n Richard M Nuo.n.

Prc>id>nt o/ r'lf Smate,
United State.i Senate,
Wa^fiington. D C.
H..n Sam R^ybohn.

Speak'-T nf the Honor nf Repr(frntatiie'!,
Washington. D C
Dka» Mi. PaiaiDtifT: The Lepartment
reoomine:id.s to the Congress for iti consider-
ation the attached draft of a propoeed bill
• To amend the act of August 5. 19; 3. author-
izing the construction of two •urvrylng ships
fiT the Coast and Oeodetlc Surve;'. Depart-
ment of Commerce, and for other purposes."
There are also attached four copies of the
statement of purpose 'and need In support
ti hereof.

We have been advised by the Bureau of the
Budget that It would lnterp<is« no objection
to the submlaslun of the draft legislation to
the Congress.

Sincerely yours.

SiNCUAa WoiC!.
Secretary of Cotumerce.

Etatemknt or PmiPosE and Nczo rc« Pko-
P08C0 Legislation "To Amend the Act of
ArcrsT 5. 1955, AuTHotiziNa thi Con-
smucTTON or Two SrtTrTiNo Ships roK
THE Coast amd Oeodetic StJmviT, Dxpakt-
MiNT or CoMMncE, AND roi Othct Pu»-

POSZS"

The proposed legislation amends the act of
August 5. 1955. authorizing construction of
two surveying ships for the Coast and Oeo-
detlc Survey, to Increase the limitation of
cost per vessel from 13,700,000 to $6,793,243

'::=

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8575

and to change th« date from which cost In-
crea«es are figured to April 4. 1967.

In reaponse to an advertisement for bids
for conatructlon of one of the vessels a low
bid of $5,813,243 was submitted. Contln.
gencies, equipping and outfittmg, design,
supervision and inspection are estimated at
an additional $980,000, making a total of
$6,793,243. If the contract Is not awarded by
July 3, 1967, the contract price will be In-
creased by the effect of escalation. It Is esti-
mated that If the escalation clause takes
effect, the net Increase In contract price will
be a minimum of $362,946.

The Department wishes to emphasize that
none of the requested Increase In the author-
ization Is the result of changes In the speclfl'
cations of the vessel. The requested In-
crease Is caused solely by Increased ship-
building costs and adjustment of estimates.
The Department urges Immediate enactment
of this legislation and the appropriation of
funds thereunder In order that the present
bid may be accepted at the unescalated
figure.

PRESroENTIAL SUCCESSION IN
EVENT OP DISABILITY OP IN-
CUMBENT

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President. I
Introduce, for appropriate reference, a
joint resolution relating to the inability
of the President to discharge the powers
and duties of his office. I ask unani-
mous consent that the joint resolution,
together with an explanation of its pur-
poses, may be printed in the Record.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The joint
resolution will be received and appropri-
ately referred: and, without objection,
the joint resolution and explanation will
be printed in the Rxcoso.

The joint resolution (S. J. Res. 100)
relating to the inability of the President
to discharge the powers and duties of his
office, introduced by Mr. Fulbright. was
received, read twice by its title, referred
to the Committee on the Judiciary, and
ordered to be printed in the Record, as
follows:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America
tn Congress assembled {two-thirds of each
House concurring therein). That the fol-
lowing article Is proposed as an amendment
to the Constitution of the United States,
which shall be valid to all Intents and pur-
poses as part of the Constitution when
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths
of the several States:

"a«ticl« —

"Sectiow 1. Whenever the two Hotises of
Congress shall adopt a resolution declaring
that the Congress believes that the Presi-
dent is unable, by reason of physical or
mental disability, to discharge the powers
and duties of his office, such resolution shall
be transmitted to the Supreme Court of the
United States, and the Court shall decide
whether or not such inability exists. If the
Court decides, by a majority vote of the
authorized membership, that such an In-
ability exists, the powers and duties of
President shall devolve upon the Vice Presi-
dent, or if there be no Vice President, upon
the person next In line of succession to the
office of President, as provided by law.

"The Vice President or other person upon
whom the (wwers and duties of the Presi-
dent have devolved pursuant to proceed-
ings under this article of amendment shall
continue to exercise such powers and duties
until the end of the presidential term then
In effect, unless It has previously been de-
termined that the Inability of the President

no longer exists, in wlilch event the Presi-
dent siuill reassume the powers and duties
of his office. Such a determination shall
be made in the same manner as herein pro-
vided for determining the question of the
President's Inability to perform the power*
and duties of his office.

"For the purposes of this article of amend-
ment, a quorum In each House of Congress
shall consist of two-thirds of the total num-
ber of members thereof.

"Sec. 2. In the event the Congress is not
in session, and In the opinion of the Vice
President, or If there be no Vice President,
the President pro tempore of the Senate,
and the Speaker of the House of Representa-
tives circumstances exist which create a
doubt as to the ability of the President to
discharge the powers and duties of his
office, they may by joint action call thtf
Congress Into special session for the pur-
pose of considering whether the President
Is unable to discharge the powers and duties
of his office.

"In the event the Congress Is not in ses-
sion, and In the opinion of the President
pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker
of the House of Representatives circum-
stances exist which indicate that the ina-
bility which occasioned action pursuant to
section 1 no longer exists, they may by
joint action call the Congress into special
session for the purpose of considering
whether or not such Inability still exists.

"Sbc. 3. The provisions of this article of
amendment shall apply to any person upon
whom the powers and duties of the office
of President have devolved In the same man-
ner such provisions apply to the President.

"Sec. 4. This article shall not apply to any
person holding the office of President when
this article was proposed by the Congress.

"Sxc. 5. This article shall be inoperative
unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by the legis-
latures of three-fourths of the several States
within 7 years from the date of its sub-
mission."

The explanation presented by Mr. Put-
BRiCHT is as follows:

PxntfOSX AND INTZMT OF THE PBOPOSXD
AMKNDICXafT

It is the purpose of the proposed amend-
ment to provide for a succession to the Presi-
dency in thf event of the physical or mental
disability of the President.

The proposed amendment provides that
whenever the Congress believes the President
is unable, by reason of ph3rslcal or mental
disability, to discharge the powers and duties
of his office it shall request the Supreme
Court to decide whether such disability exists
and If the Court so decides, then the powers
and duties of the President shall devolve
upon the Vice President or upon the person
next in line of succession.

The succession provided for by this pro-
posed amendment shall continue to the end
of the current term, unless the disability
is sooner relieved, in which event the Presi-
dent will again assume his office.

The proposal provides for succession only
after due consideration by the two Houses
of Congress and by the Supreme Court, "nie
action of both of these Independent branches
of the Oovemment is required before a suc-
cessor can assume the Presidency upon the
disability of the President.

The proposed amendment provides for re-
sumption by the President of his office in
the same manner as was provided for re-
lieving him of his burden when he became
disabled; that la, by concerted action of the
Congress and by the Supreme Court.

It provides for the possibility of disability
even during periods when there is no Vice
President.

The proposed amendment provides for sue<
cession even dxirlng possible periods when
the Congress is not in session by reconvening

the Congress upon the joint call of tbe^^e-
siding officers of both Chambers.

Nececmutt rot the Proposed AMEKOBceirr

The proposed amendment is nonpolltlcal
In nature. It is not a Democratic or a Re-
publican amendment. It is not a liberal or
a conservative amendment. It is a nececsary
amendment In view of serious problems
raised by the inadequacy of the Constitu-
tion, as it is now constituted, to provide
for a continuity in the adequate performance
of the powers and duties of the President
in the event of his physical or mental disa-
bility. This proposed amendment properly
meets the demands of the situation. It re-
moves any uncertainty about the legality of
any action taken diiring an Incapacity of
the President.

It has an impact on all three branches of
the Government; yet no unilateral action
by any single branch of the Government can
be effective. The proposed amendment pro-
vides for a simple procedure and yet it pro-
vides for a deliberate reflection upon a grave
coiutltutlonal change which can be effected
in as relatively short a time as circumstance
may require.

It allows for due consideration by both
elected and appointed officials. It requires
action by officials already provided for in
the Constitution and it does not necessitate
the creation of a new body of officials, com-
mission, or agency.

The proposed amendment provides that
final responsibility rests upon those of ju-
dicial temperament, appointed for life and.
insofar as constitutional government can
provide, beyond the tempUtions of political
advantage. Yet. the Court cannot act un-
less first requested to do so by the separata
and Independent legislative branch of the
Government.

This proposal requires a majority of a
quorum of two-thirds of the toUl nimaber
of the Members of each House for adoption
of a resolution. Henoe, it precludes the
possibility of a small catMU In either House
achieving a political coup. At the same
time it does not require so great a pre-
ponderance as to allow a small cabal to
prevent, for political advantage, a necessary
change in the executive.

There are those who have declared that to
s'Thstitute another for an ailing President
In the middle of his term is to contravene
the wishes of the electorate. This Is un-
realistic. The Constitution already pro-
vides, and the electorate accepts the possi-
bility of succession in the middle of a term
because of a disability resulting from the
death of the President. The succession of
the Vice President in such clrciunstances
Is not considered to contravene the wishes
of the electorate which had voted the Presi-
dent a 4-year term. So also this amend-
ment does not contravene the wishes of the
electorate. The disability may be short of
death, yet it Is no less an inability to dis-
charge the powers and duties of his office.
To ignore the possible consequences of such
inability is to take grave risks with the
future weU-being of tUs Nation.

The requirement that the Oongrsss should
be directly Involved in proceedings involving
succession to the Presidency is necessary.
The President Is elected by all the people —
so is the Congress. What other body under
oiir Constitution Is the alter ego of our
cltlaenry?

It is therefore fitting and proper that no
possibility of succession because of inaliility
take place until the Congress has expressed
Its belief that the President may be disabled.
There has been some comment that the
Supreme Cotirt should be kept out of this
problem since it is contrary to the tradi-
tional constitutional purposes for which the
Coiirt was established. There is little sub-
stance to such an argument. The Constitu-
tion already provides for the removal of »
President for cause tlu-ough Impeachment

8576

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

proceedings. The Constitution already pro-
vides that the Chief Justice of the United
States shall preside over such proceedings.
The problem herein Is not a pxDlitlcal prob-
lem. It Is a national governmental prob-
lem. The matter can only be resolved by
facing up to the responsibilities required un-
der constitutional government. Hence, the
participation by the Supreme Court In mat-
ters Involving succession to the Presidency
Is not only already required by our own Con-
stitution but nothing required of the Su-
preme Court under the proposed amendment
can In any way be deemed to Impair the
dignity of the Court or cause It to become
Involved In partisan politics. Its action un-
der this amendment would be nothing more
than meeting constitutional responsibilities
In a situation of concern to all our citizens.

It has been said that we have existed as a
Nation for nearly 175 years without provid-
ing for the possibility envisaged by this pro-
posed amendment and that In all that time
no problem has arisen. To that all that can
be said Is that a Divine Providence has
spared us thus far, but we are fEimlllar with
the fact that at least twice, and possibly
more times, our Nation has been faced with
the fact that the President was unable to
discharge properly the duties of his office
by reason of a physical or mental disability.

Indeed, only recently (May 14, 1957. Dis-
trict cf Columbia Bar Association) the At-
torney General pointed out that the United
BtatM cannot count on Ita past food luck
that a Pr«aldent will not b«coin« dlaahled
whtl* In oOce. The queatlon of •uc««Mton,
h« potnttd out. has b«come •MpclnUy urftnt
b«e«UM w* art Uvtixf tn an Kiomle »<•■

T>M mer« tact that «« a« a nation har«
lM*n tnriunat* thua far la no r««atm to
tMnpi pmvidvnc* tn «o importiunt a matt«r
M th« prMid»ncy, It mAy w«U b* that (lr>
tuin*tanc«a may n«v«r r*q\)lr« th«t thu
fum«n(lm*nt btccMn* optratlv*, Tvt pru-
««nc* and common wn»« dtctat* thnt tht
probablMtlM ar« mor« Uk«ly than not thnt
It will become opvratlv*. If and when such
elrcumttance* aria* it will b* too late to
tnact the ntc«Mary Itftalatlon. The tlm«
to repair the hole In the roof Is before tha
rain bec'n*. "Ince human experience Indi-
cates that it will rain, even though we can-
not predict with certainty when.

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT OF 1957—
AMENDMENTS

Mr. JAVrrS. Mr. President. I send
to the desk for printing under the rule
two amendments to Calendar No. 424.
Senate bill 2130, a bill to further amend
the Mutual Security Act of 1954, as
amended, and for other purposes, re-
ported from the Committee on Foreign
Relations.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The amend-
ments wtil be received, printed, and lie
on the table.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, by way
of explanation of these amendments, one
amendment deals with the entire ques-
tion of international travel. There are
tremendous possibilities in intenational
travel for helping foreign nations, in
the same terms in which we helped
them under mutual assistance; and also
tremendous possibilities for Introducing
our country to many travelers who do
not come here now, as well as some pos-
sible financial benefit to our own coun-
try as well, especially in States which
attract tourists during the tourist sea-
son. I shall have a great deal more to
say on this subject in connection with
the amendment, and al.«:o in connection
with independent proposed legislation

whfch I Intend to Introduce. I merely
call attention to the fact that I spon-
sored a similar move in the other body
when I was a Member there, which re-
sulted In the inclusion of section 416.
relating to the encouragement of in-
ternational travel, in the Mutual Secu-
rity Act. It is that section which I pro-
pose to amend. My amendment pro-
poses a broad scale study and report
dealing with the question of interna-
tional travel, with a view toward a more
afiQrmative action by our Govei-nment on
that subject.

In connection with the International
travel amendment. I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed in the Record an
editorial entitled "Two-Way Ocean,"
published in the Washington Post and
Times Herald of June 10, 1957.

There being no objection, the edi-
torial was ordered lo be printed in the
Record, as follow^

[From the Washington Post and Times

Herald of June 10. 1957]

Two-way Ockan

Last year, 870.000 Americans visited
Europe. But only about 35.000 Kurupean
tourists come to the United States annually.
A chief reason for this great Imbalanc* In
transatlantic tourism has been tho dollar re-
strictions ImpoMd to varying deffre* by a
number of European eouuutta. The reautc-
tlona of Oreat Britain have been the moat
•trtnient; an ordinary traveler from th«
Vntted KliMtdom for 10 years baa been al-
lowed to take no more tluu\ 10 poxinda in
banknotea Into the dt.\llar area, which haa
made BriUah viatta tt> thia c«^unvry and C«n-
ada, for example, all but Impoaalble.

The meaavire waa adopted to cooaerT*
Brltaln'a often^atrained foreutn exchan(«
balancea. But now Britain haa found It poa*
•Ible to raise the limit to 100 pounds, or iMO,
which, while hardly an invitation to exten-
sive or luxurious traveling, ought to help a
great deal. The former arrangement, aa
Chancellor of the Exchequer Peter Thorney-
croft observed, was an unnatural barrier be-
tween the Kai^Ush-speaking peoples. An-
other step that might help would t>e to set
up somewhere a sort of clearinghouse to
facilitate lecture engagements or temporary
consulting poslilons for qualified European
visitors to the United States, affording them
a chance to earn additional sums here and
prolong their visits. We'd like to see more of
our European cousins.

Mr. JAVrrS. The other amendment
proposes to enlarge somewhat the pro-
vision relating to guaranties of private
investment abroad. It is designed to in-
troduce the private economy even more
extensively into our mutual-security
program, and enlarge the guaranties to
cover revolution or insurrection. This
measure has been previously passed by
the other body, but has always failed in
the Senate. I hope very much that, w ith
the new emphasis on a long-range for-
eign-aid program, in terms of economic
assistance, we may seriously consider
this rounding out of the guaranty pro-
gram.

In writing that It Is my Intention to move
to suspend paragraph 4 of rule XVI for the
purpose of propoelng to the bill (H. R. 7441 )
nuiklng appropriations for the Department
of Agriculture and Farm Credit Administra-
tion for the fiscal year ending June 30. 1958.
and for other purposes, the following amend-
ment, namely:

Page 10. after the word "basis" on line 7,
Insert the following: ": Proxided further.
That provisions of the act of August 1. 1958
(70 Stat. 890-892), and provisions of a sim-
ilar nature In appropriation acta of the De-
partment of State for the current and subse-
quent fiscal years which facilitate the work
of the Foreign Service shall t)e applicable to
funds available to the Foreign Agricultural
Service."

Mr. RUSSELL also submitted an
amendment, intended to be proposed by
him, to House bill 7441, making appro-
priations for the Department of Agri-
culture and Farm Credit Administration
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1958,
and for other purposes, which was or-
dered to lie on the table and to be
printed.

(For text of amendment referred to.
see the foregoing notice.)

NOTICE OP MOTION TO SUSPEND
THE RULE— AMENDMENT TO DE-
PARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AP-
PROPRIATION BILL

Mr. RUSSELL submitted the following
notice in writing:

In accordance with rule XL, of the Stand-
ing Rules of the Senate, I hereby give notice

PRINTING AS A SENATE DOCUMENT
OF REPORT OP A SUBCOMMITTEE
CXSNCERNINQ PROBLEMS OP HXW-
GRY CHILDREN IN THE DISTRICT
(a DOC. NO 43 >

Mr. MORSE, Mr, Pr««ld*nt, I hftve
JVMt com* from « tpMlitt metUni of the
CommlttM on the Diatrlct of OcUumbl«,
and I rvport th«t it la the unitnimoua
view of the committee that this request
be made.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed as a Senate docu-
ment the report of the Subcommittee on
Public Health. Education. Welfare, and
Safety, of the Committee on the District
of Columbia, on the problems of hungry
children in the District of Columbia.

The committee asks that the report be
printed immediately as a Senate docu-
ment, so that it will be available to
Members of the Senate for discussion of
District of Columbia affairs, not only in
connection with the appropriation bill,
but also in connection with several other
DLstrict of Columbia bills which will be
before the Senate in the next few weeks.

Wlien I say unanimously, I should say
that there was one member of the com-
mittee who did not pass judgment on the
request. That is the Senator from New
York [Mr. Javtts] who could not be pres-
ent at the meeting of the committee
today. I want Senators to know that
the Senator from New York has been
closely following the work of the sub-
committee, and he has given us great en-
couragement as the work has gone on.
I take the liberty, although I want the
circumstances to be clear, of saying to
the Senate that I am positive that I can
speak for the Senator from New York on
this matter, because I am sure he will
say, "I am glad you said that." when he
sees me tomorrow morning, and that he
would Join with me in this request.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, ^he report will be printed as re-
quested by the Senator from Oregon.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8577

ADDRESSES, EDITORIALS. ARTICLES.
ETC., PRINTED IN THE RECORD

On request, and by unanimous con-
sent, addresses, editorials, articles, etc.,
were ordered to be printed in the Rec-
ord, as follows:

By Mr. GREEN:

Address entitled "A Sense of Balance." de-
livered by him at the under the elms exer-
cises at Brown University, on May 31, 1957.
By Mr. BEVERCOMB :

Address entitled "The Basis of America's

Foreign Policy." delivered by him before the

St. Paul's Guild of St. Joseph's Catholic

Church, at Huntington. W. Va., May 26. 1957.

By Mr. GOLDWATER:

Address delivered by him before Wiscon-
sin Republican State convention on June 8,
1957,

By Mr. SMITH of New Jersey:

Address delivered by Senator Biblk at 92d
commencement of Rider College, Trenton,
N. J., on June 8. 1957.
By Mr. JAVITS:

Address delivered by Senator Cass of New
Jersey before annual convention of the Jer-
sey Slate Federation of Labor.

ADDRESS BY THE SENATE MAJOR-
ITY LEADER BEPORE THE ANNUAL
CONFERENCE OP UNITED JEWISH
APPEAL

MrFULBRIOHT. Mr. Prwldent, last
Saturday. In N«w York, the disUmulahed
majority Itadtr, th« Senator from Texas
I Mr. JoNNsoN ) . delivered one oT the most
tnteUlf«nt and tlimlflicAnt sutements
which has been made in recent months.
It was well timed and appropriate. It
was needed. Many people have sensed
that our foreign policy has been neirative.
timid, and uninspired during the past
several years.

The reaction of the administration to
the unprecedented nationwide television
broadcast of the principal leader of Rus-
sia was a supercilious comment by the
White House Press Secretary^that
"President Eisenhower was aware of the
broadcast, but didn't see it." That. I
submit was a negative, a timid, and an
unimaginative and uninspired response
to the Communist thrust.

I saw the broadcast. I think it pre-
sented us with a good opportunity to go
into the merits of the Russian case. I
believe the Russian case is defective. I
believe Marxism is a false doctrine, but
the way to convince the people of the
world that it is false Is to meet it head-
on. just as the majority leader has sug-
gested in his wise and thoughtful speech.

I urge every Member of this body to
read the speech, and I beg and plead
with the administration that it be not
afraid to reason with the people of the
world — yes, even with the people of
Russia — about the merits of democracy.

I urge the administration, with all
the sincerity I possess, to use some Imag-
ination, in dealing with the Commu-
nists, to accept their challenge to test
our ideas in open debate before the eyes
of the world.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed in the Record at this
point the best speech I have seen in re-
cent months.

cin-

-540

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

Thi Open Cdstaih
(Address by Senate Majority Leader LnfDON
B. Johnson, before the annual conference
of the United Jewish Appeal, New York
City. N. T.. June 8. 1957)

Mr. Chairman, distinguished guests, I am
here tonight with a basic premise In my
mind.

It Is that you — the members of the United
Jewish Appeal — are men and women who
have dedicated their lives to helping your
fellow man.

I do not assume this lightly — merely from
the desire of a speaker to flatter his au-
dience. It rests upon your enviable record.

I raise the point only as a predicate to
the remarks which I plan to make tonight.
This Is the place and you are the people
to whom I wish to define a new proposal.

THX WORLD WK LIVZ TH

Never before In history have people been
BO badly In need of help. And the only kind
of help that wUl serve today Is the kind
that the people supply for themselves.

There Is no need to recite once more the
realities of the modern world. We are all
only too familiar with them — the cold war,
the armaments race, atomic fallout, Inter-
national mltunderttandlng.

Moat of theee facton have appeared before
In history. There have been cold wart, XD'*
ternaUonal mUundtrttandlng hat been a
ncurmal ttat* of affttrt tor centuries. Tbere
U nothing new about an annaroentt race.

But tor the ftrtt time, we now tace the
protpect of dMtroytng oureelvee— oot u
the retuU of an armaments race but merely
by Indulging In the race.

TKB ATOMIC SAtM

Por teveral weekt our newtpapere have
carried dally beadllnea about the effecu of
atomic fallout. The eclentltta disagree at to
the amount of damage that It being done to
humanity by our nuclear tett explotlont.

But even the most conservative state flatly
that there It tome rltk.

I am no nuclear physlcltt. I do not pre-
tend "^o have the eclentlflc knowledge that
would entitle me to pass judgment on genet-
ics or the effects of strontium fiO.

But I do know that the experts are talk-
ing about my children and your children.
And It glvea me no comfort to be told that
some scientists think the risk to them la
slight.

NO IIONOPOLT

It is even less comforting to assess the
probable future of the armaments race even
assimilng that our chlTdren escape the faU-
out danger — whether slight or tremendous.
If It continues, the future is bleak.

The Intercontinental ballistics missile
with a hydrogen warhead is just over the
horizon. It is no longer just the disorderly
dream of some science fiction writer.

We must assume that our country will
have no monopoly on this weap>on. The So-
viets have not matched our achievements in
democracy and prosperity; but they have
kept pace with us in building the tools of
destruction.

With such weapons in a divided world,
there will be little choice. We will return
to the caves of our remote ancestors and bur-
row underground like the prairie dogs of
west Texas.

EEASONABLE ALTERNATIVXS

There are reasonable alternatives to this
unreasonable prospect. They are alterna-
tives which are available to mankind — pro-
viding that mankind wiU adopt them.

cnir present situation could have been
avoided. Twelve years ago — when we had a
monopoly on the atomic bomb — the United

States offered to share the secrets of the
atom with the entire world.

We asked in return only reasonable guar-
' anties that the atom would never again be
used in warfare. This offer had no parallel
In history — and it would have converted the
atom from an implement of death to an im-
plement of life.

Two years later, this plan was approved
by the General Assembly of the United Na-
tions. It was blocked only by the Soviet
Union and Its satellites.

There is no point in reliving the past. 1
am not going to waste your time and my time
In proving that the Soviets were wrong.
Free people who have had access to the truth
are already aware of the facts.

We live in the present. We no longer have
a monopoly on atomic power. But there is
a sound reason for recalling the events of
1946 and 1948. One aspect of those events
may i>oint the way to the future.

The Russian people have never had an
opportunltv to weigh the Free World's pro-
posal for the control of atomic energy. They
were never informed about it openly and
frankly. They never knew that Stalin pro-
voked an arms race that, if continued, must
end in the total elimination of mankind.

Today humanity it a great deal closer
to self -destruction than It waa IC yean ago.

THX TRXXAT ANO TRX HOTS

And yet. becaute we are close to the threat,
we may also be cloter to hope, I do not fore-
see any quick Utopian rolutloni. A ham)y
ending to the atomlo-bydrogen menace will
not be eatUy found.

But X am convinced, to borrow Churchill's
phraee. that If we cannot see the bectnalnf
of the end, we oaa at least see the end ot the
beflnnlng.

Tbere are pathways of peaee and progreM
open to all humanity. The statetmen of the
world have one overriding duty^to help
light those patht.

Where Ue the tlgnt of hopet They lie la
the realm of reaton.

THX CRAULXMOI

The challenge It truly Immediate. It In-
volves actions that can and must be taken
this year, now, during the remaining 200
dayt of 1957.

Our basic need goes by the technical name
"disarmament." That long, rather duU-
Boundlng word represents a host of compli-
cated problems. The answer — even a be-
ginning to the answer — ^represents the hope
of all mankind.

We must initiate action on five objectives,
each contributing to our crusade for dis-
armament:

1. Controlled reduction of military forces
by all countries.

2. A start on a mutual open-skies fool-
proof inB(>ectlon system.

3. A frank and open search for a method
of suspending tests of the bigger nuclear
weapons, under airtight conditions which
give full protection against violations.

4. A reduction of everyone's stockpile of
nuclear weapons and means for delivery un-
der copper-riveted methods of mutual in-
spection.

5. And this Is the key to ultimate hope: A
worldwide agreement — ^backed by absolute
safeguards — that no nation will make any
new fissionable materials for weapon pur-
poses, neither the three present nuclear pow-
ers nor those who may soon have the ca-
pacity.

LET THX FXOPLX JXTDCX

How do we launch this program? We do
so in the only way possible — In the only way
that accords with American traditions.

We must create a new world policy. Not
Just of open skies, but of open eyes, ears, and
minds, for all peoples of the world.

I call for the open cxutaln. Let truth flow
through It freely. Let ideas cleanse evil Jxist

8578

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Jiuie 10

>as fresh air cleanses the poisoned, stagnant
mass or a long -closed cavern.

ManJilnd's only hope lies with men them-
selves. Let us Insist that the case be sub-
mitted to the people of the world.

A few years ago this would have been
utterly Impractical. But great events have
recently stirred the world. We must seize
the hopes they suggest. We must not t>e
blinded to those hopes by rigid reflections
of the past.

Only 4 years ago the brutal Stalin died.
Only a year ago the world learned that the
new Russian leader. Khrushchev, has found
It necessary to expose the depths of Stalin s
evil. And only 6 days ago Khrushchev took
advantage of America's facilities to come Into
our homes and state the Communist case.

I am glad that he did so. I have com-
plete trust and faith In our people.

They will not be contaminated by op*"n
Communist propaganda.

We should welcome this example of direct
argument.

But we must, I think, go much further
than this. Let us take Khrushchev's tech-
nique and turn It back upon him. Let us
use the program ua the means to open the
Iron Curtain.

As he has usfd our TV screens for his ap-
peals, let us demand to use his screens for
our appeal, the appeal of truth undefen-
slve and undismayed.

We should ask Khrushchev to provide us
with Sovletwlda uncensored radio and TV
facilities. We 'hould call on him to allow
spokesmen of our own choosing to come Into
Russipn homes and state our case — the Amer-
ican case — to the Russian people.

RXTOTIN TO FUNDAMENTAL.?

Let us get back to fundamentals. Let us
return to the principles which made America
strong and great and free

The most Important of these principles Is
that truth can be found In the free market
place of ideas.

It Is no secret to any of you that I am a
Democrat My political faith can be traced
to many sources. One of them — and the
most Important of them — was Thomas Jef-
ferson, who said:

"I know of no safe depository of the ulti-
mate power of society but the people them-
selves; and If we think them not enlightened
enough to exercise their control with a
wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to
take It from them, but to Inform their dis-
cretion by education."

This Is an elegant and graceful way of put-
ting a basic truth that I learned In Johnson
City. Tex. Stated more simply, it means:
Nei^er underestimate the Intelligence of the
people.

Sometimes they are misinformed. Some-
times the truth Is withheld from them But
when they have the facts, their Judgment
will be good and fair and honorable.

FAITH m THE PEOPLE

I have a deep and abiding faith in the
Judgment of the people who ride the range
In the Texas hill country. They may not
have the ease of expression and the grace of
manner of those who were reared In more
settled parts of our land.

But no demagog Is going to lead the lean,
spare Texan who runs the cattle on my
ranch into the paths of bigotry. And Nlkita
Khrushchev is not going to convert him Into
a Communist.

He's Just plain got too much sense. And
I don't think that he is unusual. I believe
that most Americans are like that.

They may speak with a different accent.
They may plow cornland In Iowa or sew
clothes In New York City. They may work
on the docks In Seattle or run a department
store In Kansas City.

They may be northern Yankees or southern
Rebels. They may be Catholics, Protestants.

or Jews. It makes no difference because
they are all Americans.

I am not afraid to have them listen to
Nlkita Khrushchev or Karl Marx or Nlcolal
Lenin himself. They have the Intelligence
and the Independence to make up their own
minds.

I know there are some who are fearful of
the effects of Communist propaganda upon
our people. I am a Jeffersonmn. I do not
Bhiire those fears.

WELCOME COMPETtTIOM

I f.\vor granting Khrushchev or Bulganln
or Mnlotov or any Soviet leader television
time in America every week of the year I
demand in return only that they grant us
equal opportunities for reaching the Rus-
sian people.

Let the Russians say what they wi.«ih. Let
our people hear It to the bitter end I have
faith in them. I do not believe that there
will be any Communist converts.

Khrushchev. In his broadcast, called for
competition between socialist and capitalized
states. There is une lorm of competition —
the clash of ideas — that Americans would
welcome with delight

I am not talking of a propaganda offensive
or waging peace Those are the terms of
advertising, and this country is not In-
terested l:i making a mercanti're Item of
peace.

I am not talking of merely one reply to
Khrushchev by the President or some other
official

I am calling for an open curtain for full
discussion of the Immediate, urgent prob-
lems facing our people We should insist
on the right to state our ea.se on disarma-
ment in detail to the S«iviet people We
should have weekly appearances during this
year on So\:et radio and television, and we
siiould otter similar facilities here.

THK THT-TH SHALL MAKE TOU ntEE

Can Khrushchev find any reasonable ob-
jection to this procedure'' Can he advance
one logical reason why his pe<iple should not
hear our proposals advanced fr im our lips
as our people heard his proposals advanced
from his lips'*

Khrushchev said last Sunday: "We have to
live on one planet " Let him show that he
is wlUins; to make this possible

I am a man who tru.«ts people when they
have the facts I believe in the Biblical in-
junction "You shall know the truth and
the truth shall make you free " The Rus-
sian people are capable of recognizing the
truth when it is offered to them.

We should not let a single day pass with-
out raising this issue We shovild call it up
In the United Nations: we should make it a
basic proposal in all disarmament talks; we
should insist upon it every time a Russian
representative is within earshot.

Why not allow Soviet labor leaders to talk
to our people in return for ovir labor leaders
talking to theirs'' Why not allow Soviet In-
dustrial managers to talk to our people in
return lor our Indusuifcllsta talking to
theirs'

Is there any good reason why American
and Soviet farmers should nut exchange
views — in the plain sight of the whole world?
Is there any reason why our scholars and
our professional men should be barred from
mutual exchanges with then Soviet counter-
parts'

Let the people know.

Let truth shine through the open curtain.

And when the people know, they will In-
sist that the arms race, the nuclear explo-
sions, the Intercontinental missiles, all be
banished They will Insist upon systems
that safeguard us against world suicide.

THE PATH or PEACE

Once again we will place our feet on the
path of constructive activity. We will look
forward with Joy rather thau with dread u>
cur children's future.

We live In a world where over two-thirde
of the people are "Ill-housed, lU-clad, ill-
nourished." When the madness of the nu-
clear arms race la halted, mankind's creative
efforts can be turned to their relief. We shall
survive this century only If we find how to
substitute human dignity for human degra-
dation.

The people in this room tonight are dedi-
cated to the cause of helping — rather than
destroying — humanity. You have worked
through the years to bring a measure of secu-
rity and a measure of decency to your fellow
humans.

BANCTUAIT

You have been associated with many hu-
manitarian causes — and one of tliem Ls cre-
ating a sanctuary for the oppressed. That
sanctuary, Israel, stands today — permanent
and enduring — in the midst of what was o,uce
desert

Creating that sanctuary meant that rivers
had to be dammed, fields bad to be tilled;
houses had to be built; the resources of na-
ture had to be tapped.

These are the tasks to which all of hu-
mr^nlty should be dedicated.

We have had enough of oppression and
wars; of trouble and turmoil; of the frustra-
tion of every normal human Impulse. We
have seen noble Impulses thwarted and
turned to ignoble ends. We have watched
the fruits of genius warped and turned Into
the paths of destruction.

This Is not the work of the people of the
world. It Is the work of the small groups of
selfish and twisted men who withhold from
tlieir fellow human beings the Indispensable
tool of freedom — the truth

As you go alxaut your humanitarian work.
I want to leave you with one thought tonight.

You are people who seek to build, not to
tear down And when doors are opened so
the people of the world can find the truth for
themselves, we can all turn to building —
building a better life for ourselves and our
children.

The people can be trusted. It Is time the
case be turned over to them.

Mr President. wlU
I yield to the Sen-
I wish to associate

Mr. MANSFIELD,
the Senator yield?

Mr PULBRIOHT.
ator from Montana.

Mr MANSFIELD
myself with the remarks made by the
distinguished Senator from Arkansas,
and to pomt out that the majority leader
of the Senate did. in New York, on last
Sunday, make a proposal for an Open
Curtain.

I think the majority leader and the
Senator from Arkansas are both abso-
lutely correct. t)ecause the question be-
fore us is. What are we afraid of? Are
we afraid of l>eing contaminated by
broadcasts by Mr. Khrushchev and
others? If we are, then I think the coun-
try is in t>ad shape. I certainly hope we
will live up to our responsibilities with
courage and leadership.

Mr, FULBRIGHT. I thank the Sen-
ator from Montana.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mf. President, If
the Senator will yield. I ask unanimous
consent to have printed In the Ricord
at this point an editorial which appeared
In this morning's New York Times on this
particular speech.

There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed In the Recoid,
as follows:

The Wab or Iokam

The war of Ideaa is the key contest of our

times. This is true because, among other

reasons, the existence of nuclear weapona

threatens to make any future shooting war

r

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8579

iinlversal suicide. Nlklta S. Khrushchev cer-
tainly understanda the vital Importance of
this encounter. He has devoted much of his
time these pest few years to this contest, and
It la to this struggle that hla present activi-
ties In Finland are directed. In this coun-
try, however, the events of the past week
following the Khrushchev television and ra-
dio Interview over the Columbia Broadcast-
ing System raise seriously the question of
whether we understand the importance of
the war of Ideas and how to fight that war.

The facts are simple. A week ago yester-
day Mr. Khrushchev was given the national
facilities of CBS television and radio to give
hla views to the American people. Tliere was
no Immediate rebuttal or exposure of his mls-
Btatements. Nor was there any reciprocal
opportunity for a similarly authoritative
American spokesman to present our views to
the Soviet people, an opportunity Mr. Khru-
bhchev should have been eager to give If he
were sincere. Only yesterday was there a na-
tionwide radio and television effort here to
analyze Mr. Khrushchev's remarks and this
was an anticlimax. No corresponding oppor-
tunity for speaking to the Soviet people has
yet been given any authoritative American.
This Is obviously an unsatisfactory situa-
tion. It Is one from which a lesson should
be learned If similar mlsukes are not to be
repeated But we must understand the prob-
lem. That problem Is not. as President Eisen-
hower said last week, that CBS is "a commer-
cial firm In this country trj-lng to Improve
Its own commercial standing." The Colum-
bia Broadcasting System acted In our tradi-
tion of free speech and free debate In the
knowledge that what It was doing might also
b.-tng commercial harm.

The real problem Is the lack of Imagination
In many quarters. This was shown by the
failure to follow the Khrushchev Interview
quickly with adequnte official analysis. Even
more serious, the Khrushchev Interview was
not made the occasion for cfflclally challeng-
ing the Soviet Government to give equal op-
portunity for presentation of our point of
view to the Soviet people.

We need, obviously, a more positive and
more imaginative attitude toward the war of
Ide.is An example of such an attitude Is
.Senator Ltndo.v Johnsons suggestion that
radio and television be used to permit sys-
tematic presentation of American views to
the Soviet people and Soviet views to the
American people. Reciprocity Is the key to
the problem, and ideas such as Senator John-
son's for a real exchange of Ideas, not merely
a one-way propaganda coup as Mr. Khru-
shchev succeeded In getUng. certainly de-
serve serious consideration.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President. I
ask unanimous consent to have printed
an editorial from the Washington Post
of this morning, on the same subject.

There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

An Open CtnrrAiN?

The Jeffersonlan principle that truth will
vanquish error "where reason la left free to
combat It" may have been temporarily sus-
pended In Russia after 40 years of Commu-
nist Indoctrination. But even so there is
still only one way to cope with the enforced
Ignorance of the Russian people on Inter-
national affairs, which adds so greatly to the
worlds perils, and that Is to beat everlast-
ingly upon the Iron Curtain until It parts.

There will be a great deal of support for
Senate Majority Leader Johicson's proposal
that the United States ought to press for
fuller opportunities to sUte its case on
disarmament and other Issues to the Rus-
sian people. And most Americans will
share Senator Johnson's confidence that
this country would have nothing whatever
to fear from offering the Russians contin-

uing and equivalent opportunities In the
United States.

Fear that Communist speeches will Im-
peril American democracy will be felt only
by those with the least ooniklence In our
Institutions. By the same token, if the
Communists have any confidence In their
Institutions they will not be afraid to allow
information from non-Communist countries
to cross their borders. An exchange of in-
formation is not going to prove Kbruschev
right or wrong In his boastful forecast that
our grandchildren will live under socialism.
Unless the alms of East and West are better
understood, the grim Issue may be whether
or not our grandchildren will live at all. In
either a socialist or capitalist world. That
Is the awful danger that gives force to
Senator Johnson's proposal for fuller access
In each country to the views of other coun-
tries.

OBSTACLES IN SEARCH FOR WORLD
PEACE

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, It seems to me that there is one
key to the situation which confronts us.
It is the extent to which we have faith in
the people when they have the oppor-
tunity to hear all the facts and weigh
l>oth sides of the issue.

Since the end of World War n. this
country has consistently taken the lead
in trying to bring peace and justice to
this world. And yet, our proposals —
some of the most daring and imagina-
tive in history— have failed.

We offered to share the secrets of the
atomic bomb at a time when we possessed
a monopoly of those secrets. We offered
to reduce the swollen armaments budgets
of this world — and we made that offer
in good faith.

We have poured out our treasure to
help the unfortunate of this world to a
better and more secure life. We have
spent staggering sums to bring health
and the blessings of modem science to
the dark comers of the globe.

And yet, the world remains divided
into two camps — each camp ready to leap
into universal destruction.

There is only one reason for this sit-
uation. It is the success which the Com-
munist leaders have had in withholding
the truth from their own people.

They have gone even further. The
Communist leaders have made posses-
sion of the truth — by any but a favored
few — an offense agaiilSlthe state

This is the rock upon which every
reasonable proposal has foundered since
the end of World War II. It is the rock
upon which future proposals well may
founder.

The Russian people do not know. And
I believe we should seize every oppor-
tunity to bring the truth to them. The
Khrushchev broadcast strikes me as one
of those opportunities.

I do not deplore the fact that a Rus-
sian Communist leader can state his
doctrine directly to the American people.
I would deplore, however, an attitude
which states that we can do nothing
about it.

The alternatives to breaching the Iron
Curtain which seals out truth are bleak.
Even though worldwide nuclear war
should never come to pass, the arms race
all by itself is enough to destroy us.

Since the end of World War n, this
Nation alone has spent more than $416,-
381.606,900 on the cold war. And we
have $44,098,235,520 left over that Con-
gress has appropriated but which we
have not yet got around to spending.

How many slums could have been
cleared with that money? How many
rivers could have been dammed at a
fraction of that cost? How much power
could have been generated to produce
the goods of peace and prosperity?

Our national debt stands today at
$274 billion. It hangs over our heads,
threatening and menacing to our whole
economy and to the economy future
generations will inherit.

Would we be under that threat to-
day if the people of the world had an
opporttmity to hear and to weigh all
the facts?

* The figures I have cited represent not
only dollars but time and effort and re-
sources. They could have been applied
to research into cancer and heart dis-
ease; into reclaiming our soil; into bet-
tering our lives.

As one who has confidence in people,
wherever they may be, I favor giving
them the opportunity to make up their
own minds.

And in Khrushchev declines this pro-
posal, let him explain why to the world.
Let him explain why Americans can hear
his case and why Russians cannot be
permitted to hear our case.

It would be interesting to hear the
Communist representatives explain this
point in some such forum as the United
Nations.

Mr. President, I have had my staff
draw up a table on the amount of money
this Nation has spent on the cold war*
since the end of World War II. I ask
unanimous consent that this table be
printed in the Record as a part of my
remarks.

There being no objection, the table
was ordered to be printed in the Record.
as follows:

Expenditures, fiscal year 1946 through fiscal
year 1957. and unexpended balances, June
30. 1957, for certain selected agencies

Agency

ETpenditurPs

fiscal year 1M6.

fi.scal year 1957

(estimated)

Atomic Enorpy Com- I

mission ,$15,000,000,000

Department of Defense,

military functions 1342. 900. 000, 000

Foreign aid ' 57, 6«t, 000, 000

VSIA 881.606,800

Total.

Unexpended

baliiiices,
June 30. 1957

$1. 300, 000. (100

37. 400. 000, nno

6,U00.(UII. (KK)
28. 23.^ 520

416,381,606,800 44,088,235,520

» Total deBvered.

Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield.

Mr. CHURCH. I should like to asso-
ciate myself with the remarks of my
distinguished colleagues this morning in
commending our distinguished majority
leader for the address he made on Satur-
day evening In New York City. The Iron
Curtain proposal contained in that ad-
dress is both courageous and imagina-
tive. I wish to commend the distin-
guished Senator from Texas for it. and to
say to him that it represents the kind of

8580

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

Initiative that is so sorely needed In
America's foreign policy. It is a most
significant contribution. I want him to
know that I appreciate what he did in
New York, and I believe the American
people at large will appreciate the speech
he has made.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I thank the
Senator from Idaho.

Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield.

Mr. SMATHERS. I should like to join
my colleagues in commending our able
majority leader for his speech Saturday
evening in New York, as well as for the
originality and courage of his ideas pre-
sented ^to us today. It is this type of
incomparable leadership that we have
come to expect from the Senator from
Texas, who now sees, on the basis of the
television appearance made by Mr.
Khrushchev, an opportunity for us of the
United States to breach the Iron Curtain
of ideas which now separates the average
citizen of Russia and the satellite coun-
tries from the people of America and the
ideas and ideals of Americans.

We are satisfied, I am sure, that the
average citizen of the Soviet Union and
the satellite countries is just as anxious
for peace as are we. However, they have
not had the opportunity to learn what
we really think nor how sincerely we de-
sire peace. Surely in response to Mr.
Khrushchev some spokesman for the
people of America could make their de-
sires and ideals clear to the people of the
Soviet Union and the satellite countries.

I wish again to congratulate our ma-
jority leader for his demonstrated cour-
age and vision. I am certain that this
idea which he has planted and this chal-
lenge which he has issued to the leaders
of the Soviet World will contribute much
toward the solution of these now crucial
problems which confront us.

Mr. LONG. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield''

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield.

Mr. LONG. I wish to congratulate the
Senator from Texas for the efforts and
ideas he has contributed to the struggle
for man's survival. Undoubtedly there
is now a much better chance of arriving
at some understanding whereby the
United States and the Soviet Union, and
all the nations of the world will be able
to live in peace.

It was impossible to work along that
line with Stalin. However, I believe that
the present leaders of Russia realize that
there is a much greater danger of war
so long as the armament race goes on.
and that through some kind of accident
cr some miscalculation these two great
nations could be plunged into a world
war, a war which neither Nation wants.

I believe that there is now a possi-
bility that perhaps the Iron Curtain will
be lifted. For many years the Commu-
nists would not permit that curtain to
be lifted. The Communists did not want
the people of their country to know that
the people of other nations were living
much better than they were. I think
that the chances for arriving at a satis-
factory disarmament agreement are
much better today than they have been
in the past.

The Senator has made a very signifi-
cant contribution.

Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. JOHNSON of Te.xas. I yield to
the Senator from Mississippi.

Mr. STENNIS. I read yesterday the
remarks of the Senator from Texas in
his speech on Saturday evening, and was
very much impressed indeed with the
substance of it and the suggestions he
made.

I believe there is a good chance that
the speech will prove to be a landmark
and turning point in International af-
fairs, or in the cold war or the arma-
ment race — or whatever we may wish to
term the present condition. Some such
procedure as that suggested by the Sen-
ator from Texas is the only thing that
will stop the arms race. I am not sug-
gesting, of course, that we disband our
military forces. Far from it. However,
some kind of approach involving, per-
haps, sitting down at the table together
and talking things over will be necessary
in order to reach the Russian people. I
personally beheve that Mr. Khrushchev
has given us an opportunity which ought
to be followed up. I very heartily com-
mend the Senator from Texas for his
remarks on Saturday evening and for
his very timely remarks today. I hope
he will continue to give his attention to
this subject.

I Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I thank the
Senator from Mississippi.

Mr. SYMLNGTON. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield.

Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President,
along with my other colleagues, I con-
gratulate the majority leader for his
wise and constructive remarks in New
York last Saturday evening. What the
people of America desire, along with the
people of all other countries is perma-
nent world peace.

It IS now clear that peace cannot be
attained except through mutually
agreed upon inspection proof disarma-
ment. Such disarmament can never
occur unless we open and maintain av-
enues of discussion witii the rulers be-
hind the Iron Curtain.

It IS for that reason I again congratu-
late the able Senator from Texas for
his outstanding contribution Saturday to
permanent world peace.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Pres-
ident. I am deeply grateful to my col-
leagues for their expres.sions of confi-
dence. I wish to conclude with this
one thought.

If this propasal were advanced by our
Government I believe the eyes of the
entire world would be looking toward
Mr. Khrushchev for his reaction. If his
reply were in the negative, we would
have to e.xplain why Americans can hear
his ca.se and see his face and hear his
voice but why Russian people are denied
the opporttmity of hearmg America's
case.

Mr GREEN. Mr. President. I wi.sh to
join my colleague.s in paying tribute to
the majority leader for the splendid
work he has done. Overnight he has
attracted the attention of the civilized
world to a very important point In the
present state of affairs, and I trust that

the response to his appeal by the civi-
lized world will be just what he has
anticipated.

Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, there
appeared in the Washington Star of to-
day an editorial relating to the timely
suggestion of the distinguished majority
leader, the Senator from Texas. The
editorial is entitled "An 'Open Curtain' "
and reads as follows:

An ' Opfn Cu«tain*

Ltndon Johnson la making a typical
American proposal In suggesting that the
curtain b« opened for a free flow of truth
between the United SUtes and the Soviet
Union. And it Is unlikely that many Ameri-
cans. ofBclal or otherwise, would be appre-
hensive of the results If a genuinely fre«
and uncensored exchange of "direct argu-
ment" via radio and television were estab-
lished between the two countries.

At the same time, the Texas Senator him-
self put his finger on the major obstacle to
opening this channel. It Is. In short, that
the Communist dictatorship has an abiding
fear of the truth reaching its captive peo-
ples. For it was this dictatorship to which
he referred when he spoke of "the small
groups of selfish and twisted men who with-
hold from their fellow human beings the
indispensable t<x)l of freedom — the truth."

There Is. nevertheless, a timeliness to Mr.
Johnson's proposal. There has been clear
Indication that even the Communist leader-
ship Is appalled at what may be the conse-
quences If continuing devek;pnient of awe-
some new weapons someday leads the world
to another all-out war. These men them-
selves appear to t>e seeking an alternative,
even If designed fur selfish pur|X)»es In his
television appearance before an American
audience. NlkUa Khrushchev b<.a.sted that
the Communist states could hold their own
In any form of competition with the capi-
talist world Mr Johnson has suggested (jne
form— a competition of Ideas, to t>c waged.
not by p.)lltlclaiis primarily, but by leaders
of Industry and workers, by farmers, scholars,
and proffs.slonal men. with the people as Jury.
We hope Mr. Khruahchev will accept the
challenge.

I compliment the majority leader on
his qreat si>eech. and I de^re to asso-
ciate myself with his remarks.

Mr. HUMPHREY subsequently said:
Mr. President, I could not help but note
with genuine gratitude and approval the
fine address of the majority leader, the
Senator from Texas I Mr. John.sonI be-
fore the annual conference of the United
Jewish Appeal, in New York City on
June 8. I note that in that address the
majority leader has again called to the
attention of the public the deep concern
of the American people over the contin-
uation of thermonuclear weapon testing.

He also made a most constructive pro-
posal with respect to the Open Curtain.
using great powers of persuasion, and
offering a constructive argument for
breaking down the Iron Curtain and
trying to eradicate prejudice and
differences.

I commend the Senator from Texas,
as I understand others of my colleagues
have appropriately done, for this
thought-provoking . f orw ard-looking,
and most constructive message. It is a
message which sets the theme for fu-
ture thinking on the part of Members
of the Congress, and I hope of all citi-
zens throughout the land.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas subsequently
said; Mr. President. I shall not detain the

1957.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Senate long, but I desire to express my
very deep thanks to the distinguished
Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Pulbright],
the distinguished Senator from Montana
J Mr. MANsriELD], the distinguished Sen-
ator from Georgia I Mr. Talmadce], the
distinguished Senator from Idaho [Mr,
Church ] , the distinguished Senator from
Missouri [Mr. Symington], the distin-
guished Senator from Mississippi [Mr.
Stennis], the distinguished Senator from
Florida [Mr. SmathersJ. the distin-
guished chairman of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee [Mr. Green], and
the distinguished Senator from Minne-
sota (Mr. Humphrey], for their kind and
generous references to a speech which I
delivered In New York on Saturday last.

8581

OUR STAKE IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent to have printed
in the Record an address delivered by
Mr. David Rockefeller, vice chairman of
the board, of the Chase Manhattan Bank.
at the Arkansas Bankers Association an-
nual convention at the Arlington Hotel,
Hot Springs. Ark., on May 22, 1957, en-
titled "Our Stake in the Middle East."

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed In the Record,
as follows :

OuB Stake in thi Middle East

It 1« a great pleasure for me to be here
today at the Arkansas Bankers Convention
In this land which has been so very hospi-
table to my brother. Win, and which he has
adopted as his home. I am particularly
happy to have a chance to see at firsthand
the remarkable progress you are making In
this part of the country. I know that bank-
ing has played a most Important role in
stimulating the sound development and ex-
pansion of Industry, commerce, and farming
In Arkansas and. her neighboring States.
From all I have seen and heard, the banks of
Arkansas are to be congratulated on the fine
Job that has been done, and you should look
forward with confidence to continued ad-
vance* in the period ahead.

When Jeff Burnett of the Arkansas Bankers
Association asked me to speak to you today,
we talked about what I might say to you
which would b« of Interest. I suggested
that this might be an appropriate time to
discuss "Our Stake in the Middle East."
Developments in the Middle East have oc-
cupied substantial space on the front pages
of our newspapers In the pcwt 6 months. We
have seen the seizure of the Suez Canal, the
attack on Egypt, the U. N. cease-fire followed
by the clearing of the canal, and more re-
cently, the crisis in Jordan. In one sense,
these events may seem remote, but in an-
other they have a very Important bearing on
all of our lives.

The events we have mentioned have. In-
deed, been dramatic. Yet what I wish to
emphasize today is not the news of the
hour — or even of recent months — but rather
the emergence of certain basic long-term
facU and trends which cause the Middle
East to assume a role of new and lasting
Importance for the whole Western World.

Why is It then that developments In the
vast and far-away area of the Middle East
should even affect banks and bank customers
in the center of our country? To my mind,
an answer to this question Involves two main
considerations. First, the Middle East Is one
of the key strategic areas of the world. We
have a series of mUltary bases there that
form an Integral part of our defense struc-
ture. These bases, and the recently pro-
claimed Elsenhower doctrine, reflect the Im-

portance which our Government assigns to
the area from the point of view of our stra-
tegic defense against Russian aggression.
Because It is at the crossroads of Asia, Europe,
and Africa and contains 1 of the 2 major
canals of the world, the Middle East Is of
crucial importance to the economies of all
the nations of the Free World, both In peace-
time and In war. If the cause of freedom la
to win out, It Is vitally Important to us to
secure the support of the peoples of this
area In our efforts to work out a secure and
lasting peace. This Is the politico-military
side of the picture.

There Is. however, a second reason for our
concern about the Middle EMt, It Is an area
which contains 70 percent of the world's
proven oU reserves, but which now uses only
1 percent of the world's annual production.
In contrast, the United States has only 15
percent of world petroleum reserves and uses
more than half of all the petroleum and
petroleum products the world now produces
each year. Europe, the second most Impor-
tant market, has very little oil of Its own.
As the demand for oil in Europe and the
America grows, the economic Importance of
Middle Eastern oU t/o the Free World grows
correspondingly.

However, It could be that this very dis-
parity between the countries having the big
petroleum reserves and those which are the
big consumers of petroleum will prove to be
the basis for the development of sound and
lasting economic relationships between the
Industrialized nations of the West and the
iinderdeveloi}ed nations of the Middle East.
Both the United States and Western Europe
need the oil which the Middle East can sup-
ply. By meeting this need, the Middle East
can earn the funds and the foreign exchange
necessary to support Its general economic
development.

To see why the nations of the Western
World, and those of the Middle East, have a
compelling mutual Interest In development
of the latter's vast petroleum resources. It
Is necessary to turn first to the basic trends
In the world's supply of energy. An ade-
quate supply of energy at reasonable cost —
from coal. oil. natural gas. or other sources-
Is obviously a necessary condition for eco-
nomic progress In the world of today. Our
rising productivity depends on our abUlty
to supplement human effort with energy
applied through machines. Only through
the harnessing of an ever-expanding amount
of energy have we been able to Increase our
production at a rate that has exceeded the
growth in our population. Only In this way
has it been possible to keep pushing up our
living standards.

Until recently, both the United States
and Western Europe were able to provide
the Increasing supplies of the energy they
needed to support industrial growth largely
from domestic resources. During the past
few decades here In our own country, we
have had a truly phenomenal Increase in oil
and natural-gas production. But since
1920. our use of oU has multiplied 7 times,
and our use of natural gas 10 times. Thus,
despite our growth in production, we were
forced to become a net Importer of petro-
leum and petroleum products about a dec-
age ago. We now Import about a tenth of
the oil we use.

It has been through developing our petro-
leum and natural -gas resources that we
have been able to meet our expanding needs
fbr energy at costs the Nation could afford
to pay. Our use of energy has shown a
long-term growth averaging 3.3 percent per
year, or somewhat more than the average
annual growth of our production of goods
and services. However, the overall cost of
supplying the energy the United States uses
has Increased from 4>4 percent of ovir gross
national product in 1900 to almost 7 percent
today, a 55 percent Increase. Energy is still
relatively low-priced in our country, but It

Is important to our future growth that we
keep It that way, A 60 percent increase In
the relative cost of energy in the next 50
years might weU slow down the rate at which
we could afford to use more energy. There-
fore, we must seek ways that promise to pre-
vent the cost of the energy the Nation
requires from exceeding the present ratio
of 7 percent of total output.

In Western Europe, the problem is some-
what different. There, the primary source
of energy has been coal — in fact, coal stUl
provides 70 percent of all energy on that
continent (as against about 20 percent in the
United States) . Nevertheless, as recently as
1948, Western Europe met almost 90 percent
of its energy needs from domestic production
of coal and other fuels. But since that time,
the industrial economy of Western Europe
has experienced a considerable growth, whUe
their domestic production of coal and other
energy sources was bumping against a cell-
ing. Thus, Western Europe U now import-
ing about a fifth of Its energy requirements
(or twice the proportion we Import). Here
again, as is the case in the United States,
the rising cost of energy is also a source of
concern in Europe.

This brief review of recent trends in the
United States and Western Eiirope shows
that there has been a fundamental shift in
the relationship between the demand for
energy and the world distribution of energy
sources. The industrialized nations of the
West must now import a sizable part of
the energy they use. However, the real
significance of these trends emerges when
you take a look at the future. A number of
competent studies of probable future trends
in the energy field have been made by gov-
ernmental, international, and private insti-
tutions. In my opinion, which I hope is
unbiased, one of the most authoritative of
these is the recent report prepared by the
petroleum department of the Chase Man-
hattan Bank.

But our studies show that the continued
prosperity pnd expansion of the economies of
our Nation and that of Western Europe de-
pend on the accelerated expansion of petro-
leum production throughout the Free World,
for they anticipate an Increase in petroleum
consoimptlon in the Free World of more
than 80 percent between 1956 and 1966. The
Increase for the United States itself la
projected at 63 percent, whereas it Is fore-
cast that use In the rest of the Free World
wUl more than double.

Where will we find the large pietroleum
supplies to meet this growing demand? Our
petroleum department believes the United
States domestic petroleum production may
weU rise almost 40 percent by 1966. How-
ever, it is unlikely to increase any more
than this. It is not that the United SUtee
Is running out of oU — far from it. But to
continue to increase production 5 percent
each year would Involve a massive effort
and a massive treatment. Even to sustain
the 40 percent growth projected for 1966
means that we must find IVi barrels of oil
for each barrel produced, if we are to have
adequate reserves. In the past 5 years, we
have fallen short of this requirement.

The reason we have faUen short is that
the cost of increasing our oU reserves has
been rising steadily, i am told that the
reserves added for each exploratory well
drilled have declined from 450.000 barrels
10 years ago. to less than 200,000 barrels
last year. And the cost of eiqjloratlon has
moved steadily higher. This is a hard fact
with which I know all of you here In the
Southwest are all too familiar.

In order to avoid a sharp advance in the
cost of meeting our needs for petroleum, we
must inevitably interest oxirselves more ac-
tively in foreign sources of oU. I would lUca
to emphasize that we shoiUd do this not to
replace the present flow from domestlo
sources, but to supplement it. In looking

8582

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

abroad for additional petroleum supplies. It
13 natural that we ahould consider first th«
areas closest to us. Various surveys that
have been made show that production in
Canada, Venezuela, and other nations In
the Americas could be Increased rapidly
enough, and economically enough, to sup-
ply the bulk of the Western Hemisphere's
requirements.

The situation In Europe, however. Is radi-
cally dltferent. Careful studies show that
even with a large-scale Investment prcijram.
the present prospect Is that Western Eu-
rope's output of coal, oil, natural ga-s. and
nucleiir power combined could be Increased
by no more than a third In the next 20
years. That would meet little more than
one-third of the area's anticipated requlre-
mejits for an Increased flow of energy to
support continued economic advance. In
the fhort-term future, the only source
Western Europe can turn to (or additional
energy supplies at reasonable co*it Is the
Middle East.

In point of fact, unless vast new and un-
anticipated deposits are discovered. It seems
clear that the Western Hemisphere alone
could meet only about half the foreseen re-
quirements of the rree World as a whole for
increased oil supplies during the ncit 10
years. And this is why the Middle East Is
£.-) Important. There Is not the sll'^htest
diubt that the Middle East has the physical
capacity to produce as much oil as is needed
to balance world demand In the foreseeable
future. Moreover, the basic costs of pro-
duction In that area (assuming reasonable
arrangements far tax payments to local gov-
ernments) are likely to be lower than In
other parts of the world

Consequently, the Free World Is becoming
m.ore and more dependent on the Middle
East. This fact emerges most clearly when
you consider that the fiiture growth nf the
Western European economy Is almost wholly
dependent on an increased flow of Middle
East oil. This is true despite the fact that
oil shortage resulting from tht recent crisis
arising out of the closing of the Suez Canal
was handled on an emergency and strictly
temporary basis in admirable fa."<h!on with
the help of the United States. The oil In-
dustry rose to the challenge and did a re-
markable job In rearranging the fliw of
world oil to meet Western B'.-.rope's needs
with a minimum of disruption. H'^wever.
tlie very fact that E'.irope's use of oil Is grow-
ing at a rate of 13 percent per ye.\r points
to the fact that it will be more and more
dlflJcult to deal with a similar crisis should
It occur a few rears hence.

The Suez crisis emphasized how vulner-
able future growth prospects In both Europe
and the United States are to t.ie shifting
political tides in the Middle East. In Exirope,
this realization has acted as a powerful spur
t.-» the development of a, common market
encompassing sl.x of the nations of Western
Europe. This Is a good thing for a fr»»e
trade area in Europe (or the com.mon market
ns '.t has come to be called) cotild strengthen
tlie economies of the western E'.iropean na-
tions making them less vulnerable to exter-
na! developments.

In addition, the Suez crisis has pro^'lded a
c-eat im.petus to the search for oil In the
Sahara Desert and In Latin America; to the
building of huge tankers; and to pl.ins for
the constrxictlon of additional pipelines to
r-iove Middle East oil to Medlt»rranean ports
where It can be shipped to Europe.

The Impact of Suez on our own economy
has been less dramatic, since we were able
t J surmount the recent crisis without resort-
ing to rationing or other measures of the
snrt that evoke a widespread public response.
Yet Indirectly the long-run Implications may
well be as significant for the United States
as for Western Europe. We have a vital
Interest in the continued military and eco-
nomic well-being of Western Europe. On the

military side, the N.\TO alliance Is perhaps
the keystone In our attempt to build a seciirw
peace. But NATO would quickly be placed
In Jeopardy If an adequate flow of oil to
Europe were Interrupted. NATO's vulner-
ability to an oil shortage was brought home
most vividly in the recent Sues crisis.

On the economic side, we Bhould be con-
cerned about Western Europe's enerjry prob-
lems since even with the substantial
resources of the Americas, the Western
Hemisphere does not appear to have a petro-
leum supply adequate to meet the require-
ments of tiie er.tire tree World in the next
few decades. An attempt to d<i without
Middle Bast oil would complicate our energy
problems encrm<3usly. bcth from a siippiy
and a cost point of view.

It seems clear, then, that the Western
World has a moct vital Interest In the Middle
East. In view of the perplexing political
problems surrnundlns? th.\t area, this Is far
from a reassurli^t; conclusion. What I should
like to sviKgect today, however. Is that we
should ntjt approach our position In the
^nddle East with a defe»itl«t attitude. Th«
problems we face offer us a challenging op-
portunity to demonstrate what can be
iiccompiished throukjh private foreign Invest-
ment supplemented by a realistic program
of Ciovernment technical assistance and
developmental aid.

Consider for a moment the bare economic
f.icts of the Middle East as we find them
tcxlay. The a.'-ea includes 19 political en-
titles with a population of 80 million pe«iple.
Most of the Inhabitants now exist at a mini-
mum subsistence level: so low a level. In
t^ct. that the average Incme per person Is
probably no more than $100 a year. The
overall ectmcmy of the area produces no
more than 98-10 billion dollars of goods
and services annii.TUy — a small amount In-
deed compeared to o\u" standards.

In this situation, earnings from oil If
wisely used, could make a tremendous con-
tribution to the area's isconomlc de.elop-
ment. Estimates are that the Middle East's
share In last years petroleum prodvictlon
amounted to approximately tl billion.
That was 4 times the amount the area
rerelved In 1950. only 6 years earlier The
$1 billion earned from oil amounted to
about 10 percent of the t.'tal production of
fie Middle Ea^t, and to a third of Its for-
eign exchange earnings.

Projections of the world petroleum de-
n:and for 1968 show that the Middle E-^st
could readily increw.se its annual produc-
tion 2 '-2 times by that year. Thus, earn-
ings from oil could Ukewrlse Increase to *2 4
billion annually by lfi66. Over the total
10-year period, the area co\ild look forward
to receipts of al>jut $18 billion from oil
development.

If these earnings could be channeled Into
productive Investment, they could generate
a Blgnlflcnnt rise In living standards
throughout the Middle East. Exjjerience
around the world shows that the nations
which mr-nnge to ln\-est as much as 15-20
percent of their annual production In roftd."^.
Industrial equipment, farm development
and the lll^e achieve a stibstantlal rate of
economic pmgTe«xS. Earnings from ot! are
sufflctent to lift the rate of Investment In
tlie Middle East Into this 15-20 percent
range and thus help generate an upward
movement in living standards throughout
the area.

What Is want'*d Is a program to sow the
o'.l en the general pattern that has proven
S(i suc^pysful In VenezTrrela. Venezuela has
used oil earnings to finance general eco-
nomic development. As a result, real In-
come per person has Increased 50 percent
In the past 15 years. Similar results are
achievable in the Middle East.

However, the problem of channeling oil
earnings Into growth-promoting activities Is
more complex in the Middle East than in

Venezuela because there we are dealing with
10 political units of widely differing char-
acteristics and problems. Moreover, direct
receipu from oil production accrue to only
6 of these Id nations. But other nations,
as for example Egypt. S>Tla, and Jordan,
could benefit from oil production, and could
earn subsuntlal sums by fumlahlng effi-
cient faclUtiea to tranaport oil to market.
Egypt has been capitallrlng on Uxla Uirough
her control of the Suea Car.al.

It to Imporuuit to recognize, however,
that In the long run no nation (not even
Egypt) has a true monopoly of the means
cf transport for oil, or e\-en of oil produc-
tion. The huge Unkers now being built
are. In fact, too big to {uua through the
tuer. And the economics of tanker opera-
tions point to even bigger units.

Given time and sufficient capital invest-
ment In huge tankers, pipelines and the
search for new oU reeenree. the Western World
could bypa-w any artificial bArrlers such as
E-vpt Is using In Suez — barriers that are Im-
po.'^ed under the Influence of shortsighted
jpoUtical pressures. In any event, oil re-
mains the major opportunity — tlis great re-
6 jurce — which. If Intelligently ut<d, can lift
the Middle East from Its present level of rela-
iive povertj .

Some Middle Eastern natl<"m9 have already
made good progress In putting ,4>ll earnings
to work to support general economic de-
velopment. Iraq has completed major flood-
control projects on the Tigris and Euphrates
Rivers, and Is now working un a 6-year, iU/^
billion development program. lu oh-rlch
little Kuwait, where nil revenues amount to
the fantastic figure of $1100 per person each
year, a prugram is uiKlerway to build rtxids.
develop a port, and buUd a plpelme to brlnf
water friom Iraq.

However, the fact that oil earnings (tha
Middle East's major source of foreign ex-
change) are not evenly distributed through-
out the region has led to uneven develop-
rr>ent. Some of the major otl-prxluclng na-
tions have greater annual revenufw than they
ran lise effectively In their present state of
development, whereas other nations are
hard pressed for funds to flnar ce develop-
ment. Prom a financial standpoint, there-
fore, there Is need for a regional approach
to the area's problems.

In fact, an ImpresslTe run-ber of the
Middle E.'St's general problems can be solved
efficiently only if handled on a regional basis.
In broad terms, the two major jiroblems are
to develop a transp<jrtatlon syitem and to
bring water to parched lands. "Hiree con-
crete examples can be advanced to support
the case for a regional, as opposed to a na-
tional, effort:

1. The waters of the Nile could be used
to develop agriculture not only In Egypt, but
also In Ethiopia and the Sudan

2. The Jordan River could be .levelop««d to
provide power and Irrigation In a manner
that would benefit countries surrounding It;

3. The Suez Canal could be widened and
deepened to accommodate the ^ uge tnnkers
now being built, thus Increasing: the flow of
trade through one of the major arterle* of
the world.

These are only a few of the mf ny examples
of what might be done If a method could be
found to u.se the region's massive earnings
from oil effectively.

One way of accomplishing this might be to
e.^tabllsh a regfional developme it authority
which would channel the surp iis funds of
the nations with kirge oil earnings Into pro-
ductive activities throughout the area.
While I am always reluctant tc suggest the
creation of a new agency In a world that Is
already generously endowed In this respect,
I do not believe that any existing organiza-
tion can All the need. Moreover, In view of
the nnt\ire of the problems. It would seem
df5lrab!e to have a new agency that the Mid-
dle East countries would consld .»r their own.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8583

In setting up such a regional development
Authority, I would urge that Its structure
and operations be patterned on those of the
World Bank, which, through its progressive
Ideals coupled with able and conservative
management, has been by all odds the most
effective of all our postwar international
economic organizations. 8uch a regional de-
velopment authority. I believe, should make
only sound loans and Investments. It should
follow the World Bank practice of making
sure that the projects it finances fit into an
economically sound development program
for the borrowing country. Its management
should be competent and nonpolltlcal. In
fact, It might be desirable to work out an
arrangement by which the World Bank
would provide technical assistance to the
regional development authority in finding
personnel and developing Its pattern of
operations.

If a balanced and constructive regional de-
velopment authority could be esUbllshed. It
might be desirable to use it as the mecha-
nism for handling a part of the $200 million
of United States Government aid funds allo-
cated to the Middle East under the Elsen-
hower Doctrine. In addition, if such an In-
strumentality were to exist, the oil compa-
nies themselves might see fit to take part In
some of Its activities.

There Is. of course, no guaranty that such
an authority would solve all the perplexing
political, social and economic problems of
the Middle East. Yet. I am sure It would be
an important step in the right direction, for
without It. It is hard to see how the varied
and confiicting forces In the Middle East
could be brought together to solve the com-
plex economic problems which confront
them. Such an authority would serve our
Interest In helping to promote the economic
development of an area that is of crucial
Importance to our future security and pros-
perity. While economic growth Is no panacea
In Itself. It may well be a prerequisite to
progress on the social and political fronts
and thus It can contribute Importantly to
world peace and stability.

1 have talked today about developments
In a part of the world that seems far away
from us here In Hot Springs. Yet. as I have
tried to show, what happens in the Middle
East In the years ahead can have an im-
portant, perhaps even a decisive effect on our
own Nation's security and prosperity. Mid-
dle East oil development can be expected to
continue, and. In fact, some projections
show that in 10 years production there will
be four-fifths as large as that in the United
States. Over a longer period. Middle East
production of oil may exceed our own. This
is bound to have a strong effect on our in-
dustry. As Middle East oil production ex-
pands, the area could become one of the
fastest growing markets for United States
machinery, equipment and other goods. Our
total trade with this region, both exports
nnd Imports, now exceed a billion dollars.
But If we keep our share of the market, our
exports to the Middle East could go up al-
most 10 percent per year In the next decade.
It seems to me more and more clear that
American businessmen and bankers need to
keep up to date and well Informed on Middle
East developments.

In stressing the Importance of the Middle
East and the opportunities that can be
opened up by the effective use of Its huge
oil resources. I do not wish to minimize the
very real difficulties we can expect to en-
counter on the political front. As all of you
know, it is a region of historic racial, re-
ligious and political tensions, both domestic
and international. It is also at present one
of the primary targets of Soviet penetration.
We can be sure that every possible device will
be used by Russia to promote Its Interest*
in that area.

Yet, as I have tried to point out, the diffi-
culty of the task should not blind us to the

fact that the Middle East Is vitally Important
to us. nor should It deter xis from pursuing
a positive and vigorous program. Fortu-
nately, there Is an Interdependence between
the Middle East and ourselves, for their only
hope of using their oil effectively in the sup-
port of general economic progress lies in
cooperating with the West.

Our task Is first one of understanding. We
cannot act intelligently until we know the
history, the ambitions and the mentality of
the people who, for centuries, have lived in
the Middle East. Next, we must formulate
a program which takes Into account both
our own objectives and theirs. Finally, we
must proceed on our course with conviction,
strength and statesmanship. Our stake in
the Middle East is huge. Let us not lose it
by Inaction or an ill-considered move.

RELATIONS WITH REPUBLIC OP
MEXICO

Mr, GOLDWATER. Mr. President,
while we in the Senate are concerned
about making friends for the United
States all around the globe, we occa-
sionally fail to remember that among
our closest friends are the people who
live immediately south of us, the Mex-
icans. There Is a country whose belief
in freedom is as firmly rooted as ours,
whose concepts of a constitutional re-
public are as firm as ours, and whose
people are as kind and generous, as re-
ligious and peaceful, as industrious and
productive, as our own people. Mexico
is not only a land of rich history, but
a country with a charming present and
a glorious future. It is a country to
which we should send the very best
representatives we can find as our am-
bassadors, and in the recent nomination
and confirmation of Robert C. Hill we
have done just that. Prom my long
acquaintance with the Mexican people
I feel certain that they will receive Bob
Hill as a friend and as an eminent rep-
resentative of the American people. I
look forward to an even closer relation-
ship with the Republic of Mexico when
Mr. Hill assimies his duties as Ambas-
sador to Mexico.

In this connection I aslr unanimous
consent that the hearings before the
Committee on Foreign Relations of the
United States Senate on the nomination
of Robert C. Hill to be Ambassador to
Mexico be printed at this point in my
remarks.

There being no objection, the hear-
ings were ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

Statucent or Bobekt C. Hill, or New
Hampshikx

Mr. Hill. Good morning, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, gentlemen.

The Chaixman. I won't ask you to give
your biography because I think you have
been In such close connection with the Sen-
ate that we are probably all familiar with it.

, KNOWLXDGE Or MEXICO

Have you any particular knowledge of
Mexico to which you have been appointed?

Mr. Hill. Mr. Chairman. I have only vis-
ited Mexico once in my life, and I was there
Just for a few days. However, when I was
Ambassador to Costa Rica and Ambassador
to El Salvador, I had occasion to be well
acquainted with the economic and political
problems In Central America because of the
nature of my duties and the proximity oX
the countries.

We had the weekly letter from Mexico
City, a very informative document which
was sent to all the embassies In the vicinity
of Central America. I read that weekly let-
ter, as well as the ones regarding Guatemala.
Honduras. El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras,
Costa Rica, and Panama. Over a period of
2V2 years. It gave me a knowledge of Mexico
and its problems.

When I came back to Washington and was
Special Assistant for Mutual Security Affairs
to the Under Secretary of State I was, from
time to time. Involved in discussions about
such matters as the air agreement with
Mexico. The Under Secretary asked me to
participate in the meetings.

But as far as having traveled in Mexico.
Mr. Chairman, I have only driven by auto-
mobile from Tapachula. Mexico, to Laredo,
Tex., on the Pan-American Highway, and I
have seen only the cities along that route.

I have not been to the Pacific coast or the
Atlantic coast in Mexico. But I do feel that
my experience in Washington and my 2»^
years in the field do give me more than a
speaking acquaintance with Mexico.

The Chairman. Do you speak Spanish?

Mr. Hnx. Mr. Chairman, I speak Spanish
so that I can get along socially. I would
never attempt to negotiate In the language
of the country that I was accredited to be-
cause I think that it is a bad mistake.

I have taken a lesson from Gladstone
when he said, "I speak French fluently, but
I would never negotiate in the language."

But as far as being able to get along with
Spanish-speaking people, it has never been
a problem because I like them.

The Chaixman. Are there any questions
anyone would like to ask?

Senator Wiley?

Senator Wilet. No; I have not any ques-
tions. I think he would make a good am-
bassador.

The Chairman. Senator Pulbeicht, any
questions?

Has anyone any questions?

MEXICAN AIB AGREEMENT

Senator Smpth. I would just like to greet
Mr. Hill here. I have seen him a number of
times, and It is a great pleasure. I told him
I would vote against him but for his charm-
ing wife. Now I am going to change my
mind and vote for him, too.

Senator Long. I hope you will be on the
job down there, Mr. Hill, by the time that
air service from New Orleans to Mexico City
is inaugurated.

Mr. Hill. Thank you very much. Senator.

As you know, the implementation of the
Mexican bilateral air treaty with the United
States can take effect after June 6 of this
year. I understand there are still negotia-
tions as to whom the route is to be given.

Senator Long. There is Just a question who
will fly from New York.

Mr. Hill. There is; yes. I understand the
nonstop flight is the one that Is under de-
liberation at the moment. I hope you wiU
come down for the Inaugural flight.

Senator Long. All the Senators involved
think that Eastern ought to fly from New
York, but I understand the examiner recom-
mended Pan American, so there will be a
dispute about that.

I would like to ask one or two more ques-
tions.

GRANTS AND LOANS TO MEXICO

Just from what you know about the prob-
lem, do you see any need of us making grants
to Mexico for developmental purposes?

Mr. Hill. Senator, I have thought a great
deal about this grant problem in Latin Amer-
ica. I made a speech in Los Angeles a few
weeks ago on the problem. In the speech I
took the position that I did not think the
United States Government should enter into
the grant programs in Latin America to any
great extent.

8584

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Ju7ie 10

You have ercepttona. as you Itnow — the
economy tn Guatemala, the situation In Bo-
livia, and tbe developing problem In Haiti.
The situation In Mexico from an economlo
and Industrial point of view la excellent.
Their oalance of payments and dollar stand-
ing is in good shape.

In my speech I stressed the beneficial ef-
fects of the free-enterprise system in the
United States and said that aa far as I could
see there is room for expansion in Latin
America.

I would recommend Government Icians
where they are Justified on projects which
are beyond the scope of normal banXing
practices.

As you know. Senator, there is a problem
in Mexico that is a long-lrrltatlng one — the
oil problem. You have not asked the ques-
tion, but It Is related to grants and k)an8.

I want to assure the committee I am not
TOlng to Mexico with any closed mind as to
the oil problem. I recognize It h:u been
troublesome s.nce the nationalization of the
properties many years a»o.

What the Government of Mexico has tn
mind as far as loans to the oil industry there
I do not know because I have not been In
contact.

But I assure you I will go with an npen
mind, and I will accept an invitation of the
Government of Mexico, if it is extended to
me. to visit the oil properties in Mexico so
that I can be well Informed on the problem.

Senator Lono It lo<3ks to me as though
private capital ts willing to go Into Mexico
and develop anything that needs developing
by outside capital. If tiie Government will
Just give Investors a fair deal. Includlnt; as-
Buratices tfiat ihey will have the opportunity
to make seme money and take that money
out eventually That Is the impression I
have had cf Mexico.

Mr Hill. Yes. sir.

Senator Moasx. Now that the witness has
raised the Mexican oil qviestion. I have a
few questions I want to a&ic. I will direct
some of them to Mr Rubottom later What
is your attitude in regard to the devel ipment
uf Mexican oil?

ATTrrrat toward mexic.\,n oil

Do you think the American Govcrnmer.t
should take the position that no loans should
be made to Pen'.ex as luni; as the Mexican
Government nationalizes Its oi; and thereby
exercises eccnoralc pressure tj try to direct
the domestic policy of another country to
our liking.

Mr Hill. Senator, as you well know, we
have to deal with fac'-s at hand In Mexico.
They did nationalize the properties, and they
have administered the oU properties for
many years. They may have a gond case as
far as the n*ed for money is concerned, but
I want to hear both sides of the story.

But I w«nt to assure ynu of this I will not
be a tool nf any special interests In Mexico
or any other country. I will go down there
and examine the case. If I am asked for a
recommendation. I will base it on the facts.

Senator Morse. Is It not true that thus far
the American Government has not looked
with favor upon Mexican requests for loans
for the development of oil resources, but
has 1( oked with favor upon loarvs Ilt other
phases of the Mexican economy?

Mr. Hiu.. I believe that Is an accurate
statement. Senator. It U a controversial
problem and I recognixe It.

INTIRISTS OF AMEXITAN OIL COMPANTXS

Senator Morst. Is It not true that great
American oil companies have ever .str.ce the
expropriation made strong repreiten'atlons
to the American State Department that no
loans be made to Pemex?

Mr Hnx. I could not answer thrit que<?tlnn.
Senator, because I am not directly aff!i,ited
with the area offlcially yet. I do not know
the situation.

Senator Moasx. Do you know anything
•bout the famotia Mexican Sabalo case?

Mr. Hill. No, I do not. I have not been
briefed aa yet by tbe Department on that
subject.

Senator Moasi. Do you know whether or
not a man named Ed Miller was onre head
of the Liitln American desk In the State De-
partment?

Mr Hill. Yes, I knew him when I was as-
scictated with W. R. Grace & Co. I believe
he Is practlclni? law In New York.

Senator Moa.sK. Bef >re he went to the De-
partment was he not a member of the leg. 1
staff uf the law firm of Sullivan &. Crom-
well In New York?

Mr. Hill. I don't know what Mr Miller's
affiliations were befi re comlr.g with the De-
partment of Slate, but I believe that he is
n.-i.'^oiiatpd with Sulliv \n fc Cmniwell row be-
caue he wrote me a letter of ct ntrratu'.a-
t:ons the other day and It w.as un the Sulli-
van & Cromwell stationery

Senator Mor^e Do you know whether or
not before he went to the State Department
to take over the Latin American dr«;k he was
the attorney of Sullivan ic Cromwell assigned
to the Sabalo case?

Mr Hill. I did r. it know that. sir.

Senator Moa.sa. Do you knew whether or
not, ncjw back with Sullivan St Cromwell, he
is again represent. ng the firm In connection
wl*h the Sabalo case""

Mr Kn.L. I do not know. s!r

RIOHT or MIXiro TO EXPaOPaL\TE

Senator Morsx. Let the record siiuw that
no one disapproves niure than I do the ex-
prn;.r;atlon I'f the oil. but do yi;a question
the ri^ht of the R''pub:;c of Mtxlco to ex-
propriate I's oil If It dec.des that should be
Its dumestlc ptllcv^

Mr HiLX. SenaU)r. I would have to answer
the question this way. because I ran t speak
from personal experience dealing with Mex-
ico. I was In Co( ta Rico as Ambassador when
the President u. C-JSta Rica talked in terms
of exproprlatU'ij^' properties of an American
Arm. the United FYult Co . In the a.Ta.
I am aware of the nationalistic spirit that
existed In Costa Rica

Costa Rica later settled for a 33', percent
Fhare of the profits, which was agreeable with
the United Fruit Co and as an observer I
wiuiessed that negotiation in Costa Rica.

But as far as the Mexican altuation is con-
cerned. ' could n t i^ive you a factual an-
swer becsMse I am not as yet acquainted with
the or. blt'm that you raised

We mav object, and object strenuously
when it affects an American corporation, but
if Ih? final decision is made and we have
used liie recourse of the courts and the prop-
erues are token over, we have to try to work
out the best arrangenients we can.

Sen.ator Moa.-;E The Mexican Government
t>i'< over the oil pr'ijects. did it not'

Mr Hn.L. Yes. sir

SenaU-r Mobse. The Mexican Supreme
Cnirt by unan;ni .ii.s decision sustained the
expropriation under Mexican law. did it not.'

Mr Hn.L Tliat Is my understanding

Senator M oa^ix. We protested as we hnd a
right to pr ..test, and I thir.k as we should
have pr:, *ested, tn an endeavor to tr^- to get
them to follow another c.nirse of action, but
they decided that was to be Mexican policy.

SETTLElilENT OF AMERICAN CI.ALM3 AGAINST

Mrxico

We th'^n coop»>ra*ed. did we nt.»-. In the
creation i-f an International commission for
settlement nf the financial claims of the for-
eign investora in the oil company, did we
not ,'

Mr Htli. I am not fully acquainted with
the expropriation prcx-eedlngs, Senator.

Senator Mi-m.«n5. You do not know whether
or not there was an Intem.atlona! commis-
sion that was nnpriinted and heard the re-
spective eontentlona and reached a nego-

tiated settlement as to the imount to b«
paid to the foreign companies?

Mr Hill. No. sir: I have bal no occasion
to be acquainted with tbe facti on that par-
ticular issue.

Senator MoasE. Do you not k low then that
the famous so-called Sabalo case was wlthla
the jurlsdlcuon of that commisBlon?

Mr. Kill I did not. sir.

Senator Moisx. Let me maki! clear I don't
think the final settlement wjn as high as I
would like to have seen it. When we go into
InternatioiiAl Judicial proceedings, we have
got to take our lc>ssen as well as our wina.

Mr Hill Yes, sir.

Senati r Morbx That la why I am at a
loss t*,) understand what is happening. I
Fpe.ik aa chairman of the Subcommittee on
Inier-Amerlcan Affairs, and have made It
a matter of Interest to try at least to (amll-
lari?e myself with Scuth Arnerl-nn problems.

I nm at a loss to understanc! the attitude
of the State Department over the years to-
w.u-d this Mexican oil iltuatlcn.

In 1949. Preaidcnt Truman »ent me down
to Mexico on a confidential mlMlon for him.
including a conference with th? President of
Mexico, and I reprorted back io him.

I have no doubt, as I have siitd heretofore
la the Senare. that our btatt- Department
Is taking what I wi.uld call ii dlEClpllnary
attitude toward Mexico in regard to olK I
find that very disturbing, anc. I shall talk
to Mr. Rubottom about It Lat t today. He
after all u going i»> be your supi rior, lant he?

Mr Hill That la correct, sit.

Senator Moasa When you kxi at the chart
of United States petroleum supply and de-
mand that Seuiitor O'Btahiinev put In the
RccuBD yesterday in his exc<edlngly able
speech oi> petroleum problemi. you recog-
nize that we are not only at tbe present
time nut producing our demand but have
to reiy on substantial imports You mlgbt
study further the O Mahcney data which
BhuM.s. I think, tliat in 1075 we will have, la
tlie opinion of the ezperu, exhausted all
poaslbUity of discovery uf new petroieuia
supplies In this country.

With that fact in muid. I am a little at a
loss to understand the policy »e are fuUow-
lug In regard to Mexican oil Just across the
border. In civse of war we are (olng to need
that oil and need it awfully fii^.t becatise uX
the existence of the Russian submarine
fleet. I aliail Uke up th>tt wltl. Mr. Rubot-
tom.

WONIN rUULBKRCX Df imTHN/i POLTTKa

Now when you go down to M»xlco aa Am-
bassador, do you think that the Amba»ador
ns well as the members of his staff should
follow a handP-ofT policy In r>gnrd to the
oncoming Mexican presidential election?

Mr Htll I do. sir

Senator Mrx-sr Do you ajrree Fith me that
American emba.Mles, diplomatic ofllclala,
fhould not seek to Vnterfere In or Influence
the domestic elections of count -les In whkrh
they hold poets'*

Mr Hill. Senator Morse, I pgree with yon
100 percent There mny be those that would
disagree with me on this point. But I know
from reading history that other governments
that have been world powers who meddled
In the Internal affairs of a ccuntry where
they had representatives hurt t lelr position.

Senator Moasx Do you know of your own
knowledge whether there Is fny basis In
some of the representations thit are being
made at the present time thn iigh such a
medium as Hansen's Latin American letter to
the effect that the United Stat<«s State De-
partment Is not, only dabbling -jut Is heav-
ily involved In the oncoming Mfxlcan presi-
dential election. It Is alleged 'hat ofllclala
of our State I>epartment are gMng out of
their way to aay favorable things about one
of ♦he Mexican candidates by referring to
him In speeches and using other nice diplo-
matic devices for creating the j-ubllc opln-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8585

Ion In Mexico that If lie were elected, that
would be very acceptable to the present ad-
ministration of the United States Govern-
ment.

Mr. Hnx. I am not fanUllar with the par-
ticular reference In the Hansen Latin Amer-
ican letter, but I want to assure you and
members of the committee, Senator Mobse,
that when Secretary OtUles asked me If I
would go to Mexico, and I accepted, he then
told rae that the situation in Mexico with
an election coming up Is a vvy delicate
one. that we were to be there as observers,
we were not to try to exert any Influence
for one candidate or another.

He gave me permission to pick my politi-
cal officer, the Minister, the economic coun-
selor, and I asked him if I could give con-
sideration to picking the consul general be-
cause that is very important with 12 posts
In Mexico.

That permission has been granted. I am
In the process of picking the staff. I al-
ready have an agreement regarding the most
important post in my opinion, the political
officer. He Is an old-line career Foreign Serv-
ice officer in the State Department in whom
I have utmost confidence. I believe mem-
bers of the committee know him. Raymond
Leddy. I want to tell you that if I find any
member of my staff showing aL.y partiality
to anyone that is running for political of-
fice. If that one-way service is inaugurated
from Mexico City to New York nonstop, he
will be on the next plane.

Senator Moasx. I want say that that state-
ment commends Itself to me very highly be-
cause I have been disturbed by reports that
I have been receiving from Mexico about al-
leged Interference of the American Embassy
m Mexico City with Internal Mexican poll-
Ucs.

I am not prepared to say that it Is true.
I am prepared to say. however, that the ru-
mors are too widespread to make me happy.

BANSKN'S LATIN AMEXICAN NEWSLETTEB

Now. there la one other point that I want
to raise with you, based again on reports
in such a medium as Hansen's letter.

By the way, what is your opinion of the
Hansen letter?
I have not reached any Judgment on it.
As far as I know, as newspaper report-
ing goes. It is a letter that at leact we otight
to consider and check, of course, as to its
authenticity.

Do you have any Judgment on that?
ttr. Hn.L. Senator Morse. I first became
acquainted with the Hansen Latin American
letter in 1949 when I was with W. R. Grace
ft Co., and Mr. Grace, the president of the
company, felt that Mr. Hansen was a bril-
liant economist, and despite the fact often-
times he was In disagreement with State De-
partment policy on Latin America, that his
Ideas were sufficiently important for the com-
pany to analyze them.

I did not know Mr. Hansen at that time.
In 1861 Mr. Grace asked me to interview Mr.
Hansen. He wanted to hire him as an econ-
omist, and I Ulked with Mr. Hansen. Mr.
Hansen was offered a substantial salary and
an Important position, and he turned it
down because he said that he had the free-
dom of thought in writing this letter that
he would not have if he was working for
a big corporafOon in New York. He thought
his contribution would be to remain with
this newsletter even if It was at a financial
sacrifice.

After I left W. R. Grace ft Co.. I did not
have occasion to see a Hansen Latin Ameri-
can letter until he wrote one recently about
my appointment to Mexico, and it concerned
me. some of the things that he said, and I
brought the letter to the attention of State
Department officials because I felt that waa
my duty and an obligation.

Senator Morsk. That letter I have not
seen. I want you to know I am asking these
questions about Hansen without knowledge

that there was a critical judgment on your
appointment.

Mr. Hnx. It was critical of the State De-
partment's policies of handling Latin Ameri-
can affairs, and it commented on Mr. Rubot-
tom. Mr. Holland, Dr. Eisenhower, and my-
•elf.

Senator Moisi. I had not seen any refer-
ence to you.

I have seen references to Rubottom and to
Milton Eisenhower and to the Secretary and
to the past Ambassador, Mr. White.

Mr. Hill. Yes.

Senator Moiss. I will ask nothing further
about Mr. Hansen of you. I have never met
him. I have checked into many items, bow-
ever, in his newsletter from time to time,
and as I have checked into them to the ex-
tent that the subject matter has been
within the realm of my knowledge to any
extent, I have found the letter remarkably
relUble.

CITTIKG IK TOUCH WTTH PBOFLK

One of the criticisms of past Embassy
practices in Mexico City, In the Immealate
past, has been that the Embassy has not got-
ten out in touch with the people of Mexico,
but has limited Itself pretty much, as I think
Mr. Hansen said in the one letter, to the
white collar, long-tall affairs within the
Embassy to which great attention has been
given to Mexican poUtlcos. Too little atten-
tion has been given by the Embassy to the
peasants, the fanners, small-business men,
and other people in the ranks of which from
time to time strong anti-American feeling
fiames up.

Will It be your practice as Ambassador to
try to broaden the sphere of Embassy in-
fluence so that the people In the so-called
lower Income levels of Mexico will feel the
Influence of our Embassy as far as seeking
to interpret American life, governmental
policies and culture to them?

Mr. Hill. Mr. Chairman and Senator
MoRsz, in my opinion you have raised one
of the most important Issues that faces an
American Ambassador when he is abroad. I
was criticized by friends when I was In El
Salvador and Costa Rica because I traveled
over practically every foot of ground In the
covmtry.

I slept out In the country In tents that
the United States Army provided, because
of no facilities in small towns. I spoke at
rallies in Spanish. True, my Spanish Is not
fluent, but I can speak it so it can be under-
stood.

I traveled with the USIA groups often In
the countries that I was accredited to, and
I found that it was the best medium of
getting to know the people. There Is no
substitute for the Ambassador meeting the
people. If he will take the time to move
around a country.

It is terribly Important. I went into small
hamlets in El Salvador where they had never
seen an American Ambassador.

An ambassador was something that they
might read about If they were forturuite
enough to have money to buy a newspaper.
I was talking with the Mexican Ambassador
last night and I said to him "Mr. Ambas-
sador, if I am confirmed by the Unit«d
States Senate and I go to Mexico, it will be
my hope^o travel all over your great coun-
try." He said to me "There is nothing tti&t
would make more of an Impact with the
Mexican people than to see an ambassador
out in the country talking with people from
all walks of life."

I do not intend to be tied down by the
routine of Just going from one reception
to another.

I h<9e to be able to get out each month
for aevaral days and thus see all the areas
of Mexico. I would recommend this to any
ambassador going abroad.

Senator Mossx, I want to commend joxi
Tery highly for that too. There ar* mem-
bers of this committee, the Senator tram

Iowa, the Senator from Alabama, the chair-
man Senator Wilxt, Senator Mamstizld,
that have followed that policy to the extent
possible as Senators.

I dont think we can begin to reach the
good will that is created by that sort of an
approach in American foreign relations.

I remember my tripe to Mexico, and I have
been in many parts of it. I got Into areas
that had never seen an American politician,
and Just talked to them, give them a chance
to answer questions, which I think creates
a tremendous good will, and on the basis
of what I know about Mexico, I want to say
on the record that in my Judgment in re-
cent years our Embassy has failed to reach
the f>eople of Mexico.

It has been reaching the top hierarchy
all right, but it has not been reaching the
people, and I am so glad to hear that this
will be your policy. That is all the ques-
tions I have for this witness.

Senator Mansiteld. Mr. Chairman.
The Chaixicait. Yes, Senator MANsmxo.
Senator Mansiteld. I think on the basis
of Senator Morse's questions, that Secretary
Hill has an idea — I am sure he had it be-
fore— of the difficult and delicate task con-
fronting him. I do want to say though
that the Technical Assistance Subcommit-
tee imder the chairmanship of Senator
HicKENLOoPEE, did contact the ambassadors
of all the countries in the world where
technical assistance was being administered,
and the frankest, most clearcut replies we
received happened to be from the then Am-
bassador to El Salvador who had previously
been Ambassador to Costa Rica and who is
now before us for confirmation as Am-
bassor to Mexico.

praise rOR NOMINEE

I think that he stood out head and shoul-
ders above all the others in the frankness
and the clarity of the reports he gave us in
response to Chairman Hickznloopes's ques-
tionnaire.

I know that Secretary Hill has had a diffi-
cult and delicate Job as Assistant Secretary
of State for Congressional Relations. I think
the record ought to show that he has per-
formed his tasks superbly, that he has been
Impartial, nonpartisan. He has tried to keep
the committee Informed of developments. I
think he has been a tower of strength to the
Secretary of State and this administration
and a tower of strength to this committee as
well in ironing out differences and In at-
tempting to arrive at mutual understanding.
I don't think that we could send a better
man to this most difficult post than the pres-
ent nominee before us. I wanted to say these
remarks so they would be on the record, be-
cause I think Mr. Hill has a great future, and
we are going to hear much of him and about
him in the years ahead.
^ Mr. Hill. TTiank you. Senator.

The Chaoulan. Are there any other ques-
tions to be asked?
Senator Aikzn. Mr. Chairman?
The Chairman. Senator Aiken.
Senator Aiken. Would it be out of order If
as a fellow denizen of the north woods I
move to approve Mr. Hill's nomination?

The Chairman. Since we have already
heard two, I thought we would hear the
others and then vote on them all at the
same time.

Senator Aikin. If I might have that privi-
lege when the time comes.

Senator Hicxenlooper. Then we will call
upon the denizen.

Senator Mosss. Mr. Chairman, while the
Ambassador is in the room, I want to say In
supplement of what Mr. Manbtixlo said that
Mr. Hill to my knowledge has been of great
help to this committee on a good many oc-
casions when he served as • llalaoa oOcer
between the State Department and this ootn-
mlttee. While be is still In the room. I
wonder If he would have any objection to th*

8586

CONGRESSIOxNAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

hearing Involving him In executive session
being made public.

I think It would be very beneficial myself.
I did not realize, to be frank with you. we
were taking Mr. Hill up That Is my fault
because had I known It I would have asked
to have It public.

The CHAniMAN. Would you be willing to
wait until we vote upon It'

Senator MoasE. Oh. yes. but I wanted to
know while he is still here, If we should de-
cide to make the transcript public, if he has
any objection?

Mr. Hiix. I have no objection. Mr. Chair-
man.

The Chaikman He says he has none Are
there other questions^

Thank you very much for dut>mlttlng to
this examination.

Mr. Hill. Thank you.

Mr Chairman, before I excuse myself I
would like to thank you as chairman of the
committee and all the members on the Re-
publican as well as the Democratic side for
the cooperation that I have had In the last 15
months.

It has "been probably the greatest experi-
ence of my life working with the members
of the committee, and I would like to com-
pliment you because I have always received
every courtesy from you as the chairman and
from all the members of the committee, even
If there was difference of opinion, and I
would like to take also the occasion to com-
pliment your very efficient staff

Some of the members I had not had a
chance to know as well as others on the staff,
but at all times thev were helpful with the
Department of State, even during times
when there were broad avenues of disagree-
ment.

Thank you very much

The Chaikman When, as, and Lf you go as
Ambassador to Mexico, we are going to miss
you very much here and you carry with you
under those circumstances the best wishes
lor success.

We can't hold the American Ambassador
responsible for everything that happens
there.

Mr. Hn-L. Thank you very much. Mr.
Chairman.

Thank you, gentlemen.

LIGHT ON HELLS CANYON
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, yester-
day, the Washington Post carried on its
editorial page a Herblock cartoon de-
picting three precipitous waterfalls in
the Hells Canyon, over which the public
Interest was taking a perilous plunge.
The first of these was labeled "Loss of
Hells Canyon Site." the second was
labeled "Disclosure of Fast Tax Write-
OCr Gains for Private Power Co.." and
the third bore the caption "Revelation
of Stock Market Gains on Government
Decision. "

I regret that I cannot paint a word
picture as vivid as that created by the
cartoonist's pen, but I can insert Into
the RicoRD the Post's lucid editorial car-
ried on the same page, entitled "Light on
Hells Canyon."

I ask unanimous consent that this edi-
torial be printed, at this point, in today's

CONGRISSIONAL RECORD.

There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

I From the Washington Post of June 9. 1957)
Light on Hxuls Canton
While the Senate Antitrust Subcommittee
Is looking Into the unusual activity of Idaho
Power Co. stock In the Interval between the
granting of its fast tax writeoff and the
public announcement of that action. Interest

in Gordon Grays illumination uf the murky
Hells Canyon situation Is still keeti. Mr.
Gray's disclosures before the subcommittee
were wrested from him by Senator Ketau-
vxa's persistent. knowledKeable. and skillful
questioning Two conclusions seem Ines-
capable One. thift the Federal Power Com-
missions t.ssuanre of licenses to the Idaho
Power Co for the cm'-structlon of
d/ims on the Snake River was based on a
mistaken premise, and. two. that Mr Gray,
as Director of the Office of Defense Mobiliza-
tion, acted on extremely dubious grounds
In Issului? certificates of rapid tax amortiza-
tion for construction of these dams.

The PPC based its Issuance of licenses to
the Idaho Power Co . in part at lea^t, on
the premise that the power potential to l>e
developed by the private construction of the
Snake River dams would be realized without
expense to the United States. Its action
cleared the way for private construction of
two low dams iiistead of Federal construction
of a single high dam at Hells Canyon — even
though the single high dam would generate
more power and produce other benefits to
the Northwest. In point of fact, however,
the grant of rapid tax »Tlteoffs to the Idaho
Power Co. will enuu a very appreciable ex-
pense to the United Stales. They give the
company, in effect, an interest-free loan for
a 5-year period: this means that the Federal
Government must pay interest on borrowed
money to make up for the tax revenue it
forgoes during this time.

On March 11. Secretary of the Interior
Soaton vn-ote a letter to Dr Arthur Flem-
mlng. who was then director of ODM. saying
in crystal-clear language, "I recommend that
you deny Issuance of the accelerated tax
amortization certificates requested by the
Idaho Power Co " Mr. Seaton gave among
the reasons for his recommendation that the
"net cost to the Government in the case of
the Idaho Power Co. application Is incon-
sistent with the basis on which the FPC
granted the license to the company." Never-
theless. Mr. Gray, when he succeeded Dr.
Plemmlng as director of ODM. not only Is-
sued the tax amortization certificates but
tried to conceal from the Senate subcommit-
tee the fact that Secretary Seaton had recom-
mended against doing so. Mr. Gray's con-
cealment of the Secretary's letter entailed a
lack of candor far from becoming to him.
and Senator KxrAtrvra performed a significant
public service in bringing the letter to
light.

There is Justification for accelerated tax
amortization to promote the construction of
needed defense facilities which would not b«
undertaken by private concerns without this
form of Federal subsidy. But the Justifica-
tion did not exist In the case of the Idaho
Power Co 's dams. The amortization repre-
sented a needless handout to the company,
defended by Mr. Gray on the dubious ground
that other companies had received it without
consideration of the need for such grants as
incentives. In the light of this handout
and the considerable cost It Involves to the
Government, Congress ought now to step In
and preserve Hell's Canyon, the choicest dam
site on the North American Continent, for
full development by a multiple-purpose high
dam that will give the Northwest the power
resources it needs.

CANADIAN FEDERAL ELECTION TO-
DAY—ARTICLES BY MARQUIS W.
CHILDS ON ASPECTS OF RECENT
CAMPAIGN

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, to-
day the people of Canada go to the polls
to select a Parliament which will govern
them for the next 4 or 5 years. This is a
great event for all who live on the North
American Continent. Canada is the larg-
est of all the nations of this continent

in area. It possesses vast resources and
its future is unlimited. In the year 1900
Sir Wilfred Laurier. one of the most il-
lustrious of all Canadian Pilme Min-
isters, said, "This century belongs to
Canada "

Canada is the closest ally of ihe United
States, in war and in peace. Americans
fought side by side with Canadians In
World War II and in Korea. The great
Alcan Highway to Alaska Is largely on
Canadian soil. Our strategic radar de-
fease lines are located in Canada. Amer-
ican investors have staked ovei' $9 billion
on the success of Canadian industry.
The policies and personnel of the Gov-
ernment of Canada are thus of major
significance to our own destiny and to
the fate of the free world.

The distinguished columnist. Marquis
W. Chllds, spent the week prior to the
Canadian election in that far-flung land.
talking with citizens and with Canadian
leaders. His conclusions and opinions
are of major interest to us of the Senate,
as Canada votes today — from the Ameri-
can line to the Arctic Circle, from New-
foundland's headlands to the craggy
shores of British Columbia.

I have a particular Interest In Mr.
Childs' salient observations about the
Canadian elections because I served over
2 years in the Canadian sub- Arctic dur-
ing World War II, and because the great
Pacific Northwest region is now intimate-
ly concerned with reaching a satisfactory
settlement with Canada over mutual use
of the waters of the Columbia River for
hydroelectric power and fiood-control
purposes.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that there be printed in the body of
the Record at this point two of Mr.
Childs' articles which appeared in the
Washington Post of June 4 and 5 and
which discuss issues of importance In the
campaign just concluded — including
Canada's attitude toward the United
States — and the effects of the uranium
boom in northern Ontario.

There t)eing no objection, the articles
were ordered to be printed in the Rccoro.
as follows :
[From the Washington Post of June 4. 19571

Canada on the Evi : Onlt BaarAct Calm
(By Marquis Chllds)

MoNTkCAL. — Within a week some 0 million
Canadians scattered across this broad land
will go to the p>oll8 In a national elecUon
that has caused scarcely a ripple of Interest.

The farmers on the prairies are unhappy
because they are not sharing In Canada's
high prosperity. You bear some grumbling
because housing has not got going in suf-
ficient volume. This is put down as one
consequence of the Canadian policy of tight
money intended, as In the United States, to
hold down prices.

There are. In short, th« familiar gripes of
a democracy In the full tide of the great
midcentury expansion that Is taking place.
Great new mining. Industrial, oil and other
enterprises have been opened up since the
end of the war. Canada's birth rate during
the past decade has been higher than that
of the United States. Japan or India.

Yet beneath the calm surface Is a current
of discontent that substantially reduces the
strength of the Liberal govemznent In power
for 22 years — so long that some Conserva-
tive candidates have appropriated the time
for a change theme the Republicans iised
so effectively after Democrats had been in
power lor 20 years In Washington.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8587

The discontent arises In no small part
from the problems that grow out of living
alongside a neighbor so vastly rich and
powerful as the United States. Not by the
wildest stretch of the Imagination could one
Imagine a mob In Ottawa sacking the United
States Embassy and tearing down the Ameri-
can flag But in its sober and restrained
fashion, the discontent here is related to the
fury of the Chinese mob on Formosa.

The Canadian Government has been in-
formed that the United States will shortly
raise its tariff on lead and zinc. Canada sells
annually to the United States about 950
million worth of these two minerals.

That may seem small, but Canadians
measure it against the fact that the United
SUtes is selling to Canada about »1.2 billion
more In goods than It buys from that coun-
try. While thU trade deficit is partly off-
set by the investment of capital coming
from south of the border. It Is still a very
large fact of Canada's economic life. And
the big amounts of American capital in Ca-
nadian development have raised new prob-
lems of control and taxation.

Because this Is a' sober election campaign
in the Canadian tradition, no one Is hurling
brlckbau at Uncle Sam. The latest distrusts
and suspicion of America are not being ex-
ploited. John G. Difenbaker. the Consena-
tU-e leader, goes so far as to say:

"The bulk of Canada's trade is with the
United States, and this country exports iu
Irreplaceable raw materials In vast quanti-
ties. We have an enormous deficit in our
trade with the United States. We Conserv-
atives believe this dependency upon the
United States has gone too far, -that Cana-
dian well-being, the Canadian economy are
far too vulnerable to American whims and
American reversals."

Some of the extreme Tories In Toronto,
where still the sun never sets on Britain's
Empire, are less polite. They talk about eco-
nomic colonialism and the greedy power of
the colossus to the south.

But. both by temperament and tradition,
Canadians are restrained, and this applies to
another Issue — communism In government.
Not long before the campaign began, the
suicide of the Canadian Ambassador to
Egypt. Herbert Normtm, touched off a wave
of antl-Amerlcanlsm.

Later it was shown the Government had
mishandled the Norman matter by withhold-
ing Information in the first Instance. Yet.
thus far the opposition has made no use of
these charges. When the visitor asks why,
he is told. "If only because it would react
against anyone who tried to bring it up."

If the professional prognostlcators are cor-
rect, the Liberals will lose 30 to 30 seats.
cutting their majority of 170 to around 140.
This, In a House of Commons of 265 mem-
bers, would still give them a working ma-
jority to form a government.

But there could be a sleeper in this quiet
election— the kind of nasty surprise that has
upset BO many comfortable assirniptions in
recent months.

J From the Washington Post of June 5. 1957)

FiTTEEN Thousand A-Bombs in Canada's Son,

(By Marquis Chllds)

Elliott Lakk, Ontario.— In what was
trackless wilderness less than 3 years ago,
the greatest uranlima discovery of the West-
ern Hemisphere today is being developed
with breathtaking speed as new towns and
big processing plants are carved out of the
forest from month to month. The bull-
dozers and the trucks roar 7 days a week.

In dry weather, clouds of dust settle on
newly painted houses, and roads are in mud
when it rains.

New workers are constantly coming in as
others, fed up with the pioneering life, get
out. This Is the Alaska gold rush without
the dancehalls. And without, it should be
added, the chance for the miner to make a
big strike, as few did In the gold rush.

A geologist prospector, Franc Joubln, and
his backer, Joe Hirshhom, known today as
the uranium king, put $30,000 into their
Algoma Basin discovery and took out many,
many millions.

Today wages are high, but so are prices.
Most families are still living in trailers. Last
winter an epidemic of acute hepatitis swept
this uranium camp, with 300 cases at its
height.

Yet for all the handicaps and hardships,
production continues to grow. Great proc-
essing machines hauled in over primitive
roads convert 1 ton of ore out of the shaft
into 2 pounds of uraniimi oxide, which looks
like bright yellow soap flakes.

A Canadian Government corporation has
contracted to buy a billion dollars' worth
of "yellow cake" out of the Elliot Lake area
In the next 5 years. All of the elements of
the revolution worked by the splitting of
the atom are evident In this subarctic area
where In winter temperatures drop as low as
60 ■> below zero.

The Canadian Government sells virtually
the whole output to the United States \mder
contracts that run through 1962 — enough. It
is said, to make 15,000 atomic bombs. But
because of fears that these contracts will
then be terminated, there are reports of sup-
plementary agreements to be negotiated with
Britain in connection with Britain's fast-
moving peacetime development of atomic
energy. '

A flerce union struggle layon, with the
mine, mill, and smelter workers threatening
to capture control of the Algomanordlc local
and its thousand men. The Communist-led
union, expelled from the CIO. already has
the local at Consolidated Denlson, the larg-
est uranium operation in the area.

They are financing intensive organizing
efforts out of revenue coming from their grip
on the nickel mines, the largest in the world,
at nearby Sudbury. If they take over the
locals of the five mines of the Rio Tlnto Co.,
In which the RothscAlld Interests are domi-
nant, they will have a leverage over an Im-
portant segment of uranium production.

This is deeply disturbing to officials of both
government and business.

When this was backwoods with a few dy-
ing lumber towns on the fringes, the Al-
goma East Riding, as Canada calls It parlia-
mentary districts, was considered a safe seat
for Lester B. Pearson. Minister of External
Affairs in the Liberal government in power
at Ottawa for 22 years.

In the forthcoming election, Pearson is
being aggressively challenged by Merton
Mulligan— Mulligan's the man— the Con-
servative candidate with the active back-
ing of the powerful Conservative organiza-
tion that controls Ontario's provincial
government.

Mulligan, a big. barrel-'walsted. black-
haired native of the region and mayor of
the little community of Thessalon. has been
stumping the Riding since April, telling
everyone who would listen that Algoma East
needs a representative in Parliament who will
look after its interests. He accuses Pear-
son of siding with the Russians in the Suez
crisis of last November and of turning
against Britain and the Commonwealth.

But the charge he returns to before every
audience is absenteeism. — ^Pearson's alleged
neglect of the people in his own district
while he travels around the world taking care
of other people's affairs. This is Canada's
brand of Isolationism. Moet observers feel
It has not taken hold.

THE MUTUAL SECURITY ACT OP 1957

Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, I desire
to invite the attention of the Senate to
the fact that on last Friday, June 7, the
Committee on Foreign Relations favor>
ably reported the Muttial Security Act
of 1957 to the Senate by a vote of 12 to 3.

The committee proposed a net reduc-
tion of $227,300,000 in the $3.8 biUion
request of the President. The total
amount authorized by the bill is $3 617
billion.

I caU particular attention to the com-
mittee report which has been prepared
In a form to present a clear description
of each provision of the bill.

This morning at my direction, copies
of the committee report. No. 417, and
copies of the committee hearings were
sent to the office of every Member of the
Senate. The hearings total more than
BOO pages, and I hope Members will have
opportunity to study them carefully be-
fore the bill is considered by the Senate.
When the Mutual Security Act, S. 2130,
is called up I will, of course, make a
statement about its specific provisions
and the way in which the committee
dealt with proposals of the President.

In view of recent suggestions that Con-
gress has been a source of delay in con-
sideration of Presidential proposals, I
wish, to call the attention of my col-
leagues to the fact that the President's
proposals have been before the Senate
since only May 21. Only 18 calendar
days have elapsed since we began con-
sideration of this bill. Weekends and
vacations have intervened, giving the
committee only II working days for con-
sideration of the proposals.

UNSCRUPULOUS CONTRACTORS FOR
MILITARY PROCUREMENT

Mr. McCLELLAN. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that I may pro-
ceed for 10 minutes.

The PRESmiNQ OFTTCER (Mr.
CHtmcH in the chair). Is there objec-
tion? The Chair hears none, and the
Senator from Arlcansas is recognized for
10 minutes.

Mr. McCLELLAN. Mr. President, dur-
ing 1955 the Senate Permanent Subcom-
mittee on Investigations of the Commit-
tee on Government Operations held
hearings in connection with/the textile
procurement in military services. We in-
vestigated procurement practices of the
Armed Services Textile and Apparel Pro-
curement Agency, a unit established in
the Defense Department to coordinate
procurement of the Army, Navy, and Air
Force. Evidence was presented to the
subcommittee showing that unscrupu-
lous contractors had bribed and con-
trived with both civilian employees and
armed services officers to improperly
favor contractors in the award and ad-
ministration of contracts. The subcom-
mittee was confronted with graft and
corruption.

One of the principals In the hearings
was Harry Lev, who had delivered de-
fective material to the Armed FV>rces.
He corrupted and induced Govenunent
officials to betray their public tnist. He
endeavored to ingratiate himself into
special favor with officials and employees
of the Defense Department, He paid
their hotel bills. He entertained them at
home and on his yacht. He bought
dresses and other items of clothing for
female personnel of procurement.

Another principal witness. Marvin Ru-
bin, held himself out as a fixer who had
influence with Government procurement

8588

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

officials through bribery and friendship.
He was one of the contact men with the
Army's Quartermaster Corps, and he
represented several manufacturers. His
method of operation differed from the
usual five percenter in that he was op-
erating on a larger financial return.
Still another main w itness in our investi-
gation was Capt. Raymond Wool, of the
Air Force, who was one of the contract-
In? officers for the Procurement Agency.
He had granted Harry Lev many impor-
tant deviations on a naval white hat con-
tract, resulting in substantial lower costs
to Lev. and he had been very friendly
with Marvin Rubin and Harry Lev.

Joseph G. Porreca was the chief in-
spector of the clothins branch of the
textile division of the Quartermaster
Corps. He accepted many gifts from
Marvin Rubin and Harry Lev. including
a deep freezer. He admitted in public
testimony that he had committed per-
jury before this subcommittee in execu-
tive session.

Mrs. Mella Hort testified she had been
the contract administrator employed by
the United States Army Quartermaster
Corps who administered garrison hat
contracts and handled several of the Lev
Co. Government contracts. She received
many gifts from Marvin Rubin.

Maurice Ades testified that he had
been a partner of Harry Lev in Puerto
Rico. He was an active participant with
Lev and Rubin in their many dealings
with the United States Government.

I merely identify these people who
testified before the subcommittee, and
have refrained from giving detailed in-
formation, as we have submitted a re-
port to the Senate on thi.s particular in-
vestigation. Following the hearings, we
submitted to the Department of Justice
a transcript of the hearings. This re-
sulted in criminal trials and convictions
of Harry Lev, Marvin Rubin. Capt. Ray-
mond Wool. Mrs. Mella Hort. and Mau-
rice Ades in New York on the charge that
they had conspired to defraud the Gov-
ernment of the United States. On May
15. 1957, the Federal court imposed the
following sentences: Harry Lev, 9
months in prison and a $5,000 fine: Ray-
mond Wool, 18 month.s in nri.son and a
$1,500 fine: and Marvin Rubin, 15
months in prison and a $1,000 fine.
Maurice Ades was given a suspended
sentence, fined $1,500. and placed on
probation for 2 years, Mrs. Mella Hort
was given a suspended sentence, fined
$1,500 and placed on probation for 2
years. Joseph Porreca entered a plea of
guilty to the charge of conspiracy to de-
fraud the Government of the United
States, but has not as yet been sen-
tenced.

Federal District Court Judge Irving R.
Kauffman, who imposed the sentences,
classified Rubin as follows;

He la a man completely without any b\isl-
ness principles. He is a man whi) Impresses
me as one who bejleves the laws uf busi-
ness are the laws of (the Jungle.

I desire to point out that the follow-
ing appeared In an article in the New
York Times of Thursday, May 16, 1957:

Before the sentencing. A.ss!stant United
States Attorney Arthur Christy said a Con-
(jresslonal Investlgatlan has disclosed a sir-
uution of which the public cuuld truly b«

■shamed — a spectacle of Government em-
ployee* who sold their pubUc trust.

The convictions I have enumerated are
a direct result of the investigation con-
ducted by our subcommittee, and indi-
cate, I think, in a positive manner the
constructive work being done in at-
tempting to expose and prevent instances
of fraud, corruption, bribery, and in-
efficiency In the executive branches of
the Goverimient.

In 1956 the subcommittee continued its
inve-stigation. concentrating on the
clothing procurement of the Quarter-
master Corps of the Department of the
Army. Once again we found that brib-
ery, inefficiency, and improprieties
existed in the Government procurement
of millions of dollars of military cloth-
ing. A substantial amount of this cloth-
in=< was purchased from a particular
group of contractors who, through con-
nivance, obtained improper favors, de-
livered sub.standard garments to the
Armed Forces, and made unconscionable
profits at the expense of the taxpayers.
Three of the principals in this investiga-
tion were Joseph Abrams, Harold Hy-
man, and Murray Berman. Abrams.
who was a certiOed public accountant,
con.'^pired with certain individuals to de-
fraud the United States Government in
the military clothing procurement field.
Harold Hyman, a relative of Joseph
Abrams, consistently invoked the fifth
amendment as to various activities in
which he had been engaged, particular-
ly with relation to his bond transactions
and his use of fictitious names in busi-
ness dealings. Murray Berman, a
trusted subordinate of Abrams, also in-
voked the filth amendment on all perti-
nent questions concerning his association
with Abrams and his dealings with vari-
ous bonds. L^

On April 12, 1957, Joseph Abrams and
Murray Berman were found guilty by a
Federal court in New York City for mis-
appropriating Government-owned cloth-
ing material and for con.'^piracy in mak-
ing false statements to the Government.
On the .<^ame date. Harold Hyman was
found guilty of making false statements
to tne Government. On June 4, 1957,
Joseph Abrams was .sentenced to 2*2
years in prison; Murray Berman was
sentenced to 6 months in prison; and
Harold Hyman was given a suspended
sentence.

The convictions mentioned by me to-
day do not include cases of other per-
sons who were witnesses before the sub-
committee and whose ca.-^es have t)een
referred to the Department of Justice.
For example, the case of Robert H. Pin-
ner, who was an FOA consulting en-
gineer and who was engaged in a grain
storage project in Pakistan, is present-
ly being handled by the United States
attorney for the District of Columbia,
and involves a possible perjury viola-
tion by Pinner. I mention this because
it is anticipated that there will be ad-
ditional conviction.s of witnesses who ap-
peared before this subcommittee.

I wanted to bring to the attention of
the Senate some of the results which
are being achieved in our examination
into the operations of the executive de-
partments to determine whether there

has been any waste, extravagance, In-
efficiency, or other improprieties.

As a result of our Investigation, the
Department of Defense has taken ad-
ministrative action in an attempt to pre-
vent such occurrences in the future. For
example, the Army has abolished the
Quality Clothing Evaluation Board
w hich had existed and has set up a Con-
tract Review Agency in the Philadel-
phia Quartermaster Depot. It is hoped
that the internal corrective action taken
by the Department of Defense will im-
prove conditions and eluninate some of
the evils that have l)een exposed.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yi?ld?

Mr. McCLELLAN. I am very happy
to yield to the distinguished Senator
from Ohio.

Mr. LAUSCHE. At the very begin-
ning, I commend the Senator from Ar-
kansas for the distinguished and salu-
tary work which his committee is doing.
I listened with interest to the quotation
which he made of the remarks of the
judge with reference to Mr. Rubin, who.
I believe, was the leader in the initial
course of misconduct.

Mr. McCLELLAN. Rubin was one of
the leaders, and certainly was one of the
most reprehen.'^ible of the group.

Mr LAUSCHE. The judge decried
what Rubin h-»d done. What was the
penalty which the judge imposed upon
this person, who contaminated the mili-
tary per.sonnel, took advantage of his
country's need, and definitely was en-
gaged in criminal conduct?

Mr. McCLELLAN. Two years, and a
fine of $5,000. as I recall.

Mr. LAUSCHE. With good behavior.
within what time can that man procure
his release?

Mr. McCLELLAN. When he has
servec two-thirds of his sentence, which
wiuld be 16 months.

Mr LAUSCHE. The point I wish to
make is that I have frequently seen
young men, men youthful in years, who
took automobiles for unlawful rides, and
who were sentenced to State reforma-
tories to s< rve sentences of 14 months.

This IS the case of a man who con-
taminated Government officials, who
took advantage of his country, and whose
conduct was described as being unpar-
donable. Yet, for such a man it is said
that a sentence of 16 months is an ade-
quate penalty.

I simply do not understand the work-
ings of our courts — and I am not at-
tempting to Impose my judgment upon
them. But the concept of comparative
justice is indefensibly abused. My hope
IS that good will come of this case.

I commend the Senator from Arkansa.s
for his work. I think that when trans-
actions of this type are brought to light,
the Judges should understand that the
entire United States Senate has had to
concern Itself with them, that the pub-
lic is disturbed by the revelations, and
that young soldiers, who serve in wars,
wonder what is happening when a pen-
alty of 16 months is given to such an en-
emy of our .society. That is my under-
standing. I commend the Senator for
his work.

Mr. McCLELLAN. I thank the Sen-
ator very much.

1957.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8589

I may say, Mr. President, that we do
not discover these things easily. We
have to have a trained staff of competent
Investigators, and it sometimes takes a
rather long and tedious process to get the
information, to develop the testimony,
and to ascertain the facts so we can
malce these exposures.

The fines which have been imposed
do not begin to reimburse the cost to the
taxpayers incurred In bringing the
frauds to light and In getting criminals
prosecuted.

I do not know what the court had In
mind in Imposing the light sentence. I
am not critical of it, except I very much
agree with the general viewpoint ex-
pressed by the distinguished Senator
from Ohio. In my experience as a pros-
ecuting attorney In my own State, and
then some few years In Investigative
work. I have come to feel that some-
times I think our courts are too lenient
with violators, particularly where they
are dfparently dedicated to that kind of
living. In the case of a first offense, it
Is different, but the persons to whom I
refer conspired ; they became crooks and
defrauders, and expended their energy
along those lines. When we finally ex-
pose them. I should like to see greater
penalties imposed.

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. McCLELLAN. I yield to the
Senator from South Dakota.

Mr. MUNDT. Speaking as a member
of the committee which the distin-
guished Senator from Arkansas heads,
I wish to associate myself with his hope
that some of the crooks who conspire de-
liberately to cheat and to obtain their
livelihood at the expense of the tax-
payers of the country can be adequately
punished. I hope a way can be found so
that when, after long and laborious
hearings and efforts, we finally expose
a racket, the result will not be merely
a suspended sentence, or a small fine
that amounts to only a fractional per-
centage of the profits that have been
made.

I think we should make examples of
faithless public servants who are guilty
of efforts to destroy the Nation's defense
effort or impair its solvency, by putting
them in jail and keeping them there as
long as the law allows.

Mr. McCLELLAN. I thank the Sen-
ator from South Dakota for his com-
ment. He has made a very valuable
contribution to the work of the com-
mittee.

Mr. President, I made this verbal re-
port because, while we have submitted a
written report on the work of the com-
mittee, the sentences and convictions
are developments which have occurred
subsequently to the time of the filing of
the report. I thought our colleagues
and the country would be Interested in
knowing the work of the committee has
resulted at least In those convictions.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator from Arkansas
yield?

Mr. McCLELLAN. I yield to the ma-
jority leader.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I think I
divulge no secret when I say to the Sen-
ate that when I first came to the Con-

gress as an employee of the Congress, I
had a great admiration and respect for
the distinguished Senator from Arkansas
[Mr. McCLKLLANl. first as a Member of
the House, and later as a Member of the
Senate. I know of no Member of this
body to whom my colleagues owe a
greater debt th(in to the senior Senator
from Arkansas.

His objective manner, his constructive
approach, his judicial consideration, his
responsible handling of most difficult
problems, as the agent of the Senate,
have not only brought glory and respect
to this body, but worldwide attention to
the methods of the Senator from Arkan-
sas and his committee. I want to ex-
press to him the gratitude of the ma-
jority leader, and of all Members of the
Senate for whom I can speak, for the
time he has spent, the great ability he
has displayed, and the great credit he
has reflected on the Senate and the
Nation.

Mr. McCLELLAN. I thank the dis-
tinguished majority leader, but I wish
to pass on all such agreeable remarks
to members of the conunittee, because
we operate as a committee. We operate
cooperatively. We go into these tasks,
I may say, without any thought, spirit,
or attitude of partisanship, but simply
to try to do a job for our country. What-
ever little success the committee has had,
whatever credit it may have brought to
the Senate, each member is entitled to
a share of the honor.

DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE
APPROPRIATION BILL 1958—
AMENDMENT

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, tomor-
row the Senate of the United States will
discuss a very Important appropriation
bill, the appropriation bill for the De-
partment of Agriculture. In connection
with that bill, there is one amendment
made by the Senate Appropriations
Committee which I wish to call to the
attention of Senators now. so that as
they read the Record tomorrow morn-
ing they will be fortified with the knowl-
edge and the facts made available to
them on this new venture by the Appro-
priations Committee to endeavor to write
agricultural legislation on an appropria-
tion bill.

I wish to say. first of all. I oppose the
amendment. It was adopted by a rather
close vote.

I send to the desk an amendment pro-
posed to be offered by me to the bill.
My amendment seeks to undo the very
serious damage done to the conservation
reserve program by the amendment
adopted by the committee.

My amendment simply strikes out of
the bill language inserted by the Appro-
priations Committee, which provides,
with regard to the conservation reserve
program :

Provided further. That the average annual
rental payment per acre shall not exceed
$7.60 per acre for conservation reserve con-
tract* entered into 30 days after approval
of this act.

That amendment proposes an altogether
new limitation and brings Into being an
altogether new mathematical factor

which does not prevail in the soil bank
or conservation reserve program as of
now. At the present time the national
average, which has been computed by
the weighted formula. Is $10.09. The
committee amendment would Impose a
new legislative average of $7.50 an acre.
I point out that not one single thin
dime of economy Is involved In the
amendment. It is agreed, with unanim-
ity. I believe, by the Appropriations
Committee, that we should provide $350
million for the conservation reserve pro-
gram. The question is: How is the $350
million to be divided?

Under the normal procedure, according
to the legislative act by which this appro-
priation is made, the $350 million would
be divided among the 48 States by a
formula which gives every State a fair
opportimlty to share in conservation re-
serve program dividends. If the formula
is changed to $7.50 — this new legislative
formula, this new figure which has been
grabbed out of the sky, because the
sound of "seven" is somehow associated
with being lucky— I think the program
will not possibly be able to succeed and
endxire, because I submit any farm pro-
gram which directly and deliberately
discriminates against great sections of
agriculture cannot long continue and
prevail with the American taxpaying
public.

Thirty-seven States would be discrimi-
nated against by the new $7.50 legislative
formula average figure.

It seems to me — and I call this to the
attention of the Senators from those
States — that if I lived in a State such as
Minnesota, I would want to examine the
work of the Appropriations Committee
very carefully, because, under the exist-
ing formula set up In accordance with
the basic legislation, tiie annual pay-
ment per acre is $11. Of the contracts
already signed, the average payment per
acre is $9.9. When it is proposed to set
apart farmers now receiving conserva-
tion reserve benefits at that level, by an
act of the Appropriations Committee,
and make the figure $7.50 average, not
only are the people of Minnesota being
discriminated against, but the farmers
of Minnesota are being discriminated
against.

Certainly, if I lived In the State of
Ohio and represented the i>eople of Ohio
in the Senate. I would be greatly con-
cerned by this action, because in the
State of Ohio the figure is $12 an acre at
the present time, but the average signup
is $10.24 an acre, which means there is
almost a $3 an acre reduction proposed
by the act of the Appropriations Com-
mittee— which means, realistically, in my
opinion, that the farmers of Ohio will be
denied the benefits of the conservation
reserve program for which they are being
taxed.

I speak because I am concerned pri-
marily with the total effect on the farm
program of an action which discrimi-
nates against certain States because the
land which they happen to have is more
productive, or because the land has been
evaluated at a level of annual return per
retirement higher than $7.50.

This does not particularly concern the
people of South Dakota, because in our
particular area the average signup Is

8590

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

V

aniy S8.64 an acre. Howerer. It cer-
tainly aSects Tltally the people Dl the
State ol lUinoia. the people of the State
of Iowa, the pecHiile of the State of Indi-
ana, and the people of the State of
Kansas. It certainly makes this pro-
e;ram unworkable in the great State of
Washington, with its wheatfields.

I wi£h tn have some information
placed in the Rkcobo at this point, Mr.
President, because the amendment I
hare submitted will, of course, be c*is-
cussed at length tcxnorrow. I think we
should not eo flyingr blind into an ex-
periment which I am afraid can destroy
the entire soil-bank program.

At this point in the RacoBD. Mr. Presi-
dent. I should like to have appear a re-
print from the information of the Ac>-
propriations Committee, which shows
the conservation reserve pro<n"am State
by State, the approved annual payment
rate per acre, and the average annual
payment per acre under signed con-
tracts, as of April 15. 1957. so that each
Senator may compare that with what
would happen unless my amendment
striking out the >7 50 average acre limi-
tation shall be approved.

There being no objection, the table was
ordered to be printed in the Record, as
follow' s :

Con^m-ation res^erve prng-^am — Approved
State annual payment ratei per ac-'e and
av^rag^ rate.^ on contracts re-ported nfpted
•J of Apr IS. 19S7

State

Appriw^l

:*nBii.il

•cr-

A vt«r ««
uiiiuai

suriM^l

AUNuu A

.\-!7iin,i

\rk"jn.'«i.'<

( itiifiiruak . .

'J V

9. Ill

V< ill)
i: «

B. M
« '10

II w

IJ V.
I? «1

l-J («l

III 'HI
V '»)

ij «

l.; <
11 .«
U .)u
in '0

tt HI

« •«
S( J.

7 'HI

1(1 ti
U ij

11 u

1<I .t,

■i «l

1.' mi

II ■»>

12. '»)

W <

ll> l»

III w

I' <'

10 A

l» ,»,
1,1. »l
III 'K)

n. 'HI

$7 «

i; »7

7*»

7 M

\ 1 <n

Coll. ruin

r.inm-rtlinit

I ictaw -wv . . .

7 "-^
7 *i

H..riiU

< '•■orijin , .

IJaf*.

r.uiout

Iniii;ui3 .

1,1 ( '

Inwit . .

11 «

111. .U

S .7

K^UL-QIS

Ki'iuucky -

I /i»iir«n»n!» ..

Mame

•i 'tl

M sr\ !;in«l . .

111. 77
* 'If

7 ' '

» m

9 17
*t W

M .».--. ichijsflts

Nttchiriin

Nr:s.-.i,s.si[i;iL

>f BWIHjrl

Muntium.. .

H SJ

^.■t■Il.^k.l

s u

7 ■i^

N>>V !•()«

N<fw H:un;i4bin' .

1 Iff

New hi-,v\

lu 'u

.V»w \f.',tn,

New York

8 a

N mu luiiiiuwi

N-T'h Diikota

chw .

<>k)mrK'm«

«. 77

S. 74
t •'1

( ' ■ Z''il

l'»nr»^vtvHnh»

KtH>»lr Island

.•"' l;I 'l ' ' T'.!!!!!!

S..iU"i I' ik.-f I

'1 matnftf*

T «uut

s -n

3 »

». J>
11 T
7 OJ
Hk77

7 ja

I'lh

\ i-rnioMt

\ irrllii*

\\ k-hiii^fiii)

W-sf VrrifiTKU ...

\^ Hena.s.n

\Vji.i}iiP4£

'^ f ''

•lau

&M

» L ttiipd ;?utn STWu^e wh«n w?:jlit«d by ji»ie j(j*rfL

The PRESIDIJJO OFFICER. The
amendment will be received, printed, and
lie on the table.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President. I do
not desire to labor the point at this time,
smce it will undoubtedly be discussed at
length on the floor tomorrow; but I must
siibmit that the statement of the dis-
tini-Tuishod Senator does not measure up
to his usual accuracy. The amendment
to which he referred could not possibly
have the effect of brmgmg payments m
any State down from $13 to S7.50. The
total average payment is about $8.50. as
I recall, thou^^h I do not have the exact
figures before me.

We undertake to bring the figure
down to $7.50. Apphed eqmtably across
the board, the reduction woukl be a
httle more than $1 per acre throughout
the country in the pa^-ment for the con-
sen, a Lion reserve

Simply for the purpose of having it in
the Record, I w:sh to point out that
when mention is made of a $350 million
propram. as autiiorized by the appro-
priation bill. Senators will do well to
bear m mind that this is a contmuing
program. Many of these contracts are
entered mto for a 10- year period. When
a farmer enters mto the prop ram. there
is a charge against the Treasury of the
United States. If all the contracts were
made on a 10-year basis, the $350 mil-
hoti per year program would obl.'Rate the
Government for payments of $3'i
billion.

I do not think that the action of the
Senate Committee on Appropriations in
undertaking to make a very modest re-
duction in these paymtnts constitutes
any blow to the farm program. Cer-
tainly I am as interested in the farm
program as any other Member of the
Senate, since I represent. In part, an
.TTrlcultural State, and one which par-
ticipates very larsrely In the conserva-
tion reserve program

I should al.«;o like to h.ive appear In
the record the statement that these an-
nual rental payments are in addition to
the practice payments, which can
amount to as much as $25 an acre, for
putting the practice into effect. That
money comes from the Treas^ury of the
^United States.

Mr MUNDT. Mr P;-es:deiit. will the
Senator yieW

Mr. RUS,SE:LL. I yield.

Mr. MUNDT, I .should like to point
out — as I am sure the Senator intends to
do — that the practice payment ts a one-
shot payment only.

Mr. RUSSELL. The Senator Is cor-
rect.

Mr. MUNrr. For the first year.

Mr RUSSELL. Of course. It is.

Mr. MUNDT. The Senator had not
Included that in his sUtement.

Mr. RUSSELL. The practice pay-
ment might be considered not to be a
one-shot payment.

Mr. MUNDT. The practice payment?

Mr. RUSSELL. It could be more
than one-shot, because it could be paid
in 2 years. There can be only one prac-
tice payment made, though it may go
over a period of 2 years.

Mr. MUNDT. For one practice.

Mr. RUSSELL. For one practice, the

Senator is correct.

Mr MUNDT. That Is right.

Mr. RUSSELL. If the farmer who
puts his land Into the reserve, using
the maximum that could be applied un-
der the Senate amendment, were to
receive $25 for the practice of putttn?
it into the conservation reserve, and
then $13 a year for 10 years to keep It
in. he would get $25 for the practice
payment and $130 for rental payments,
and at the end of a 10-year period he
would Ret the land back with a greatly
Increased value.

I do net think the action of the com-
mittee Is going to work any great hard-
ship on the program. It will under-
take to bring at)out a little decree of
realism In the application of the pro-
gram.

I shaJl not labor the Question now. It
will undoubtedly be the subject of dia-
cussion on the floor tomorrow.

EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED

The PRESIDINO OFFICER 'Mr. Tal-
MADCE in the chair) laid before the Sen-
ate messages from the Preaklent of the
United States submitting sundry nom-
inations, which were referred to the ap-
propriate committees.

(For nominations this day received,
see the end of Senate proceedings )

EXECLTTV'E REPORTS OF A
COMMITTEE

The followmg favorable reports of
nominations were submitted:

By Mr E.\STLASV. from the Committe*
ou the Judiciary:

Hartwell L>*vi«. of Aiabiuaa. to b« DnlVcd
Stales anoriiey iut Ui» aiiddie dUtrict oi
Aliibama.

CUut. in G Rlrliarda. or South Dakota,
to b« United StatM attorney for the dl«-
l.-ict of South Dakita:

James L M.ny. of Alabama, to be United
SUtes marahal for the southern district of
AlatMma; and

John F Barr. of Went Virginia , to h»
United StatM marahal for the northern dla-
trtct of Weat Vlrgli;!*.

By Mr JENNER. from the Committee on
the Judlrlarj:

Jack. Chapler Brown, of Indiana, to b«
Uniied StiktP!\ atiomey lor the a. m them
disUict ui liidiAua.

r

ORDER DISPENSING WITH CALL OP
THE CALENDAR

On request of Mr. Join»so;« of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the call of
the calendar today under the rule was
dispensed with.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Pres-
ident. I move that the Senate proceed
to the consKleralion of executive busi-
ness.

Tbe motion was agreed to: and the
Senate ptoceeded to consider executive
business.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8591

EXECUTIVE REPORT OP A
COMMITTEE
Mr. HRUSKA. Mr. President. It Is my
pleasure to submit the report of the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary recommending
confirmation of the nomination of Rob-
ert Van Pelt, of Lincoln. Nebr.. to be
United States district Judge for the dis-
trict of Nebraska.

Mr. Van Pelt Is a native Nebraskan.
He was educated In the schools of Ne-
braska, receiving his law degree from its
State University College of Law in 1922.
He has engaged in the general practice of
law in Lincoln since that time. He had
served as assistant United States attor-
ney for Nebraska, and had taught at the
college of law from which he graduated.
His law practice was statewide in the
Nebraska courts. Much of it was trial
work, a most desirable background for a
Jurist.

Mr. Van Pelt has been very active In
civic, church, and other organizations.
He served as State moderator for the
Congregational Church. For many
years he has been a member of the Doane
^ollege board of trustees, and until re-
cently has been its chairman. He made
a fine contribution also in his member-
ship of the Lincoln School board and city
zoning board.

His '■ecord and reputation is of the
best for professional and personal integ-
rity, capability, and character. I know
he will serve in outstanding fashion as a
worthy successor in the line of the very
excellent Federal Judges In my State.

Mr. Van Pelt has been nominated to
succeed the Honorable John W. Delehant
who recently retired after a distin-
guished 15-year record of service on the
Federal bench. Happily for all con-
cerned, however. Judge Delehant has in-
dicated that he will accept assignment
of further trial work as retired Judge.
Thus, his continued usefulness will be
available in large measure, even though
his successor will undertake, in addition
to trial work, the administrative duties
in connection with the Judgeship.

Mr. President, Mr. Van Pelt has the
capability and all the necessary attri-
butes to serve as Federal Judge in out-
standing fashion. He will be a worthy
successor in the line of excellent Jurists
in my native State who preceded him.

It is my hope and recommendation
that the Senate will confirm his nomina-
tion at an early date.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr President, I wish to
add a word in behalf of Robert Van Pelt,
whose nomination will come before the
Senate for consideration very shortly.
He has had many years of experience and
Is one of the outstanding lawyers of our
State. He Is an excellent student, a
seasoned practitioner, and an individual
of the highest integrity. He has judicial
temperament.

Hi.s nomination has met with the wide-
.«;pread approval both of lawyers and
judges, and of the public as well, in the
State of Nebraska.

I reconmiend him very highly for the
position of United States district judge
to which he has been nominated.

The PRECIDING OFFICER. The
nomination will be placed on the Execu-
tive Calendar.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
the nominations on the Executive Cal-
endar. It will take just a mcnnent.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
nominations on the calendar will be
stated.

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

The legislative clerk read the nomina-
tion of Maj. Gen. Richard Clark Lindsay
to be lieutenant general. United States
Air Force.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the nomination is confirmed.

UNITED STATES NAVY

The legislative clerk proceeded to read
sundry nominations of members of the
Naval Reserve for permanent promotion
in the line and staff corps.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that these
nominations be considered en bloc.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the nominations will be con-
sidered en bloc; and, without objection,
the nominations are confirmed.

IN THE NAVY AND IN THE MARINE
CORPS

The legislative clerk proceeded to read
sundry nominations In the Navy and
Marine Corps which had been placed on
the Vice President's desk.

Mr JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
nominations in the Navy and the Marine
Corps be considered en bloc.

The PRESmiNa OFFICER. With-
out objection, the nominations In the
Navy and the Marine Corps will be con-
sidered en bloc; and, without objection,
they are confirmed.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
President be Immediately notified of all
nominations confirmed today.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, the President will be noti-
fied forthwith.

LEGISLATIVE SESSION

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I move that the Senate resume
the consideration of legislative business.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate resumed the consideration of
legislative business.

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I desire to ask the reporters for the
Dally Digest to take notice of the an-
nouncement I made this morning that
the Senate will convene each morning at
9:30 for the remainder of this week, that
the Senate will be in session on Saturday,
and will sit in the evenings, if necessary,
until we dispose of the four pending ap-
propriation bills and the mutual security
authorization bill.

I should like to have the attache* of
the majority and the minority of the
Senate call the attention of each indi-
vidual Senator to this announcement so
that if he has any engagements he will
be able to take proper notice of the con-
vening time of the Senate and the fact
that this will be a very long workweek.
We will come early and stay late until
we dispose of the measures which are
pending.

COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING
SENATE SESSION

Mr. OTtlAHONEY. Mr. President,
will the Senator jrield?
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield.

Mr. OTkiAHONEY. I wish to invite
the attention of the Senator from Texas
to the fact that more than a week ago,
at the request of the Senators from
Florida [Mr. Holland and Mr. Sxath-
ERs], I annoimced that hearings would
be held on a bill which they had jointly
introduced, affecting the Everglades Na-
tional Park in the State of Florida, by
the Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs, beginning at 10 o'clock on Tues-
day morning.

More than 2 weeks ago, by direction
of the Subcommittee on Antitrust and
Monopoly Legislation of the Committee
on the Judiciary, I gave public notice
that on Wednesday morning at 10
o'clock the staff of that subconunittee
would present to the subcommittee in
open public session its analysis of the
testimony which was heard and received
by the committee. The public has been
notified of both of these meetings.

I therefore ask unanimous consent
that these two committees, the Commit-
tee on Interior and Insular Affairs and
the Subcommittee on Antitrust and Mo-
nopoly Legislation of the Committee on
the Judiciary, may sit during the ses-
sions of the Senate.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, my at-
tention was momentarily diverted.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. I beUeve the Sen-
ator from Georgia desires the fioor to
call up a bill.

Mr. RUSSELL. I did not understand
the committees which were to meet.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. The Com-
mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs
and the Subcommittee on Antitrust and
Monopoly Legislation of the Committee
on the Judiciary.

Mr. President, I think it is a proper
request and I hope the Chair will put
the question.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Tal-
MADGE in the chair). Is there objection
to the request of the Senator from Wyo-
ming. The Chair hears none, and it is
BO ordered.

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, the un-
finished business, coming over from last
week, is H. R. 7143?

Mr. O'MAHONEY. Mr. President, I
yield to the Senator from Georgia with
the understanding that I shall not lose
the floor.

Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the Senator.

Mr. President, the bill is of vital im-
portance to the national security, but it is

8592

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Jinn 10

not controversial. I appreciate the Sen-
ator's yielding so that I may maie a

brief statement

The PRESIDING OFFICER, Is there
further morning business? If not, morn-
ing bxKiness is concluded.

SUSPENSION OP TROOP CEILINGS IN
THE ARMED FORCES

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, the un-
finished business, as I understand, is
H R. 7143

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Witho-it
objection, the Chair lays before tiie
Senate the unfinished business.

The Senate resumed the consideraticn
of the bm ^H. R. 7143) to amend the act
of AuKUst 3, 1959. as amended, to con-
tinue in effect the provisions relating to
the authorized personnel strength of the
Armed Forces.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, this
bill would amend the act of August 3,
1950, as amended, so as to continue In
effect the suspension of ceillnss on the
authorized personnel strengths of the
Armed Forces.

These ceilings apply In normal times,
when wj are not engaged in either hot
wars or coid wars, to the Armed Forces
of the United States. The personnel
strenyths which were intended to applj*
in noimal times total only slightly more
than 2.QC0.OOO persona.

Since the buildup of our Armed Forces
following the hostilities in Korea, it hixs
been necessary to suspend these ceilings.
Periodically they have been suspended.
The act of August 3. 1950. suspended the
ceilings until July 31. 1954. Public Law
307 of the 83d Congress extended the
suipension until July 31. 1957. at which
time the peacetime ceiling will become
effective unless the suspension is ex-
tended as contemplated by this bill.

I do not think that any Senator will
challenge the necessity for a further ex-
tension so the peacetime ceilings will not
apply on the 1st of July. The necessity
for continuation of the suspension has
not chansfed materially since 195C. The
Armed Forces now have an active duty
strength of approximately 2.8 million
persons. While there is a widely shared
hope that reductions in these active-
duty numbers may be made possible in
time by technological improvement* and
by a relaxation of international tension,
we have not yet reached the stage where
the size of our Armed Forces can be
safely reduced to only slightly more than
2 million persons, as would be necessary
If this bill were not enacted. The hope
for a reduction which will be permanent
lies in the yearnmg of our people for a
relaxation of international tensions and
the elimination of the danger of ai^gres-
fiion against the Free World.

I might point out, Mr. President, that
the effect of the reduction, if it came
about, would be particularly acute in the
case of the Air Force. Without an ex-
tension of the suspension of ceilings as
provided in this bill, the Air Force would
have to reduce its combat and support
forces by almost one-half of its ptrength
at the present time, or a reduction of
about 400,000 persons. Obviously, the
Air Force could not meet its commit-
ments after such a reduction. The ef-

fects on the Army and the Navy would
be not quite so drastic, but failure to
continue suspension of the ceilings would
cause both the Navv and the Army to

reduce their strengths below levels
planned for the next fiscal year.

For the period of time that the perma-
nent personnel strength limitations are
su.'^pended. there comes into play a sec-
ondary ceilm? of 5 million persons on the
active duty personnel strengths of tiie
Armed Forces. This secondary ceilmg
of 5 million will remain in effect during
the extended period of suspension of the
perman^nu cei!ir.t;s involved in thus bill.

H. R. 7143 would extend the suspension
of the personnel ceilings until July 1,
19'9. The termination of this suspen-
sion would coincide with the termina-
tion of authority to induct persons for
military service under the Universal Mil-
itary Training and Service ^ct.

These two subjects are. of course, in-
timately related. In 1959 It will be
necessary for the Congress to review in
their entirety problems of national de-
fen.«?e as they relate Ixjth to the extension
of the draft and to fixing the size of the
Armed Forces after that date.

Mr. President. I cannot conceive of any
objection to the passage of the bill.

Mr. OMAHONEY. Mr President, the
Senator from Georgia has discussed a
bill which I feel should be enacted.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
bill L«! open to amendment. If there be
no amendment to be proposed, the ques-
tion is on the third reading and passage
of the bill.

The bill i H. R. 7143) was ordered to a
thud reading, read the third time, and
passed.

CLAIM OF CHRISTOFT!TR HANNE-
VIG— CONVENTION BETWEKN THE
UNITED STATES AND NORWAY
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent for the
present consideration of Calendar No.
378. House Joint Resolution 185.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Joint resolution will be stated by title
for the information of the Senate.

The LecisL.MivE Clikk. A joint reso-
lution CR. J. Res. 185^ to implement the
convention between the United States
and Norway for diapoMtion of the claim
against the United SUtes on behalf of
ChristofTer Hannevig.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the request of the Senator
from Texas?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill.

BIRTHDAY ANNIVERSARY OF SEN-
ATOR BYRD

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, today is the birthday anniversary of
the senior Senator from Virginia, the dis-
tinguished and illustrioiis Haut Ploob
Btrd. There is no more popular Mem-
ber of this body, and no man in America
who has made a greater or more con-
structive contribution to good govern-
ment than Harry F. Btr», as GoTemor
of Virginia, and ax a Member of the
United States Senate for many years.
We are all deeply in his debt for his wise

guidjuice. for his ma.Tnlflcent qualities
of leader.ship, and for his always under-
standing attitude toward those of i.s who
may not be so experieziced as he U .

Mr. OMAHONEY. Mr. E>re&id(!nt. It
affords me great delight to join :n the
Liibute which tlie Senator from Texas
has paid to our good friend, the Senator
from Virginia. I congratulate him per-
sonally, standing on the floor. up<'n the
attainment of his "Junior" statu'i. He
is not an old man yet, but he is a great
man.

Mr. BARRETT. Mr. President. I wish
to join the disUnsui^hed Senator from
Texas and the distinguished ScJiator
from Wyoming in the congratulations
they have extended to our good friend,
the senior Senator from Virginia.

Let me say to him that all the Members-
en this side of the aisle feel preclfcly as
does the senior Senator from Texas with,
regard to the Senator from Virginia. I
am sure that the people of the country
generally join us in wishing him many
happy returns of the day.

MLTT7AL SECLTRITY ACT OP : 957— J
AMENDMENT >^

Mr. OMAHONEY. Mr. President, W>
yt-ar. on behalf of the Senator fr^
Arltansai I Mr. McCuluu* I and niysdf ,
I submitted an amendment to the Mu-
tual Security Authorization Act, by
which the officers and employees of the
Government carrying out the proirama
authorized in that measure were to be
under obligation to testify full:' and
frankly before the appropriate (^oamil-
tees of Congress. The amendn^tt was
not endorsed by the administrBt.on at
that time, and it failed.

I feel that there has been sjch a
change in attitude, and such a wider
comprehension among the people of the
United States as to the amount of money
which Is being expended under muttial
security, for military and economic aid
to foreign countries, that the Senate b
more ready now than it was a yetir ago
to make certain that the CcngrcBs Is fuUy
advised with resiiect to the man.ier in
which these funds are being exp«;nded.

The Senator from Arkansas (M-. Mc-
Clsixan 1 . as chairman of the Comaiittee
en Government Operations, h«.s had
many occasions to find repreaientatives
of the executive department refuzmg to
give the committee Information which
It had the right to have, with respect to
the manner in which these sums are
being expended. It ts only necessary to
refer to the report which the Fareign
Relations Committee has Just submitted
to the Senate, namely. Report No. 417,
In support of the Mutual Security Act
of 1957. to .show bow essential an ainend-
nient of this kind is.

How many people realize that tiie cu-
mulative expenditures for mllitartr and
economic aid through June SO, 1966
amounted to $35459.329.000; that cf this
total sum, of great magnitude, tho-e re-
mained unliquidated ob^igattaKM, aa of
June 3Q, 1966. amounting to $ffJI23 6S3,.
000; and that the estimated expenditures
for the fiscal year 1957 amount to $3 tSX-
647.000?

In the face of this amazing record of
expenditure, we find that the projram

1957

CX)NGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8593

for estimated obllgmtlons for the flscfti
year 1958 amounts to $4,435,758,000, and
that the estimated expenditures for the
fiscal year 1958— we are almost In that
year now— will amount to $8,911,369,000.
It la only necessary to recite these
expenditures to realise how important
it is that the committees of Congress
should be fully advised of the manner In
which such expenditures are being made.
When we lend to other governments or
give them huge sums for military pur-
poses or economic purposes to be ex-
pended through their own agencies, we
cannot be oblivious of the fact that
there may be opportimities for waste and
extravagance, to say nothing of possible
corruption.

We owe It as an obligation tc our peo-
ple to make certain that the commit-
tees of Congress shall not be denied this
information. This subject was a matter
of comment In a television program
about 2 weeks ago. over the Columbia
Broadcasting System, in which the Sen-
ator from Georgia [liir. Talmaocb], now
presiding over the Senate, the Senator
from South Dakota (Mr. Mitkdt], the
Senator from New Jersey [Mr. Cask].
and I participated. Diulng that discus-
sion I raised this question :

The Senator from South Dakota in-
dicated that he migh*. be interested in
sponsoring such an amendment. I re-
ceived a letter from him containing the
suggestion that if the amendment were
patterned after the text of the Atomic
Energy Act. in all probability he would
be satisfied to Join in the sponsorship of
such an amendment.

I am very hai^y to be able to an-
nounce that when he had the opportu-
nity today to examine the text of the
amendment, he authorized me to write
his name on the amendment as a co-
sponsor. The Senator from Oregon
(Mr. MoRSx], who is a member of the
Committee on Foreign Relations, has in-
dicated his desire to act as a joint spon-
sor.

As I present the amendment now, It is
Intended to be proposed in behalf of my-
self, the Senator from Arkansas [Mr.
McClellanI. the Senator fiom South
Dakota [Mr. Mukdt]. the Senator from
Oregon I Mr. MokseI, and the Senator
from Georgia (Mr. Talmaocx].

I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment may lie on the table through
the next session of the Senate, so that
other Senators, who may be inclined to
do so, may add their names as cosponsors.
The PRESroiNO OFFICER. The
amendment will be received and printed,
and will lie on the table for 1 day as re-
quested by the Senator from Wyoming.

Mr. CMAHONEY. Mr. President. In
order that it may be clear to all who
read the Record just what the amend-
ment does, I should like to read the text
of it into the Record.

On page 47. line 33. before the period,
it is proposed to Insert a semicolon and
the following:

Th» Secretary of State shall keep the Com-
mittee on Foreign Belatlona of the Senate,
the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the
House of Representatives, and the Commit-
tees on Appropriations of the Senate and
House of Representatives folly and ciirrently
Informed with respect to all activities of the

cm 541

Departmient of State or any agency thereof
under this act. The Secretary ot Defenss
shall keep such committees and the Cotn-
mittees on Armed ServloM of the Senat* and
Hovtse of R^iresentativea fully and cmTsntly
Informed with respect to aU activities at the
Department of Defense under this act. Any
OoTemment agency shall furnish any infor-
mation requested by any such eommltte*
with respect to the activities and responst-
bflltles of that agency under this act, and
it shall be the duty of any officer or em-
ployee of the Government having informa-
tion relating to programs being administered
under this act to furnish promptly to such
committee or committees, upon request by
any such committees, full information with
respect to such activities and responsibilities.

FEDERAL INDIAN POUCIES ON
HEALTH. WEUPfiRE, AND RELO-
CATION

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, dur-
ing the recent session of the Montana
State Legislature, they passed several
Joint memorials pertaining to Federal
Indian policies on health, welfare, and
relocation.

The State legislature recognized the
need for a study of the relocation pro-
gram and, perhaps most Important, they
realised that something must be done to
meet the empl03mient needs of our In-
dians. As you know, many of our Indian
reservations do not provide sufDcient Job
opportxinitles.

I referred these memorials to the Bu-
reau of Indian Affairs, and I have re-
ceived their views and comments. So
that the Senate may be fully informed
as to the Bureau's position on these mat-
ters, I ask that Commissioner Glenn L.
Emmons' letter of May 31. 1957. be
printed at this point In the Concrks-

SIOKAL RXCOBO.

There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed In the Rxcobo.
as follows:

Dkfawmewt or trz Imaajoa.

BUSKAU or IMSIAM ATTAIBS,

Wa^inffton. D. C, May 31. 1957.
Hon. ACtxx lUwsnBJi,
United States Senate,

Washington, D. C.

DcAB ScNATOR Maksthxo: This Is In fur-
ther reference to our letter of April 11. and
your letter of March 21. 1957, enclosing for
comment and consideration three Joint
memorials p(Msed by the Montana State
Legislature pertaining to Indian health, wel-
fare, and relocation.

Our comments on each of the memorials
are as follows:

1. House Joint Memorial 6 recommends
that "• • • the Congress of the United
States make a thorough study of the ef-
fect of promoting off-reservation migra-
tion upon the American Indians' family;
the advisability of extending family assist-
ance programs to Indians away from reser-
vations; the educatlraial develoi»nent of the
relocated Indian child: the development of
Job opportunities at or near reservations;
the development of Indian property re-
sources and the equal participation for all
Indians in Federal services such as the
Indian Branch of Public Health Servtoes."

The Bureau does not have any objectloas
to a thorough study being made as suggested
by menuurlal 6 if the Congress of the United
States deems such a study as warranted and
necessary. In the event a study Is under-
taken, the Btireau will be most happy to
cooperate and assist In any way poasiUe.

a. House Joint Memorial 14 recommends
to the Congress of the United States that

** * * they more fully recognJae the Ped-
eral responsibility in assisting ^md providing
reasonable Job opportunities, and necessary
financial assistance. In cooperation with the
State of Montana, and the counties thereof,
far Indian people, regardless of where they
reside within the State of Montana; and
requesting further, that appropriate action
be taken to Insure that Indian people re-
crtve employment preference In connection
with all contracts Involving the use of labor
on Indian reservation."

It Is the Binvau's policy not to duplicate
services of other agenciea. either Federal or
State, when such services are available to In-
dian people on the same basis as they are
available to non -Indians. The Indian peo-
ple, as citizens of the State and county in
which they reside, are entitled to all the
rights and privileges extended to other citi-
zens in similar circumstances. Since local
emfdoyment services are provided them,
through the State employment service, as
residents of the State, regardless of where
they reside, we believe that the duplication
of these services Is not justified. It Is the
Bureau's position that the local employment
eervloes should continue with this responsi-
bility In Montana as well as in other States.
Accordingly, the Bureau at Indian Affairs
and the Bureau of Employment Seciirlty on
July 1. 1955, entered into an agreement, a
copy of which Is attached, regarding this
3X3lnt. TUB agreement was a revision of an
earlier one entered Into on July 25, 1950.

Since unemployment compensation benefit
payments are provided, through certification
by the State employment agencies, to assist
eligible Individuals during periods of unem-
ployment, we do not believe It would be
proper for the Bureau to comment on sug-
gested Increase or any change as to eligibility
requirements for such benefit payments.
The Bureau of Employment Security, De-
partment of Labor, may be able to offer com-
ments on the suggestions.

With reference to the suggestion concern-
ing employment preference In contracts, the
Bureau is restricted by the Federal pOpcy of
nondiscrimination as provided by BMBBtlve
Order 10557. requiring the Incorporattpli of a
nondiscrimination clause in all Qovinment
contracts.

3. House Joint Memorial Mo. 15 recom-
mends to the Congress of the United States
that " • • • the necessary action be taken
to have a policy established by the Depart-
ment of the Interior and the Indian Bureau
thereof, to purchase coal for use on the
Tongue River and Crow Indian Reservation
from the coal deposits existing on the
Tongue River Indian Reservation, in order
to promote the general welfare of the north-
ern Cheyenne Tribe, both by providing eta-
ployment on that reservation for the north-
ern Cheyenne Indian people residing there-
on, and by providing Income for this ex-
emplary tribal enterprise."

By letter dated April 11, 1957, we have au-
thorised the area director, Billings area ofllce,
where both Tongue River and Crow Indian
Reservations are Ic :ated, to purchase coal
locally for the fiscal year 1958, if such piur-
chases meet the following criteria: (1) It
win further the expressed policy of the Con-
gress if a fair portion of contracts are placed
with small business concerns; or (2) small
mines are located in the vicinity of the
using point: or (3) the pvirchase of coal will
help the local economy; or (4) promote the
general welfare of the trlt}e(fi) ; or (6) supple-
ment or provide Income to Indians

We beUeve that purchiise of coal from the
Tongue River Indian Reservation will meet
the above criteria.

Th* memorials forwarded with your letter
are returned, as requested. We appreciate
your submitting them for our oommentft.
Siaoerely yours,

GLXmi L. EaofOWB.

Commissioner.

8594

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

COMMANDER QUICK'S APPOINT-
MENT AS COMMANDER OP THE
WAVES

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, on
August 1 the command of the WAVES
will be turned over to Navy Comdr.
Winifred Redden Quick, a native of
Great Falls, Mont. The new director will
assume the rank of captain and will be
the only member of the WAVES entitled
to wear the four stripes of a captain.
Commander Quick is the daughter of
Mr. and Mrs. Dan A. Redden, former
residents of Great Falls and Missoula.
She was one of many women who en-
tered the branches of the armed services
during World War II for strictly pa-
triotic reasons and decided to make it
a career. There are only four WAVES
from the first WAVE class who are now
on active duty. She has been awarded
the Bronze Star Medal and she also
wears ribbons for the American theater,
Asiatic-Pacific. World War n Victory,
and National Defense.

Montana is indeed proud of Com-
mander Quick's accomplishments and I
am taking this opportunity to wish her
success in her new post as commander
of one of our finest women's military
organizations.

Mr. President, I ask that an article
appearing in the May 19, 1957, issue of
the Great Falls Tribune be printed at
the conclusion of my remarks.

There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

GRKAT Palls Nativk To Dihect WAVES

An attractive and hard-working native of
Great Palls will add a thin gold stripe to
her wardrobe this summer and become di-
rector of the WAVES.

When Navy Comdr. Winifred Redden Quick
assumes her new duties August 1 as the
fifth director of the WAVES with the accom-
panying rank of captain, she will be the
only member of the WAVES entitled to wear
the four strlpjes of a captain.

Now assigned to duty in London as senior
assistant to the assistant chief of staff Ihr
administration at the headquarters of Adm.
Walter F Boone, commander in chief nf
Eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean Naval
Forces. Commander Quick will succeed Capt.
Louise Wilde as WAVE director.

The daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Dan A.
Redden, Commander Quick was born In
Great Palls on November 26. 1911. Her par-
ents moved soon after her birth to Missoula,
where she attended the Sacred Heart AcaS^
emy from 1917-22.

Her father, now deceased, was a Nelhart
businessman. Her mother now Mrs. George
Lowe, lives in Corning, Calif.

•T have nothing but pleasant memories
about my early years In Montana." the com-
mander has reported. "I hope one day soon
to return to Montana for a visit."

She was graduated from the University
of Southern California in 1935 with a bach-
elor of education decree and did graduate
work at Radcllffe College. Cambridge. Mass .
In 1938. Commander Quick received her
master's degree from Stanford University,
Palo Alto. Calif , In 1952. after attending a
Navy course In personnel administration
there.

Her naval career began In August 1942.
"for strictly patriotic reason.s " Her brother.
10 years her junior, then was entering the
United States Naval Academy. A naval
aviator, he now Is serving as a lieutenant
commander in Japan.

Commander Quick. Captain Wllde and
Comdr. Eleanor Rich and Winifred Love
are the only four WAVES from the Initial
WAVES class remaining on active duty.

While on duty with the Bureau of Naval
Personnel, Washington, D. C. the then Lieu-
tenant Commander Quick was assigned In
1944 to 14th Naval District Headquarters In
Pearl Harbor to prepare for assigning WAVES
to that overseas station.

For her outstanding work on this as-
signment, she was awarded the Bronze Star
Medal. She also wears ribbons for American
theater. Asiatlc-Paclflc, World War II Vic-
tory, and National Defense.

Commander Quick will leave Navy head-
quarters In London late this month to
take over her new 4-year post.

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND
THE CONDUCT OF FOREIGN RELA-
TIONS

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, in
recent weeks I have proposed amend-
ments to two bills which have a vital and
direct relationship to the conduct of the
foreign policy of this Nation. I proposed
to reduce the 1958 appropriation for the
United State Information Agency to $60
million, some $35 million below the sum
finally appropriated for that Agency.
Last week I proposed to reduce the 1958
authorization for the mutual security
program by a total of $800 million.

Both of these efforts to reduce the
size of these operations failed. My ef-
forts to reduce these funds have been
characterized in various quarters as
something akin to the use of a meat ax
on the allegedly carefully designed, effi-
ciently operated, and nicely balanced
proposals of the President.

Let me say in the first place that I do
not consider myself an enemy of the
United States Information Agency or the
mutual security program.

Last year I steered through the Senate
a bill which would have given the In-
formation Agency a foreign service of its
own. I have supported larger budgets
for the Information Agency than that
which I was willing to support this year.

My record in support of the mutual
security programs over past years indi-
cates my belief in carefully administered
and well-balanced aid programs. I have
supported the point 4 program since
its beginning and have urged its purifi-
cation and expansion.

Despite the fact that I believe an
Information program is essential in our
national interest and that foreign aid
must be continued into the future, I have
been compelled to seek their curtailment
for reasons which are essentially ad-
ministrative and constitutional in
nature.

It has been my duty for a number of
years first as a member of the Commit-
tee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives and more recently as a
member of the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate to visit many of
our information and mutual security in-
stallations in the field. I have seen much
good work. I have been much impressed
by the caliber and devotion of many of
the men and women in these Jobs.

But having said that, I must also add
that I have seen many, many instances
of waste, or overstaffinj,'. of the right

hand not knowing what the left hand is
doing.

I have seen Instances in which the Am-
bassador and the local head of the In-
ternational Cooperation Administra-
tion have been working at cross [ urposes.

I have seen information officers denied
access to vital Information in .he pos-
session of Ambassadors.

I know of Instances In which opera-
tions of the information agency have led
to violent protests from the very nations
which we have been trying to impress
with our information program.

I have seen plans hastily dniwn and
promises made, only to have tht-ir effect
nullified by interminable delays in Wash-
ington.

I have seen imaginative men In the
field with their spirit crushed by the top-
heavy bureaucracy of Washingt(vn where
a man's salary Is often determined
not by his ability to turn out \*ork, but
by his ability to put his initials on work
done by others.

It may be that some wastf is inevitable
In any operation, government oi private.

I am not convinced, however, that the
way to deal with this problem is ? imply to
make our appropriations ijenerous
enough to cover an item for w iste and
Inefficiency.

My reasons specifically for proposing
reductions in the mutual security pro-
gram involve very largely the lack of
Imagination in the administrtition In
dealing with the report of the Special
Committee To Study the Porflgn Aid
Program. I grant that large po-tions of
the committee's recommendaticns were
accepted. But on vital matters, the ad-
ministration has shown itself bound by
a concept of agency accommodation
rather than by a wilhngness to face
reality.

Take the development fund as an
example. I am convinced thai had it
not been necessary in the view of some
elements In the executive brinch to
preserve that quasi-independent agency.
ICA, the fund would more logicf.lly have
been made an independent Government
corporation, or have been giveii a close
relationship to the Export-Import Bank.

Or take the case of defense support,
as an example. If the Executive had
been willing to face reality, I believe it
would have abolished that category of
aid and lumped all economic-type grant
assistance together. But the adminis-
tration was fearful that if the economic-
type, grant-aid figure were to show in
budget estimates as at least $1.2 oillion—
defense support. $900 million, plus spe-
cial assistance, $300 million— this would
look to the American people like too big
a figure for gifts. The result is that the
executive branch still seeks to hide eco-
nomic grant aid to certain countries
under the heading of defense support
on the theory that such assistance is so
closely related to the miliUry effort of
the United States and its allies that it
cannot be separated therefrom. The in-
consistency of this approfh Is shown,
however, by the fact that the Executive
is only asking that defense support be
appropriated as part of the Defense De-
partment budget, while the day-to-day

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECC»D — SENATE

8595

administration of the program la to be
in the hands of ICA.

I believe there are two ways of getting
at the waste and the misleading prac-
tices I have described here.

The first method is to reduce the funds
available for these operations as I have
proposed.

The second method is to centralize the
conduct of our foreign affairs In the De-
partment of State. Power and respon-
sibility must go hand in hand.

The Department of State should be our
first line of defense. The State Depart-
ment should be the primary Instnmaent
of the Executive for advancing the for-
eign relations of the United States. It
has long been accepted by both political
parties that the United States can speak
with only one voice in the conduct of for-
eign relations. Notwithstanding the in-
herent responsibility of the State Depart-
ment, as our interests abroad have ex-
panded, an organizational structure has
mushroomed, permitting the United
States to speak with many contradictory
voices. The State Department has be-
come partially paralyzed in the exercise
of its responsibility. It has become crip-
pled as the autonomous agencies have
circumvented its control in conducting
foreign relations. In particular, the
United States Information Agency and
the International Cooperation Adminis-
tration are powerful autonomous instru-
ments of United States foreign relations.

While It is regrettable that these agen-
cies dally shape the course of our foreign
relations without the benefit of close
State Department direction, it is more to
be regretted that the Secretary of State
is a foremost advocate of this dualism.

The pbsition taken by the Secretary of
State on numerous occasions has been
that these foreign operation functions of
the United States Government cannot be
incorporated within the State Depart-
ment. The reason advanced is that the
Department would then not be free to en-
gage in policymaking. The Secretary of
State is not alone in this mistaken view.
It may be granted that policymaking is
an Important aspect of our foreign rela-
tions. There must be United States rep-
resentation In the United Nations and in
the world's capitals. There is a continu-
ing need for high-level consultation, ne-
gotiation, coordination of State interests,
and treatymaking. But "this historical
picture of diplomacy does not entirely
satisfy the present needs of United States
foreign relations.

With the growth of economic and mil-
itary strength and political leadership,
the responsibilities of the United States
have expanded proportionately. Foreign
relations Is no longer solely a matter of
representation and treatymaking, but
Involves the entire range of our global
operations. Foreign policy is no longer
something that can be coined exclusively
within cloistered walls. For while the
State Department is conceiving policy,
actual policy is also being made by the
operations of the quasi-independent
agencies negotiating daily with foreign
governments — daily determining the
course of our foreign relations. A sharp
line cannot be drawn between policy and
operations. Operational activities of the

agencies are not distinct from policy, but
are rather the life and breath of foreign
policy.

At present the agencies have separata
headquarters in Washington and sepa-
rate establishments in the field. In
Washington, the theoretical organiza-
tional chart provides for top-level policy
coordination by the Department of State.
In practice, the policy is either lost in
the course of implementation or the pol-
icy is simply a rubberstamping of what
has become a de facto decision of the
agency. In the field, in theory, the
agency is under the umbrella of the
ambassador. In practice, the field
agency reports to its headquarters in
Washington. Under present organiza-
tion it is virtually Impossible for the
State Department to initiate and control
policies in Washington or for the ambas-
sadors to control policy in the field.

Mr. President, were this a mere ques-
tion of internal organization only of
concern to the administration, we would
not burden the Senate. It is, however,
a matter of concern to the Senate, affect-
ing as it does the course of United States
foreign relations. We may enxmierate
the specific consequences:

First, in the absence of continuing and
direct supervision by the State Depart-
ment, the agencies tend to mushroom
their activities, often engaging in proj-
ects or programs not directly related to
the key foreign policy objectives in the
area.

Second, the activities of the agencies
often work at coimterpurposes to other
agencies or to the Department of State.

Third, the present practice of multi-
agency operations abroad results in the
snowballing of American personnel. A
point is reached at which the presence
of large nimibers of Americans in a
country works more against our inter-
ests than the program works to our in-
terest. It is the familiar pattern. As
the contingent increases in size, it is ac-
companied by the post exchange. Amer-
ican automobiles. American salaries.
American high schools, American stand-
ards of living, and inevitably local ani-
mosity and friction.

Fourth, the lack of central unified
operations within the State Department
makes for a duplication of administra-
tive functions and tends to build up ex-
cessive housekeeping services and per-
sonnel This makes for inefficiency and
waste, boosting the cost and lowering
the effectiveness of our. program. Qual-
ity is sacrificed to quantity. It incurs
administrative problems growing out of
disparity in salaries, emoluments, and
services among personnel of the separ-
ate agencies.

Fifth, It places the United States Am-
bassador in an untenable position.
While the ambassador waits to negoti-
ate high policy, the minor officials of
the agencies maintain daily contact
with the officials of the country. This Is
often at the permanent secretary or
ministerial leveL These ccmtacts give
continuing shape to United States for-
eign policy. If there is a serious ques-
tion at issue, the Ageacy refers It back
for decision to a desk officer in his
agency in Washington. The desk officer

of the United States Information Agency
or the Intematlofnal Cooperation Ad-
ministration in Washix^gton then makes
a decision, and United States policy is
made. Ordinarily, the dedc <rfBcer
knows a great deal about the particular
problems of his area, but is not expected
to know the broader impUeations of
total United States foreign policy. Yet
the desk officer makes the day-to-day
policy, cutting the ground from imder
the State Department in Washington,
and leaving the ambassador in an awk-
ward position. In this role, the ambas-
sador is a ceremonial totem pole. The
officials of the country look to the minor
agency officials as the source of the liv-
ing, real, dynamic, day-to-day policy.
The ambassador spends considerable
time trying to catch up with and cover
up the operations of these minor agency
officials. While the ambassador's eco-
nomic affairs officer, public information
officer, or political affairs oflleer — thb
regular ■ foreign service personnel — are
transmitting cables to Washington for-
mulating high policy, the agency
personnel are already way ahead imple-
menting either that policy or its dia-
metric opposite. Too often it is the op-
posite. Tragic as it may seem, in too
many instances the focus of real power
of the United States under this system
is not the ambcussador but Uie agency
head. The agency head too often not
only has the monopoly of decision upon
the concrete issues, but has an edge on
the emoluments of prestige and power.
In some instances the agency heads
even have had larger villas, more ex-
pensive automobiles, and more lavish
representation allowances than the am-
bassador has had. In his recent testi-
mony before the Senate Appropriaticms
Committee the Director of the United
States Information Agency character-
ized integration within the State De-
partment as the tail wagging the dog.
The present status of the State Depart-
ment is fairly clear.

Sixth, there is yet another aspect too
often overlooked. During the postwar
period these quasi -independent agencies
have been established to meet the United
States worldwide responsibilities be-
lieved to be of an emergency or a tempo-
rary nature. The economic collapse of
Europe, the resurgence of militant com-
munism, the cold war, the Korean war
and its aftermath all have called for
large-scale United States operations
abroad. To the extent that these have
been massive operations and to the ex-
tent that they have been conceived as
nonrecurrent measures, there has been
some justification for the autonomous
agency. We now are faced, however,
with a new premise — a new point of de-
parture calling for a changed outlook.
That is what appears to be the evident
truth: that while some programs may be
phased out at an early date, other oper-
ations of the United States abroad are
of such nature as to continue beyond the
foreseeable future. Recognizing this,
two conditions are evident: First, the
existence of the autonomous agency
tends to perpetrate those functions
which could be phased out at an early

8596

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

date. Second, thosfe remaining nonmili-
tary functions that are recognizably of
a permanent nature should be estab-
lished on a permanent basis within a
permanent department of the Govern-
ment. It would appear that the total
overseas personnel establishment could
then be greatly reduced. Programs could
then be administered by career person-
nel on a sound businesslike basis. Above
all, they should be closely geared to all
other foreign operations of the United
States, and they should be administered
in close harmony with United States for-
eign policy objectives. These conditions
can be met only by incorporating the
present autonomous agencies within the
Department of State. Only by establish-
ing the organization on a permanent
basis will it be possible to phase out those
programs that are not of a permanent
nature.

Ironic as it may seem, one important
consequence of the State Department's
loss of control over many of the most
important instruments of foreign policy
Is that the State Department must take
the blame for the mistakes of the other
agencies of government operatinii
abroad. If the Voice of America makes
a mistake damaging to our relations
with a country or an area, who takes the
blame? If the Department of Defense
makes a mistake in its activities abroad,
who takes the blame'' If the Interna-
tional Cooperation Administration ap-
proves a grant to a country when it
could have obtained a loan from the Ex-
port-Import Bank, who takes the blame?
In each case, it is the Department of
State which takes the blame, both in
the eyes of foreign nations and in the
eyes of our own citizens.

Power and resf)onsibility must be m-
extricablv linked together for the ef-
ficient conduct of the foreign affairs of
this Nation. That is not now the case.
One other illustration. The Commit-
tee on Foreign Relations has recently
gone through the process of con.sidenng
the Mutual Security Act of 1957. This
is probably the most important foreign
policy measure to be considered each
year by the Congress. It provides
the Congress with an opportunity to re-
view the ffiipact of the United States
around the world. It gives the Congress
an opportunity to question and to sup-
port, or reject, foreign pohcy issues
throughout the world.

But who has the responsibility for pre-
senting this program to the Congress?
The presentation this year has been
handled by the General Counsel of the
International Cooperation Administra-
tion. Last year the presentation was
handled by a short-term employee of the
International Cooperation Administra-
tion. I do not reflect on these men and
their abii.ty. They have done fine work;
indeed outstanding work, and they are a
credit to their organizations and to the
Government. But I submit, Mr. Presi-
dent, that Congress is as interested in
foreign policy as the Secretary of State.
I submit that just because the Secretary
of State wants to relegate what he calls
"operations" to the outlying realms of
the executive branch. Congress should
not be expected to accept truncated pres-

entations of the foreign policies of the
United States, even when put forth by
able men from the operations coordinat-
ing facilities of the executive branch.

I do not insist that the Secretary of
State drop his numerous duties to sit
with the committees of Congress for days
as they consider the mutual security leg-
islation. But I do ask that the Depart-
ment of State assume its responsibility
for the coordination of foreign policy.
I ask. for example, that it take the initia-
tive in bringing together the scattered
activities that have developed as the re-
sult of the generation of foreign cur-
rencies in surplus disposal programs
throughout the world.

The foreii.jn policy of this Nation can
never become an effective instrument to
advance the national interest, if we in-
sist on administering it on a blunderbuss,
shotiiun basis.

These conclusions are not based solely
upon personal observations, but are con-
firmed by numerous reports of my dis-
tinguished colleak;ues v^ho have exam-
ined our prugram.s around the world.
The need for bringing these programs
closer within the State Department has
been voiced by committees of both the
Senate and the Hou.se of Representatives,
as well as by private agencies.

The Brookinus Institution, in its report
on the admini.strative aspects of foreign-
a.ssistance programs, prepared for the
Special Senate Committee To Study the
Foreign Aid Program, states pointedly:

The present tendency of the executive
branch ha^ been to divorce the ] Stale] De-
partment aa fAT tw p»jMlble from ojieratluna,
and to develop it only as a p<i;icy agency.
The transplanting of the Intern.ituinal Co-
operation Administration functions Into the
Deprtrtnient was largely the resut of Con-
gressional pressure and was accepted only
with reluctance Thus, many questions will
remain difficult to settle until there is more
agreement (^n the appropriate status and
r^le (f the Department of State.

The Special Senate Committee To
Study the Foreign Aid Program, in its
report on May 13, 1957, states:

The comml'tee .suggests that the Secre-
tary of State reexamine his position on this
question with a view to continuing and
speeding of the process of integration of the
International Omperation Admuilstratlua
Into the Department.

The report of the Committee on For-
eign Relations on overseas information
programs, made on June 15. 1953. stated,
with re.spect to the then existing sep-
rate agencies:

The artrument fnr separate agencies must
be weighed agaln.st the cost, the Increased
jiersonnel. and the dangers of conflicting
influences on foreign policy gruwlm^' out of
separate proi;raui3.

The Subcommittee on Technical As-
sistance of the Senate Forei^'n Relations
Committee stated in its report on Mav 7
1956: '

The subcommittee Is not entirely satisfied
with the extent to which the International
Cooperation Administration has been inte-
grated with the Department of State. It
urges the Secretary of State, who is the ofB-
ciHl primarily responsible, to pursue th«
matter more vigorously.

The evidence would seem to contra-
dict any poscsible belief that the United

States is now achieving its policy objec-
tives by speaking with many voices. 'We
are beginning to reap the consequences
of inundating the world with American
personnel all bent upon diverse pur-
pases. The recent anti-American riots
In Formosa, whatever the justice of the
incident, indicate, first, the close rela-
tionship of every Amerioan activity
abroad to the attainment of policy ob-
jectives. Secondly, the antl-Araerican
riots indicate that, even in a country
considered to be a stanch ally, there ex-
ists an underlying resentment that must
have l>een simmering beneath the sur-
face for some time. It points to the
conclusion the policy objectives might
better be achieved by a quahtative, inte-
grated approach than through a mas-
sive unleashing of a multitude of agency
personnel. In Japan current antl-Amer-
IcanLsm is focused upon the Girard case.
involving the shooting of a Japanese
woman gathering scrap metal on a firing
range. The Japanese people are aroused
against the testing of nuclear weapons.
Before that they were against the use
of .sacred Mount Fujiyama as a firing
range for artillery. Before that it Was
isolated instances of nonconformance by
American military personnel. Whatever
the surface i.ssue, the underlying resent-
ment IS related to the present multi-
farious, quantitative approach. It points
again to the need for lodging foreign op-
erations within the Department of Stat^.
The Qirard case in Japan is illustrative.
Inconceivable as it may seem, instead
of the State Department initiating, ad-
ministering, and controUing United
States operations, thi.s case never
reached Ambassador MacArthur, but
was referred to the Department of De-
fense in Washington. From Korea,
Thailand, Vietnam. Laos, and Cambodia
come reports that the efforts of one
agency to build up the economy are be-
ing diluted by another pohcy respecting
exchange rates on the dollar.

In yesterdays New York Times there
appeared an article entitled 'Forces
Overseas Stir 'Inevitable Tensions',"
written by Mr. E. W. Kenworthy, a very
able reporter. I should like to read a
part of the article:

In another respect, the status of forces
agreemenu recognize that these matters —

Referring to^he Girard case —
cannot be left simply to legal procedure.
They contain a provision that when there la
a deadkxrk In the two-member committees
set up to decide Jurisdiction the issiie shall
be referred to the two Governments through
diplomatic channel* for settlement.

Calmer heads In Congress this week felt
that the Girard case would not have become
the Inflammatory Issue it has If the diplo-
matic stage had not t>een Ignored.

The statement Issued by Mr. 'Wilson and
Mr Dulles does not make clear Just why the
Issue was not referred to top diplomatic
levels before It got out of hand.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the entire article be inserted
in the Record at the conclusion of my
remarks.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
It is so ordered.

(See exhibit 1.)

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8597

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, wUl
the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.

Mr. DOUOLAS. Do I understand e6r-
rectly that in Japan, according to the
executive aerreement negotiated with the
Japanese Oovernment, if an offense is
committed by an American serviceman
while off duty, the serviceman is com-
mitted to the Japanese civil or criminal
courts for trial?

Mr. MANSFIELD. That is correct.

Mr. DOUGLAS. But that if the of-
fense is committed while the American
serviceman is on duty, he is subject to
American military discipline, and, hence,
to American court-martial?

Mr. MANSFIELD. That is correct,
providing there is no difference in inter-
pretation.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Does the Senator
from Montana say that in the Girard
case there was a difference of interpre-
tation?

Mr. MANSFIELD. There was, indeed.

Mr. EX3UGLAS. What was the pro-
cedure prescribed by the executive agree-
ment negotiated with Japan for cases
where there is disagreement between
Japanese and American authorities as
to whether a man in on duty.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Under the pro-
cedure prescribed by the executive agree-
ment, meetings would be held between
representatives of the Japanese Govern-
ment and the United States defense es-
tablishment in Japan to see if the differ-
ences could not be worked out.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Were such confer-
ences held?

Mr. MANSFIELD. They were, but
there was no conference held on the
diplomatic level, as I understand. Con-
.sequently. Ambassador MacArthur did
not know what was happening until it
was over. Therefore, the State Depart-
ment was not brought into the case.

Mr. DOUOtAS. Is it not true that the
American Government has consented to
have the Girard case transferred to a
Japanese civil court?

Mr. MANSFIELD. According to the
newspapers, and I think theirs is an
accurate report. President Eisenhower
agreed, at the request of Secretary of
Defense Wilson and Secretary of State
Dulles, to do so.

I see the Senator from Vermont [Mr.
AncxM] rising. I should like to ask him
if I am correct or incorrect in my state-
ment.

Mr. AIKEN. I think the Record
ought to show that when the adminis-
trative agreement with Japan was made,
which I believe was in February 1932.
or a year prior to the ratification of the
NATO Status of Forces Treaty, any of
our officials acting upon it after the
Girard case was supposedly following
the terms of the agreement entered into
in February 1952.

I should like to make this inquiry. In
the view of the Senator from Montana, is
it not possible fsr a person to be on
duty and at the same time engage in
activities which are not connected with
that duty? Was there not a delicate
question of law involved in the Girard
case?

Mr. MANSFIELD. I agree with the
Senator from Vermont. I think there

are those questions. Perhaps one of
them is before us at the present time.

Mr. AIKEN. My reason for bringing
out what I mentioned was that I am now
receiving commimications which protest
the Status of Forces Treaty and cite the
Girard case. I want to make it clear
that the Japanese agreement was an
administrative agreement entered into a
year before the Status of Forces Treaty
was approved.

I believe in the editorial from which
the Senator has been reading, from the
New York Times, that was not made
clear. I read that editorial, although
I do not remember it in detail. It seems
to me that it did not point out — but left
the impression — that the Status of
Forces Treaty was involved.

Mr. MANSFIELD. The Senator from
Vermont is correct. This is not in the
actual Status of Forces Agreement or
treaty which was reported by the Com-
mittee on Foreign Relations and passed
by the Senate, but it is a status of forces
agreement in a somewhat similar iso-
lated instance, in an executive manner,
between the Government and Japan.

Mr. AIKEN. It is undoubtedly true
that the administrative agreement en-
tered into with Japan, and other similar
agreements, led to the enactment of the
Status of Forces Treaty.

Mr. MANSFIELD. The Senator is
correct. This is not a part of the status
of forces law.

Mr. AIKEN. That is what I wished to
make clear, because so many of the cor-
respondents seem to think this is the
result of the Status of Forces Treaty.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I understand.

I hope the Record will ultimately be
made clear precisely when this executive
agreement with Japan was concluded,
because I think that is an important
point.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Yes.

Mr. DOUGLAS. To continue on the
Girard case, is it not true that Specialist
Girard was in uniform, on duty, on an
American military reservation, and that
his specific duty was to watch over the
custody of property on the rifle range?

Mr. MANSFIELD. The Senator is
correct.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Therefore, by any in-
terpretation of fact or law it would seem
as though he was on duty and subject
to American court-martial.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I would say to my
friend, the Senator from Illinois, that
that was the interpretation placed on
the Girard case by his commanding gen-
eral in the Japanese theater.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Ctae of the things
that has puzzled me is this: The Sena-
tor has said that Ambassador MacAr-
thur did not know of this case in Japan.
It would seem to me that he should have
known about it. Then the Senator said
that after the decision to turn Specialist
Girard over to the Japanese courts was
made by some local representative of
the Defense Department in Japan, this
action was approved by the Secretary of
Defense, by the Secreteoy of State, and
by the President. Does that mean that
Ambassador MacArthur was bjrpassed,
and that the case went up frcmi the local
defense official to Washington?

1ST. MANSFIELD. As I recall the
case. It was a decision made in Japan to
turn Specialist llilrd Class Girard over
to the Japanese authorities for trial in a
Japanese court.

Of course, all such decisions are sub-
ject to review. The case reached the
Office of the Secretary of Defense. Mr.
Wilson, and he withheld judgment for a
few weeks. Ttien, as a result of an agree-
ment reached between Mr. Dulles, the
Secretary of State, and Mr. Wilson, the
Secretary of Defense, the case was
brought to the attention of the Presi-
dent, who decided in favor of the deci-
sion made in Japan, which was evidently
concurred in by Mr. Dulles and Mr. Wil-
son, that Girard should be turned over
to the Japanese authorities, and that the
case should be tried in the Japanese
courts.

Since the Secretary of Defense held
up the decision which affected Girard. I
do not know whether our Ambassador
to Japan, Douglas MacArthur in. was
consulted. Up to that time, on the basis
of what information I have, he was not
consulted.

My idea is that all the agencies over-
seas operating in the name of the United
SUtes— whether the USIA, the ICA. the
Defense Department, or any others —
should be under some degree of control
of the senior American officer in the
country, and the senior American officer
is the accredited Ambassador to the par-
ticular country. Ambassadors eetm to
have more experience, and perhaps ttiey
could be of a great deal of help in obviat-
ing such cases as the Girard case in
Japan and the Reynolds case in Fomosa,
and, very likely, others which have oc-
curred in every country in the world in
which American troops are stationed.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield to permit me to make
a statement?

Mr. MANSFIELD. I am delighted to
yield.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I think the adminis-
tration made a grave mistake in turn-
ing over Specialist Girard to the Jap-
anese court for trial. It is perfectly
clear, as I have said, that he was on
duty, in uniform, on an American mili-
tary reservation guarding property un-
der orders of his superior and that
therefore neither under the executive
agreement nor imder any general prece-
dent established by the status of forces
treaty were the Japanese courts entitled
to have jurisdiction in his case.

I submit that it is clear that the ad-
ministration should not have ceded
jurisdiction in this case. I am informed
that Louis Girard in his interview at the
White House a few minutes isigo asked
the President's representatives whether
this decision meant that in the future
it would be the policy of the President
to turn over to foreign courts any Amer-
ican soldier on official guard duty who
shoots a foreign citizen while guarding
American property or whether the Pres-
ident was making an exception in the
case of his brother. Mr. President, that,
question goes to the heart of the matter.
But to it, I am informed the President's
secretary, Mr. McCabf^ replied that no
decision on this matter could be made at
this conference. Reliable eye witnesses

8598

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Jinie 10

\
4

also report to me that Louis Girard was
then told he should not ask such a ques-
tion. But. I submit. Mr. President, that
this is a questldl^ which the adminis-
tration will have to answer before the
bar of public opinion. In my measured
judgment, if this Is to be the pohcy of
the administration we are in for endless
trouble and countless cases of Injustice.
If it is not our pwlicy, should young Wil-
liam Girard be made the innoncent vic-
tim of the administrations desire to
propitiate Japanese opinion? To do so
is unfair and unjust.

I think it is possible that the admin-
istration leaned over backwards, and
made a grave error, in this matter, be-
cause in the Formosa case they had made
a mistake in the opposite direction.

As I understand the Reynolds case in
Formosa, that was a case where an Amer-
ican soldier, while off duty and not in
uniform, shot a Formosan citizen off a
military reservation. Therefore, if there
is a similar agreement with Formosa —

Mr. MANSFIELD. I understand there
Is none.

Mr. DOUGLAS. None at all?

Mr. MANSFIELD. No.

Mr. DOUGLAS. If there had been an
agreement with Formosa similar to that
in effect with Japan, or similar to the
Status of Forces Treaty. It would seem
that that case should have been tried by
a civil court in Formosa. But the ac-
quittal of Reynolds by an American
court-martial stirred up sonmuch popu-
lar opposition that I belwve the State
Department, in order to cOTiciliate Jap-
anese public opinion, made an error in
the opposite direction and turned over to
a Japanese court a man who was entitled
to be tried — if tried at all, which is doubt-
ful by an American court-martial.

I am not excoriatin? the motives of
those responsible for these decisions, but
I think it is proper for me to register
my opinion that this was a very grave
mistake and that we blundered, lurch-
ing first mto the ditch on one side of
the road and then, in an effort to re-
cover ourselves, rushing into the ditch
on the other side of the road. All this
indicates an unsteady hand and a lack of
clear and definite policy.

Mr. MANSFIELD. There is no ques-
tion of that.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I believe I have the
right to speak on this subject, since
Specialist Girard come.s from my State
and I have been in rather close touch
with the case ever since it developed. I
hope that the administration will cor-
rect the mistake which it has made and
discreetly but firmly recapture jurisdic-
tion in the case for the United States,
where I think it rightfully belongs.

Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield to the
Senator from Vermont.

Mr. AIKEN. I am glad the Senator
frnm Montana pointed out that there is
no analogy between the case in Japan
and the case in Formosa, because there
was no agreement with the Formosan
Government which would have per-
mitted Sergeant Reynolds to be tried in a
local court.

Is it not possible that the administra-
tion might have taken into considera-

tion the fact that there have been over
14,000 arrests mostly for minor offenses
of American servicemen In foreign
countries, with which we have had agree-
ments, and to the best of our knowledge
they have not been mistreated in the
courts of the countries involved but, in
the main, have received more lenient
treatment than they would have re-
ceived before a United States military
court?

In my opinion, the Girard case did
Involve a rather delicate legal question,
which I would not attempt to pass judg-
ment on. I assume that those who are
wiser in the ways of international law
than I am did consider it and arrived
at the conclusion which was ultimately
reached.

Mr. DOUGLAS. May I say. Mr. Presi-
dent, that I am not attacking the Status
of Forces Treaty. I voted for that treaty.
Nor am I attacking the executive agree-
ment with Japan. I am merely saying
that even on the basis of the executive
agreement with Japan, as I understand
it, and the precedents of the Status of
Forces Treaty itself, it would seem to me
that when a man ls en an American rifle
range, in uniform, charged under the
mihtary orders of his superior officers
with the duty of guarding emplace-
ments and ammunition there, he is on
military duty and it cannot be said that
he is en duty one minute and when he
rests he is off duty.

He is on duty until he is properly re-
lieved and leaves the reservation. All
the rules of military conduct prescribe
that he cannot be a civilian at one mo-
ment and a military man at another.
The general orders which every recruit
must memorize require him to guard
property under his care and to tend his
post until properly relieved.

Mr. IIRUSKA. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does
the Senator from Montana yield to the
Senator from Nebraska?

Mr, MANSFIELD. I yield.

Mr. HRUSKA. Is it not true that the
executive agreement does not make the
te.^^t whether the man is on duty or not.
but whether the act or omission of which
he IS guilty is within the performance of
his duty; and if so. despite the fact that
he was on duty it would be possible for
the act of which he was guilty to he out-
side the performance of his duty and
therefore subject to the jurisdiction of
the Japanese courts?

Mr DOUGLAS. The Senator from
Nebraska is a lawyer and I am not a
lawyer. We both, however, had some
experience in the military service.

The question a.s to whether Girard was
acting in the performance of his duty or
not is a matter for an American court-
rnartial to decide. If he were acting out-
side the authority reposed in him by his
officers and in violation of commands
given to him by his officers then he
should be tried by an American court-
martial.

We are not opposing a court-martial
for Specialist Girard. We are merely
saying that the question of whether he
was performing his duty faithfully, ac-
cording to orders given to hfm. i.s not a
matter for a Japanese civil court to de-

I yield.

It is my under-
the Immediate su-

Is a correct

As was pre-
commanding

termine. It is a mattei^r an American
military court to determine or for his
commanding officer to decide.

Mr. HRUSKA. That is the point at Is-
sue. It is not so simple as saying that
the man was not on duty, and therefore
he is subject to Japanese Jurisdiction.
It is not that simple. That was the
point which was controverted by the
Japanese. It was contended that he
w as not in the performance of the scope
of his duties at the time he committed
the act of which he is now accused.

Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. MANSFIELD.

Mr. SMATHERS.
standing that from
perior of Private Girard on up the line
to the commanding general, all ruled that
he was actually in the performance of
his duty, and that he was acting under
their specific instructiorvs. It seems to
me that they are the ones who would be
in the best position to determine whether
he was acting within the scope of the
proper performance of his duty; and
they have ruled that he was.

Mr. MANSFIELD. That is correct.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Does the Senator
from Montana say that
statement of fact?

Mr. MANSFIELD. Yes.
viously pointed out. the
general found that he was on duty, and
that he should not be turned over to a
Japanese court. But some higher au-
thority thought otherwise, and sent the
decision back to Mr. Wilson, the Secre-
tary of Defense. Mr. Wilson held it up
for a time. Then Mr. Wilson and Mr.
Dulles got together with President Eisen-
hower, and they agreed that Girard
should be turned over to the Japanese
courts.

Mr. DOUGLAS. It would require a
Philadelphia lawyer to argue that this
man was off duty when he was in uni-
form, on a military reservation, guarding
emplacements and ammunition under
the military orders of his superiors.

Mr. ALLOTT. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.

Mr. ALLOTT. I have a great deal of
respect for the Senator's deep thought
in the field of international relations. I
do not know whether he is aware that
last week I submitted a resolution to the
Senate which, I believe, is before the
Committee on Foreign Relations at this
time. It would authorize the appoint-
ment of a committee of eight Senators to
investigate this entire situation.

I was called from the Chamber and
did not hear all the Senator from Mon-
tana had to say. However, so far as my
own information as to the facts is con-
cerned, I must disagree with a state-
ment which he has just made, which I
am sure he makes in all good faith, just
as I believe, in good faith, that my own
information is correct. For that reason
it seems to me that what Is needed in
this entire area— and I ask the Senator
if he does not agree with me — is to de-
termine whether there has actually been
a decision by the proper persons that
Piivate Girard should be turned over to
the Japanese authorities, and whether
the decision was a proper one.

V

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8599

Second, there needs to be a general,
impartial, and objective appraisal of this
entire area, not only for the edification
of the Senate, but also for the education
of the American public, who do not un-
derstand the implications and the re-
sponsibilities which ffo with our troops
when they serve upon the soil of our
allies throughout the world.

I have almost made a speech, and I
apologize to my good friend from Mon-
tana, but I did not know whether he was
aware of the resolution to which I have
referred.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I am.

Mr. ALLOTT. I did not know whether
the Senator considered it worthwhile or
not.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I think there is a
great deal of merit to it. However, I do
not see at what point we disagree, be-
cause I think this problem ought to be
gone into, not only as it relates to Japan
and to Taiwan, but to all countries in
the world in which American troops are
located.

The thesis of my argument is that in
all overseas operations the Ambassador
of the United States to the country con-
cerned ought to be the head man in
charge. He should be over the ICA, the
USIA. the Defense Establishments, and
all other agencies of the Government.

So far as the Girard case is concerned,
the American Ambassador to Japan was
not consulted. It was purely a military
matter. If Ambassador MacArthur had
been consulted, it is quite likely that the
impasse, the delicate and difficult situa-
tion in which we find ourselves at the
present time, would not have occurred.

So the burden of my argument today
Is that we ought to abolish the practice
of having various agencies and their
representatives speaking in the field of
for^gn policy. All the autonomous or
semiautonomous organizations, such as
the ICA, the USIA. and others, should
be placed in the State Department, so
that one department would speak, with
one voice, in the field of foreign policy.
This is only incidental, but had this sub-
ject been discussed with Ambassador
MacArthur, it is quite likely the diffi-
culty would have been alleviated, if not
entirely obviated.

Mr. ALLOTT. Mr. President, will the
Senator further yield?

Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.

Mr. ALLOTT. I was not directing my
remarks so much to the conclusions the
Senator has drawn as to a statement of
fact which he mentioned a few moments
ago, with which, so far, my own in-
vestigation does not lead me to agree.

Mr. MAHSFLELD. What was the
statement of fact?

Mr. ALLOTT. The statement of fact
related to the responsibility for the de-
cision. It is my belief that the decision
in this case was not made at the level at
which it should have been made. I do
not believe that a decision of this type,
to turn an American boy over for trial
to anyone, anywhere, at any time, should
be made at a level less than the Secre-
tary of the Army, the Navy, or the Air
Force, or the Secretary of the appro-
priate branch of the service.

Mr. MANSFIELD. We tried to point
out that the decision was made in Japan.

As the Senator from Florid* [Mr.
SMATHrats] has said, from the boy's ccxn-
pany commander vip through the 0(»n-
mandlng general — not the commander
of the Far East area, but his cmnmand-
Ing general— everyone felt that Spe-
cialist Girard should be tried by court-
martial.

But when the case reached the area
commander, he decided that it should be
turned over to the Japanese courts.
Then it came back to the Defense Secre-
tary, Mr. Wilson, who held it^ up for
weeks. Finally Mr. Wilson, Mr. Dulles,
and the President got together, and they
made the decision, based upon the ex-
ecutive agreement, which gave the Presi-
dent the power to t\im Girard over to
the Japanese authorities for trial.

Mr. ALLOTT. I do not believe we can
settle the question of fact on the floor;
but from the sequence of events and the
facts which have been unearthed, so far
as my own investigation is concerned —
and my sources may not be nearly so
good as those of the Senator from Mon-
tana— I would have to draw a different
conclusion from that drawn by the Sen-
ator. However, as I have said, we can-
not determine that question here.

I think this is a subject which we
should Investigate is an objective and
impartial manner, because so long as we
have troops throughout the world in the
countries of our allies, we shall be faced
with this problem. We owe it to our-
selves, and we owe it to the American
people, to let them know what this is all
about, why this status of forces ques-
tion arises repeatedly, and why we have
before us this particular case, the Olrard
case, and the Taipeh case.

I thank the Senator.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
think the distinguished Senator from
Colorado has made a real contribution.

I do not claim to know too much about
this case. I know that the Senator from
Colorado has made a rather Intensive
study since the incident occurred. I
bow to his Judgment, and I assure him
that if I have made any errors in my
statement today, they certainly have
been unintentional.

Mr. ALLOTT. That was the reason
why I said I did not wish to take issue
with the Senator from Montana on the
question of fact, because there have been
so many purported "true versions" kick-
ing around, first in one place and then
in another. I have done my best to as-
certain the facts. The facts disclosed
by my investigation do not coincide with
the statement of fact which the Senator
from Montana has made. That Is why
I think we need an Impartial select com-
mittee to look into this subject and let
the American people and the Congress
know what it is all about.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, will
the Senator irield?

Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.

Mr. RUSSET J. I do not wish to delay
the distinguifdied Senator from Mon-
tana in the presentation of his very able
statement.

I was somewhat concerned by the Sen-
ator's observation that the decision to
turn Specialist Olrard over to the juris-
diction of the Japanese courts was purely

a military decision. I very greatly doubt
the complete accuracy of that state-
ment.

The decision may have been made at
the level of the military commander in
the Far East, but I have not the slight-
est doubt — though I have not been pre-
sented with detailed facts — that the de-
cisicm was not made without consulta-
tion with the State Department in Wash-
ington. It is wholly contrary to natural
impulses for any man who has spent
many years in the military service to
turn any servicem£>n under his command
over to anyone else, when he has a pro-
cedure for dealing with the case.

I have been deeply ccmcemed with
respect to the entire Status of Forces
Agreement. It is a sort of mass appease-
ment all over the world, of which I never
did approve. It never seemed to me that
it was necessary to make such conces-
sions affecting the lives of millions of
yoimg Americans who are taken into
the services, many of them against their
wishes, in order to secure permission
from those with whom we are associated
to allow American troops to be stationed
in their lands.

If the issue had been presented to
these countries with the alternative—
whether there should be a Status of
Forces Treaty or whether the American
troops should be withdrawn, there have
been few demands that the troops be
sent back to the United States. In most
cases I believe they would have aban-
doned their insistence upon Jurisdiction
over American servicemen by foreign
courts.

As a matter on fact, we had many
more men stationed in Europe during
World War I and in World War n, when
oiu: men were always and in all cases
tried before American military courts,
than we have overseas at the present
time. Since the first American soldier
reached Eiut>pe in World War I millions
of our servicemen have been stationed
in foreign lands subject only to the
jurisdiction of American military tri-
bunals.

I concede freely that as a general
proposition up to now it is true that the
cotu-ts of those countries have dealt more
leniently with those surrendered to them
for trial in foreign courts than our mili-
tary courts would have dealt with them.
That is not the question that is involved.
We are dealing with the sacred con-
stitutional rights of yoimg Americans
wearing the vmiform of their country.
In the effort to keep Informed as to the
operation of these Status of Forces
agreements I appointed a subcommittee
of the CoDunittee on Armed Forces and I
limited it to 2 members In trying to get
as bipartisan a committee as possible.
I appointed the Senator from North Car-
olina [Mr. Ervht], who has been a dis-
tinguished Jiulst, and I also appointed
the distinguished Senator from Vermont
[Mr. Flanders], who has taken a great
Interest in these matters. They have
held some hearings on the Girard case.
Although I have not consulted with them
and they have not filed a formal report
with the full committee. I uzxierBtand
that they have had great difficulty in
finding out who was responsible for the

8600

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

original order to turn Girard over to the
Japanese courts. It places a great
problem on the President and the
Secretary of Defense and the Sec-
retary/ of State In connection with
reveniing that order, even if it was im-
providently or Improperly issued. They
would have been in a much stronger
position, if that commitment had not
been made.

I hope that we will get all the facts in
this CBJp^e. I am sure the Senator from
North Carolina and the Senator from
Vermont will continue to pursue the mat-
ter in an effort to get all the facts. I
ardently desire good relations with all
the world, but I deem it a great tra::;edy
that even one American soldier should
be used as a sacrificial lamb in order to
maintain cordial relations. I do not
know Girard. However, in my respcin5i-
bility to the men in the service. I should
properly feel toward every one of them
in a case of this kind just as I would if
one of my own nephews, who is now on
duty with the armed services, happened
to be the individual involved. 1 kncy
how I would feel if that situation were
brought home to me. I would feel very
greatly outraged to have one of my owu
family turned over to a foreign courc
under such circumstances as exist in this
case. I do hope that a clarification may
be had of this matter, because every time
one of these men is tried it raises a
stronger presumption as to the duty an-
gle— as to whether he was in perform-
ance of military duty — and increases the
Insistence of foreign governments that
all servicemen should be turned over t.o
them for trial, regardless of circum-
stances. There should be some r.Iarilica-
tion. From my part. I have never Ijeen
able to agree to the thesis th.-it it was
necessary, in order to get foreign natioas
to permit us to station troops in their
countries, for their own defensr. to turn
over to their jurisdiction the American
men who follow their country's flag If
an American citizen is following the
flag under orders, he ought to enjoy
every protection of the Constitution
which that flag symbolizes.

Mr. MANFIELD. Mr. President, to
repeat what I said, the Girard case in
Japan is illustrative. Inconceivable as
It may seem, instead of the State De-
partment initiating, administering, and
controlling United States operations,
this case never reached Ambassador
MacArthur but was referred to the De-
partment of Defense in Washington.
Prom Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, Laos,
and Cambodia come reports that the
efforts of one agency to build up the
economy are being diluted by another
policy respecting exchange rates on the
dollar. The government of Madras
State in India contends that the Nei-
veli lignite development program has
been held up for 3 years while the plans
have been shuttled between the ICA.
the State Department, the Bureau of
Mines, and the Patent Office. From
Afghanistan and Iran are reports that
present operations on the Helmand and
KaradJ Dams are salvage operations
based largely on earlier 111 -conceived
actions of autonomous agencies.

These cases could be elaborated.
They point to the consequences of speak-
ing with many voices.

The President has the power under
the Reorganization Act and the Mutual
Security Act as amended to return the
State Department to a strong position
of leadership in the conduct of the for-
eign relations of the United States. I
suggest that it may well be the sense
of the Congress that the President
assume the Initiative to that end.

Exhibit 1
Forces 0\trse.\s Stir "Ixevitable Tensions"

BrT MOST CoNrLicTs Are Setti.ed More

E.«n.T Th.*n Girard Case

(By E W Kenworthy)

Wa-'Htnctcn, June 8 — In his "English

traits," Emerson tells the story of the Eng-
lish lady traveling on the Rhine who over-
heard a German speak of her party as for-
eigners. She turned and said. 'No. we are not
foreigners; we are English, It la you that are
foreigners."

The 19th-century English traveler has his
20th-cen:ury ccuutcrpart — the American
serviceman land his wifei. The difference
Is that the upward of 1 million Amf'rlcans
now stationed in 79 countries are not tour-
ists. They are where they are In furtherance
of an agreed policy of FYee-World defense.

Into tight, crowded countries, the Ameri-
can servicemen have come, bringing with
tlTiem their accents, their electric refrigera-
tors, their ove -size cars, their higher wage
scales and living standards. Above all they
have brought. Inevitably, their national atti-
tudes and prejudices.

One of our national shortcomings (but
probably in no greater degree than xno&l na-
tions) IS a certain Philistinism. And this 1b
Ukely to be even more evident among service-
men, most Gf them from unsophisticated
backgrounds and with little previous foreign
travel. The storied hills of Rome are noth-
ing to Mount Wuchusett. let alone Pike's
Peak.

DIVIDED BLAMB

The local population Is not blamelesa. If
the American serviceman throws his money
around, local shops and restaurants also
sometimes gouge him with a double price
list. On social occasions and In the press
there are constant btirbs ab<jut America's
"materialism," l':s "lack of culture," Ita
"domineering foreign policy." Its "lack of
cooperation with its allies "

As Secretary Dulles remarked in a recent
press conference, tensions are inevitable
when large numbers of troops are stationed
on f(jreigu soil. Inevitably, also, the tenslona
have Increased In Asia by the sensitivity
there on color. In Japan there is also the
fact that our troops came first as a victori-
ous army of occupation.

This explosive mixture of national pride
and sensitivity was touched off last January
30 by an Incident on a military maneuver
ground at Somagahara. japan.

By last week the Incident— largely through
clumsy handling in tiie Departments of De-
fense and State — had become a major diplo-
matic Issue between Japan and the United
States. Petitions were pouring In to the
White House Senators and Congressmen
were making Intemperate speeches calling for
the revisijn of treaty arrangements governing
the status of our troops all over the world.

shell riREO
All thlB came about because 21 -year -old
Army Sp3c. William S. Girard put an empty
cart^ld^e shell in a grenade launcher and
flred It at a group of Japanese scavenging
for scrap metal. Specialist Girard said he
only meant to frighten the scavengers off
But the shell hit Mme. Naka Sakal In the
back and killed her.

Specialist Glrard's divisional commander
certified to the two-member Joint United
States-Japan committee, set up by the
Status of Forces Agreement, that the shoot-
ing took place In the performance of duty,
and that Specialist Girard should therefore
be tried by a United States military court-
martial. The United State* representative
on the joint committee agreed. The Japa-
nese member disagreed.

The Department of Defence at first sup-
ported the United States authorities in
Japan, but as the deadlock persisted and
Japanese opinion became Inflamed. It di-
rected Its representative to waive Jurisdic-
tion. It was the affirmation of tlila deci-
sion, at first taken at lower levela In the
Pentagon and State, by Secretaries Wllaon
and Dulles last Tuesday that set off the pro-
tests m Congress and the country.

POTENTI.4L miCTTON

From the time that the United State* tx-
gan sending troops abroad In large num-
bers following the attack on South Korea,
it was foreseen that one of the greatest po-
tenlal sources of friction would be the
Jurisdiction over American servicemen
charged with offenses against foreign na-
tionals.

Status of Forces agreements were nego-
tiated with the NATO countries and Japan
to deal with the problem. It wiis a^^^ed
that American courts-martial woald have
primary Jurisdiction over offenses commit-
ted against foreign nationals In the per-
fnnrumce of official duty, and for off-duty
offenses If committed against other Amer-
ican nationals or American Government
property. Local courts, however, would have
Jurisdiction for offenses against local laws
and citizens when committed off duty.

But the negotiators for the United States
and the host governments well understood
that in a matter where national sovereignty
and pride, as well as popular emotions, were
so heavily Involved, It was not s'lfflclent
merely to set up this line of Jurlrdlctlonal
demarcation. Therefore. It was ag^reed that
both the United States military authorities
and the host government could ask for
waivers of primary jurisdiction.

As a matter of policy. United SUtes au-
thorities have asked for waivers In virtually
all cases where it was agreed that the local
government had primary jurisdiction. And
as a matter of practice, the host govern-
ments have In the large majority of cases
waived Jurisdiction.

FIRST waiver

On the other hand, the host goremments
have rarely asked the United States to waive
jurisdiction where there has been any dis-
pute over whether an offense was committed
on or off duty. In fact, the GIraid case la
the first case In which Japan has asked for
such a waiver.

In another respect, the Status-of-Forcea
agreements recognize that these matters
cannot be left simply to legal procedure.
They contain a provision that when there Is
a deadlock In the two-member committees
set up to decide Jurisdiction the Iwue shall
be referred to the two Govemmentfl through
diplomatic channels for settlement.

Calmer heads In Congress this week felt
that the Girard case would not ha\e become
the Inflammatory Issue It has If the diplo-
matic stage had not been Ignored.

The statement Issued by Mr. Wilson and
Mr. Dulles does not make clear Jtisr why the
Issue was not referred to top diplomatic
levels before It got out of hand. It says
merely:

"The Department of Defense considered
having the Joint committee refer tl^ie matter
In dispute to the two Governmentii for set-
tlement, but rejected this procedu.-e as In-
advisable under the circumstances "

In any event, administration offlolals feel
that If Specialist Olrard Is brought to trial

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8601

and eooTleted, bU wntene* wCI be nght tmA
probably auBpcndail. Aa Banator 8&m Xrtzw
noted thlB week, that "Irom the ataadpolnt
of aentaooea, Amarlcan aarvicaman charfed
with Crimea have fared well, and forclgik
courU have leaned rather backward to be
lenient."

Aa aa example, S martnee eoniieted In
1956 Of a particularly brutal rape ware gtven
■enteneea of 8 and 2 yeara rcapactlTely.
Both acnteneea were auapended.

amucAN

Sereral leglalatore ^Is week were demand-
ing that the United Stataa revoke the Statue
of Forcea agreementa and Inatat on Jurla-
diction over offensea of Aaoerican troofw.
These oonaideratlona did not weigh with
other leglalatora, however. None of our
prlncipal allies, of course, would submit to
such a demand. And they would be on firm
United States conatttutlonal groond In their
refusal.

In tha famoua Schooner Exchange case
Chtef Justice John Marshall ruled that sov-
ereign natlooa have exclusive juriadlctlon
over Crimea committed on their territory,
subject only to their willingness to relin-
quish It. *

This decision was cited by a Federal dis-
trict court In February 19M. when It re-
jected the petition of several so^lcemcn in
Japan for a declaratory judgment that the
Statua of Forces Agreement deprived them of
their constitutional rights. The Judge
pointed out that in the absence of the agree-
ment the plaintiffs would have been subject
to the criminal Jurisdiction of the Japanese
courts anyway.

IfODc of the erltlca of the agreements last
week proi>osed the withdrawal of United
Statea troopa from overaeas basca. ^

SOCIAL SECURITY MILESTONE— TEN
MnUONTH PERSON QUALIFIES
FOR BENEFITS

Mr. NEUBERQER. Mr. President, on
June 6 President Eisenhower and Secre-
tary Folsom Joined in hailing the fact
that the 10.009.000th citizen had quaU-
fled for social -security benefits. They
said It was a milestone. They said it
was a great achievement. The Presi-
dent said it was a symbol that Govern-
ment's "prime concern Is the welfare of
its people."

I am grateful that the President and
his Secretary did not let tiiis epic event
go unheralded. Nor do I believe the
event should pass without somebody on
the Senate floor placing in the Con-
CKBSsioMAL Ricoso a few of the things
which leading members of the Republi-
can Party said about social security when
it was first proposed and put into effect
by President Franklin D. Roosevelt —
largely over and against bitter Republi-
can opposition.

It is graiKl for Republican leaders to-
day to hail the 10.000,00(Hh person to
come imder social security benellts.
They are welcome to the fold. But it is
equally pertinent that the Record should
show that, had the Republican Party
prevailed In its views, there nerer would
have been a 10.000,000th person to quali-
fy for social security — there never
would have been a first person, elfher.
There Just would not have been any
social security at all.

Mr. President, It probably Is legal for
a cannibal to send a telegram of con-
dolences to the family of the victim he
has Just eaten for supper. And it Is legal

for a RepnbUeaxi to herald tbe advance of
soetel weiulty, tlMt sune BotttA Beeurtty
program which the Republican Party de>
iKxinecd — horse, foot, and dragocm — and
UieA ao hard aod so deqserately to keep
off the statute bo<As of our country.

Mr. President, "lei's look at the
record," as Al Bmltb used to say.

When the social security act was be-
fore the congress, leading Republican
spokesmen denounced it as "a Uireat to
recovery" from the depression which
gripped the Nation's economy. The Re-
publican Presidential candidate of
1936 — Governor Alfred M. Landon — was
quoted In the New York Times stoary on
a campaign speech in Milwaukee, Wis.»
as stLying:

This Is the largest tax bill in history. And
to call it "social security" is a fraud on tha
worktogman. • • •

I am not exaggerating the foUy of thla
leglalation. The aavtng it forcea on our
workers la a cruel hoax. • • •

To get a workable old-age penaion plan wa
muat repeal the present compulsory insur-
ance plan. The Bepublican Party is pledged
to do this.

A RepubHcsui campaign pamphlet of
1936 had this to say about the social
secmity act:

The way they've rigged thla thing and
rushed It through Congress, it appears to me
that they figure a lot of ua are willing to
trade ova votea for a counterfeit inanrance
policy.

Denouncing social security apparently
was a favorite Republican indoor sport
during the year of the program's enact-
ment. For instance, here Is what Repre-
sentative Robert F. Rich of Pennsylvania,
said about the program:

And. following the course we are pursuing,
and have been pursuing in the last 2 or 3
years, we are simply going to wreck the Na-
tion as sore aa the aun rises tomorroV

morning.

And his fellow House Member, Repre-
resentattve John Taber, of New York,
used these words to describe the results
of the program:

Never in tbe history of the world liaa any
measxire been brought in here so insldloualy
as to prevent business recovery, to enslave
workers, and to prevent any possibility of
the eraployna providing work for the people.

Mr. President, I could cite numerous
other statements voiced by leading Re-
publicans in the recent past to show their
opposition to the social security program.
But I think it unnecessary to labor the
point. The record speaks for itself.

I am pleased that the passage of 22
years has a]M>&rently brought a complete
reversal in attitude of Republican Party
spokesmen toward social security. Tbe
cruel hoax of 1936 is now hailed as a
bastion of financial security. I trust that
tbe conversion will remain effective. I
hope it is to be permanent^

PROPOSED CIVIL RIGHTS LBOISLA-
■nON— THE JURY TRIAL AMEND-
MENT

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, the
Senate Committee on the Judiciary has
adopted an amendment to S. 83, the
clvQ-rlghts bill, proTiding for Jury trials

in an contempt cases wtaldi might arise
under the proviBi<»is of the" bfIL

I may say In an kindness, wittiout re-
flecUon upon the motives ot any Sena-
tor, that this parttcoku- amendment is
designed to weaken and destroy the ef-
fectiveness of the civil-rights blH and,
in particular, to destroy ttioee secti(»is
which would help to guarantee the right
of Negroes to vote.

Parts rn and IV of the bffl provide that
the Attorney General of the United
States may institute "a civil action or
other proper proceeding for redress, or
|H-eventive relief, including an ai^hca-
tion for a permanent or temporary In-
jimcti(m, restraining or6a. or other
order," when any perscm has Nicraged or
is about to engage in apeciRed conspir-
acies against civU rights, or in actions to
deprive others of eqrual right to vote in
general, qsecial. or primary electicms for
Federal oflloes.

In other words, the Attorney General
can institute civil aetioo to protect Uie
right to vote and can Institute such
action before an election or during an
electiim rather than be compeUed to
wait until after some civil or criminal
offense has actually been committed.
The inadequacy of criminal penalties or
Judgments for damages after the injured
person has been deprived of his right
to vote is obvious. Tbe new injunctive
action is designed to be available in time
to prevent such a deprivation. And if
such injunctions are violated, the courts
could hold the violators in contempt oC
court imtil they ended their violations
and complied with the law. Or it could
punish them as in other contempt cases.
These are common compliance or mi-
forcement procedures that are author-
ized in no less than 28 other Federal
statutes, as wsll as being the accepted
procedure in all equity matters.

Mr. President, there is no history of
jury trials in sach Injunction contempt
cases. The so-caUed "jury trial" issue
in such cases is a new. unique, and rad-
ical departure from the precedents of our
law. I have already placed in tbe Rec-
ord a very thorough brief on this point,
and I do not intend to repeat the argu-
ments now. It is sufficient to say that
the right of a Jury trial — with one excep-
tion, namely, under the Norris-La Giur-
dia Act. and that provision was later
virtually repealed, which I explained in
my brief — is not a normal part of the
procedure in the American Judicial sys-
tem in injiuxtive proceedings, or for the
trial of contempt in civil cases and In
criminal cases where the Government is
a party.

But let us go beyond that fact and
show Just what the so-caUed }ury trial
amendment really means. Let us see
what it means In inractice and how, in
practice, it would hinder rather than ex-
tend the right to vote.

I have secured for the Information of
Members of Congress — and I ask xmani-
mous consent to have it made a part of
the Rbcord at the conclusion of my re-
marks—a memorandum prepared by the
Research OSiee of the Southern Regional
Council, which I received from the Le^-
lative Reference Service (tf tbe Library
of Congress, concerning Negro voter
registration in 11 Southern States, in

8602

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

most cases classified by county. I shall
include in the Record the explanation
of how the figures were gathered and
some comments on their accuracy, all of
which I ask unanimous consent to have
printed at an appropriate point in the

Record.

^ The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
it is so ordered.
I See exhibit 1.)

Mr. DOUGLAS. Throughout my re-
marks I .shall use the terms "Negro" and
"nonwhite" as synonymous, although I
realize that the total of nonwhites in a
given State may be very slightly greater
than the total number of Negroes.

For instance, let me cite the State cf
Alabama. In Blount County there are
429 potential Negro voters, but not a
single Negro has voter registration.

In Bullock County, there are 5 425
potential Negro voter.s, but only 6 Negroes
are registered.

In Clay County there are 1. 010 poten-
tial Negro voters, as of 195(7, but not 1 of
them IS reti'.stered.

In De Kalb County there are 443 poten-
tial Negro voters, but none is registered.
In Jackson County there are 1.242 po-
tential Negro voters, but none is regis-
tered.

In Lowndes County there are 6.512 po-
tential Negro voters, but not a single
Negro is registered.

In Marshall County there are 604 po-
tential Negro voters: again, not one
single Negro is registered.

In Morgan County there are 4.641 po-
tential Negro voters; again, not a single
Negro is registered.

In Tallapoosa County there are 5.083
Negro voters; again, not a smgle Negro is
registered.

In Wilcox County there are 8.218 po-
tential Negro voters; once more, net a
single Negro is registered.

According to the figures which have
been computed from the 1950 census,
there were 516.245 Negro males and fe-
males over the age of 21 who were en-
titled to vote: but the number of Ne-
groes registered was 53,336, or 10 3
percent.

I have here a list of all the counties
In Arkansas. I Invite a close inspection
of the figures relating to each of those
counties. I select a county at random.
Crawford County contains 414 Negroes
over the age of 21. Only 21 of them reg-
istered, or 5.1 percent.

Poinsett County— named, perhaps.

after the celebrated Joel R. Poinsett—

contains 1.754 Negroes over the age of

^21. but only 195 are registered, or 11.1

percent.

For the State of Arkansas as a whole
according to the 1950 census, there are
232,191 nonwhites of 21 years and over;
but in the whole State only 67.851 Ne-
groes were registered, or 29 2 percent of
those who would be expected to be
eligible.

In Georgia, the total number of poten-
tial Negro voters in 1950, 18 years of age
and over, was 633.697. It is well known
that the votmg age in Georgia Is 18. In
1956 the number of Negroes registered
was 163,389. or only 25 6 percent of those
who are potential voters had registered.

If one takes the figures by specific
counties, one finds some very startlingly
low percentages.

For instance, in Webster County, there
were 1.313 potential Negro voters, and
not a single Negro registered

In Miller County there wei-r>i.372 po-
tential Negro voters, and only 6 regis-
tered

In Lincoln County there were 1.617 po-
tential Ne-iro voters, and only 3 regis-
tered.

In Baker County, there were 1.819 po-
tentially qualified voters — over the age
of 18 — and none remstered.

In Bleckley County there were 1,588
potential Negro voters, over the age cf
13— becau.se 18 is tl:e vot:n? age m
Geort;.a — and cnly 3S Negroes were reK-
istered

In Louisiana there were 510.090 poten-
tial Neu'ro voters as of 1956. The total
number of Neuroes resjistered :n 1956 was
161.410. or 31 6 percent. I may say that,
on a comparative ba.^i.s, that is a rela-
tively hmh percentakje so far as Southern
States are concerned, but even there
slii;htly less than 1 Negro out of 3 was
actually registered as a voter.

In MissiSvSippi we have some figures for
13 counties taken from the State Times
of Jackson, Miss , which represent the
results of a survey which that newspaper
made in the fall of 1956. Surely, this
source is as unbiased and as accurate as
one could wi.-h for

In Hinds County, there were 35.021
Negroes 21 years of age and over, but
only 4.305 Nee roes registered In 1956. or
just about 1 Negro out of every 8.

In Marion County there were 4.103
Negroes over the age of 21, and only 500
of them were registered, or. again, about
1 in 8.

In Clarke County there were 3.849
Negroes 21 years of age and over, and
none at all registered to vote

In Smith County there were 1.400 Ne-
groes over the age of 21. and only 13 reg-
istered to vote.

In Calhoun County, there were 1.893
Negroes over the age of 21, and 2 were
registered. That is one-tenth of 1 per-
cent.

In Tunica County there were 9,123
Negroes over the age of 21, and 38. ap-
proximately one-third of 1 percent, reg-
istered

In Wilkinson County there were 4.558
Negroes over the age of 21. and 55 were
registered, or about 1 percent.

In Sharkey County there were 4.533
Negroes over the age of 21. and 1 Negro
registered out of nearly 5.000.

In Issaquena County there were 1 790
Negroes over the age of 21. and no Ne-
groes registered.

I could go on.

I might say that I also have some
figures for Mississippi, from a source
which I believe to be reputable, but
which has no responsibility for the fact
that I am using the material. I am using
this material without the knowledge of
the person who prepared the informa-
tion, but I have had the figures checked
very clo.sely, and I beheve them to be
very accurate

They show, in brief, taking the State
of Mi.s.sissippi as a whole, that In 1950
there were in the State 497.354 Negroes

of the age of 21 and over, but only 19.367
Negroes were registered in 1954, or about
4 percent of the total.

We have some interesting figures for
South Carolina.

In Abbeville County there weie 3.678
potential Negro voters. But cnly 15
were registered.

In Calhoun County, named. I presume
after the great John C. Calhoun, the
eloquent advocate of slavery and in-
equality, who has Just been chixsen as
one of the five great Senators in the
history of this Ixxly. there were 4,437
Negroes of the age of 21 and over, and
not a single Negro was registered.

In McCormick County there were 2.625
potential Negro voters 21 years of age
and over, and not a smgle Negro regis-
tered.

For the State of South Caroli.ia as a
whole. In 1950. according to the census,
there were 390,024 nonwhites 21 years
of age and over, but only 98,8l»0 were
registered, or 25 3 percent of the total.

Then we have Virginia. It is one of
the States of the country which has one
of the lowest percentages of Negroes tak-
ing part in elections. There were in the
State in 1950 422,670 Negroes 21 years of
age and over, but only 84,931 were reg-
istered in 1957, or only 20 percent of the
total.

In Texas, for 95 out of their 254 coun-
ties, there were 550,992 potential Negro
voters, but only 209,297 were registered.
or 38 percent. Howe»^r, I may say the
95 counties which we have liste<l, while
they form a little less than 40 percent
of the total number of counties, contain
over 90 percent of the Negro population.

Further, Mr, President, we have the
testimony of the distinguished Governor
of Mississippi, the Honorable Jiimes P.
Coleman, before the House Judiciary
Committee on the civil-rights bill this
year. He states, on pages 736 to 738,
that in 1954 there were some 22,000 Ne-
groes registered In the entire £;tat^ of
Mississippi.

So there is agreement between the de-
tailed figures, by counties, I h.id pre-
pared, and the figures given by Gover-
nor Coleman. He went on to say, how-
ever, that only 8,000 of the numtjer reg-
istered had paid their poll tax. and
hence only 8,000 of those 22,000 were eli-
gible to vote, since Mississippi Is 1 of
the 5 States in the Union which retains
the poll tax.

Governor Coleman further states, on
page 736:

In the 1955 primary for Governor, be-
cause at that election we elect everything
in Mlsalaaippi from Ctovernor on down to
constable. It was said that approximately
7,000 of them voted.

So, In reality, only about 7,000 Negroes
voted In Mississippi in 1955.

I may say the figures which Governor
Coleman presented for 1954 were the re-
sult of a survey he had made while
attorney general of the State.

If we look at the census figures for
1950, "we know that as of that year there
were 990,282 nonwhites In Mississippi,
of whom 986,494 were Negroes. Of these,
497,354 nonwhites were 21 years of age
or over. Therefore, in 1954 something
Just over 3 percent of the total non-
whites 21 years of age or over were reg-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8603

Istered to TOte and only 1.4 percent of tbe
nonwhltes 21 yean of a«e or over ac-
tually voted. That Is only about 1 out
of 100.

For comparative purposes, It to Inter-
esting to note that in the 1956 pj-esi-
dentlal election, approximately 240,000
whites in Mississippi voted. This figure
is about one-third of the total number of
white residents over 21 years of age. In
other words, about 1 percent of the
Negroes voted, whereas one-third, or ap-
proximately 33 percent of the whites
voted.

These facts. Mr. President, are based
on official census figures and on the tes-
timony of the Goremor of the State of
Mississippi.

I have some further and more detailed
figures concerning Mississippi, which, In
view of the incomplete figures for that
State from the Southern Regional Coun-
cil's research. I ask unanimous consent
to have printed in the Rbcord.

I have obtained these figures as I have
said from another reliable southern
source. The person who gathered this
material has no responsibility whatso-
ever either for the fact that I was able to
gain the information or concerning the
interpretation which I shall place upon
the figures. That, of course, is true also
of the figures from the Southern Re-
gional Council. I ask unanimous con-
sent that this table, showing figures for
all Mississippi counties, be Inserted at
this point In the Record.

"Hiere being no objection, the table was
ordered to be printed in the Record, as
follows:

Mississijypi

MisMstipf* OootlnqM

Coonty

19.'in

poieniiiW

NepTj

»OUTi

19.',4 nam-

he, of

Negroes

resui'Tcd

PfT-

ocot

A'lonu

9.3.18

4.SM>

M7U
1,749

21.>«.S
l.MKt
3.96H
4.f»l«
1.482
4.72h
3.H49
4.U23

19.136
7. Ml
Z3M
8,043
7,406
2,294
«tK
75K
4, Ml
1,131
7.:;5I4

38,021

lt.4«h

7. 7rj

1.790

47n
a.7ia

4. 313
4.3M
3,923
8.046
4. 023
3.844
1.118
12.965
2,228
S.835
R.MI

17. 8n

4.MI7
8,177

11.6W.

4, i(n

8.210
6.7i4

Z97S

641

78

3

34

3,'.

511

6

0

0

19

Ul

0
12

1,070

16

419

rl
7n

0

3X

30

449

1..->6W

4.UH9

45

37

n

i2

9U6

9

0

1.038

872

an

106
0

1,039
268

m

97

297

516

117

431

831

U

1ft

0

6.9

Alcwrn

Amtte

Altai* _

Bi'tilon . . .

.1

.7

2 0

Bolivar

2 3

Pitlhniin

s

C»rron

Chtrkamw

Choctsv

1 3

CULhunie

3.3

riart

Ctoy

0.3
5l6

riipuih

.2

<'in;n(rV*i

17.8

lM'.«>OtO

.01

ForiT-^

Frmnklln

.2
3 1

Uearce

OrwDi- .

5.0

OTTumJii

.8

HaiMDct „.

}Utnmia. .„

flinis

39.7

mo

11 7

Tldma.

.4

Muiiiphn'j'S.

.5

Nsa(|u«'na .,

ltiw:»mt>a

K. 9

imtkaaa

M.O

JasiMT

.2

^ffprson

JrR«Twn l>»vls

Joucs

».4
10.8

KemjuT

.9

Lafayette

3.7

l.amar

LMt4l««rl»te

8.0

Livrroncc

ito

Ixrjke

1.7

)4«>

l.i

LrSore _.

I.liKtiln

IS

U.4

I,<>wti<lc<<

i.a

Mrirton

8.7
8.1

MwdwU

MonnM

MonfBoraery

.1

CmaAy

1950

potential

Negr»

volers

19.')4 num-
ber of
Negroes
rcfrlstcrcd

Per.

Keshoba

2,984
3,687
6.7l>t
5.409
£,t;2ii
X454
1.136
".tiOS

lm:

1.170
7.^44
7, 225
4,329
4.533
3.351
1.4UJ
746

18.949
U,Zu
4.989
1,603
463
9,123
1.904
3,U17

12.312

2.S. H23
2RS7
1.S43
4. .^58
4. 162
3.142

U. 128

8

63

0

128

1

0

58

137

6

18

234

33

15

1

61

6

2S

114

0

0

144

17

27

67

0

1.009

1,464

(1

3

40

30

9

81

.3

Newion

No«ub«*

Olrtlhfw.ha

L4
.......

Punnin ,. ,..

01

Pearl River

PpiTy

Pike

"Mi"

l.S

Pcillt,)tO0

PrmtLss

Quttincii..

UuBkln

Scott

SbwWev

SImpsoo

Pmtth

8u>»e

.8

li
3.0

.4

.3

.02
LI

.4

Sunflower

TaJlaliatchie

Tate

.«

Tippah

TiahoDiingo

9.0

a7

Tunica »

rnton

.3
3.5

Walt hull

Warren

^\ iL«hingion

""8."9'*
6.7

Wayiio

Webjiter

.3

Wt)kln.«on

.9

WtTwtiin

.7

Yalobusha

.3

Yuioo . ..

.7

ftate

497,354

19,367

3.9

ia'.<i ctnsus, nonwh:te, 21 yean of age and over..

1964 muBber of .Segroea refisiercd

PiTTont registered ..-,-.-

497. 364

19.367
3.9

Mr. DOUGLAS. Tlii< table, which
breaks down the-'^umber of Negroes
registered in Mississippi by coimties for
1954 and compares them with the poten-
tially eligible Negro voters based on the
1950 census, shows that in 1954 some
19.367 Negroes were registered to vote in
Mississippi out of a potential vote of
497.354. I believe these figures are accu-
rate— for they are almost the same as
those given by Governor Coleman.

Mr. President, let me point out that
the figures I have presented indicate
merely those who are registered or who
are on the voting lists. The figures are
not of those who actually voted.- In some
cases, particularly In those States where
one must pay a poll tax. the number of
qualified voters Is considerably less than
the number of "registered" voters, and
the number of actual voters is^still less
than the number of qualified voters.

Therefore, the figures I have given are
maximum figures. For example, the
Governor of Mississippi. Mr. Coleman,
stated that there were some 22,000 Ne-
groes registered to vote In that State in
the 1954 election. However, be estimated
that only B.OOO actually voted, and gave
as a reason the fact that many of the
others had failed to pay the poU tax.

One further example should be noted.
In the figures I have presented for Mis-
sissippi, the number of potential Negro
voters for Bolivar County is 21,805, ac-
cording to the 1950 census. Thit number
of registered voters in 1954 was 511. Yet,
from the official prooeedtngs of a coort
ease in December 1956, from which I
Shan later read, we know that only 14
Negroes In the entire county were, in
fact, on the list of qualified voters.

Therefore my figures are the maxi-
mum ones, and I am amazed at tha
moderation I have shown In this matter.

In other words, the registered Totcrs
are not necessarily the same as the quali-
fled voters, and generally vastly exceed
in numbers the qualified voters, became
in five States, as I have sak^— namely,
Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas. Virginia,
and one other — a pioU tax to a fmrther
prerequtoite to voiixig. Fnrthamore, in
some States a requirement to ImpoiRd
that the voter, in order to be quahfled,
most be able to interpret the constttu-
tion to the sattofaetion of the examining
oOeials.

Fbr instance, I have here the sworn
written application of one for registra-
tion as a voter in Mlssisstppi, as intro-
duced by Governor Coleman, found at
pages 73S-739 at the Hbnae hearings.!

The applicant is asked to "write and

copy, in the space bdow, section of

the constitution of Mississippi."

The instoructioD to the registrar is,
"You will designate the section of the
constitution and point out the same to
applicant."

Ins^-uction 19 is that the aiH>Ucant is
to write in the space below "a reason-
able interpretation — the meaning — of
the section of the constitution of Missis-
sippi which you have iast copied." l^iat
could tax a Philadelphia lawyer, upon
occasion.

Instruction 20 is to "write in the space
below a statement setting forth your un-
derstanding of the duties and obligations
of citizenship under a constltutioDal form
of government." One can Imaging the
difilculty which a Negro would experi-
ence in many districts of ttie Sooth in
writing his interpretation of a constitu-
tional form of government; that is, writ-
ing an explanation which would be satis-
factory to the white registration offlciato.

In cme county Negroes were asked to
state what kind of a govemmott we lived
imden One Negro replied. "A demo-
cratic form of government." That was
declared to be unsatisfactory. Then he
said. "A republican form of government."
That was declared to be unsatisfactory.
The voter was ruled out.

There have been charges, very wdl
supported in one case, that the ai^Ucitfit
was asked to state how many bubbles
could be created by a bar of so£^. whiclx
Is ridiculous.

For purposes of comparison, and to
show that the proportion of those voting
out of those generally eligible is not as
high as it should be In the South and in
many other parts of the country, I ask.
unanimous consent to have printed at
this point in the Record a table showing
for all the States for the 1956 Presiden-
tial election the percentage of those of
voting age who actually did vote.

I read from this table, listing the
States in order of the number of voters
per 100 persons of voting age. It to inter-
esting to note that the Southern States
are at the very bottom of the list.

At the top to Idaho, with 77 J percent
of the voters of voting age actually vot-
ing. In Connecticut it to 76.6 percent;
In Utah, 76.1 percent; In liassachuaetts,
75.3 percent; in New Hampshire. 75.2
percent; in Rhode Island. 74.6 percent;
in Iowa, 74.1 percent; in Dltoote, 72.5 per-
cent.

8604

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

' I am very proud that my own State i3
1 of the first 10.

I a^ the distinguished Senator from
Wyoming LMr. O'Mahoney 1 in the chair.
I know he will be pleased to know that
66.9 percent of the persons of voting age
In Wyoming actually voted. And they
showed their good sense by returning the
present Presiding OflBcer to the Senate.

In Oregon the figure is 68. 4 percent.

In New York, with a large immigrant
population, it Is 65.5 percent.

Now listen to the figures for the South-
ern States, down toward the foot of the
list.

The 38th State Is Florida, with 48 3
percent.

The 39th State is North Carolma, with
47.6 percent.

The 40th State is Tennessee, with 46
percent.

The 41st State Is Arkansas, with 39 9
percent.

The 42d State Is Texas, with 38 1 per-
cent.

The 43d State is Louisiana, with 37 2
percent.

The 44th State Is Virginia, with 34.2
percent.

In the early days of the Republic, Vir-
ginia in the persons of Thomas Jeffer-
son. George Mason. James Madison, and
James Monroe, with a great galaxy of
other Virginia statesmen, really was in
the forefront of the struggle for democ-
racy. Nevertheless in Virginia, at pres-
ent, only about one-third of the potential
voters actually vote at the time of a
presidential election.

The 45th State is Georgia, with 30 4
percent.

Alabama is the 46th State, with 28.5
percent.

South Carolina Is the 47th State, with
24 6 percent.

Mississippi Is in last place, with 22 1
percent.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair understands that the Senator
from Illinois asks unanimous consent
that the entire table may be made a part
of the Record at this point.

Mr, EXDUGLAS. The Senator does,

There being no objection, the table
was ordered to be printed In the RfcoRo,
as follows;

Voter turnout for the 1956 preiidentlal
election

Rank

1
2
3
4

A

A

7

8

«

1(1

II

1-'

i:i

14
l.^
Iti
17

IS
19

ai)

21
Z2

Voter turnOMt 'or the 1956 presidential
election, — Continued

StaM

NuniUr -if

\ Dirrs [>«T l'«)

l»T'*m.< of

Iclaiio

77 3

roninttlcut

7ti 6

Itah

7fi I

M;iS!«a«'hii>etts

7.5 ;i

New Hartip.shtre

7.5 i

Hhtxti' I.slaml

71 .5

Iowa

74 1

7'J. S

1 Illinois

t Indian:!

rj, 1

72, 4
7'.' 3
7'' 0

Wist \intinia

-Mnllt.itUl

.^"lllll I>ik0t!l

I)<'ki« irt'

\\ A-.tiiri):ton

71 .S

71 4

:'■ 1

.N'.'w J,r:*>y

folorxlo

VV voming ..

tkM i

V.'rmonl..

On-iion

»>. 4

ft; s

h7 rt
«7 4
07 I

Mmii.\s<)ij

1 K.kiisas

Misioiirt

, Miclujjaii

Rank

6uu

NuniNr of

vitrr* [•••r I'D

(••rti)^* of

\ot :rii< .**.'t9

24

Vi>rth I'skia

t\: 0

2.5

\\ i,<f'iriHi'i . ,

'rh li

2rt

l.,5 tf

27

\t»w\i>ric . . _

h.5 5

2>
2*1

('ill'iTtKa.

1 ihii>

h.5 il

30

M •*

HI

\l nil.'

64 1

3.'

\. •%».!,»

tV4 5

.'<.(

1 ikl.ihcirtia

M 0

M

\.'w .M.'vico

>C> I

H.'.

K*'iilU('kv ... ,

,V> 7

M

M irs! iii'l

.54. H

;<7

V-Unr^i

4U H

Sf

K'.iH'.l.l

4n 3

M

N.jr'h 1 ir'>lljui

47 «

40
41
4.'

r-riTi.-'s.,.

\ It I .-.u-

[-.■t.L-

4hO

:v- 1

4.1

I.i)!!!.*!!^^

.<: i

44

\'ir^ipiji

34 I

4'.

1 ifitrvia.-

Ml 4

4f;
47

\Lib;tma

*>tMirh (\irolina -. ---

> 5

.'4 rt

4H

,\liS>lASli>pl

i;^ 1

Sriur">' I' .■-. 1 '♦'pnrtTTieiit of i ommfn*. Currf'iit
I'(>(Mil.<tion Kri'ort*. I ici .5, r<.^''. 1'. i, t iMf J. Ksttin»t>*»
nf CiMlian l'oi>ul;HU)n o( \ otiiie \t>' (or Nov. 1. I9,5rt.
■»iii| •^t.ili.'ilii-s i)( th«' I'rfsi.lfnluil jui't I 'oni!Tt^'«loiiiil
Kiwiioii of Nov. li. iw.'W'i. L. s. lio^iTiUiiiiii t'ruituig
Uffi(f, U kshmcton. 19.57.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President. It Is
for the very reason that Negroes as a
group are not registered and. therefore,
do not vote in any great proportion in
most Southern States, that we need a
civil rights bill to protect and defend the
rigtit of Negroes to vote In Federal elec-
tions. Nothing IS more basic to our way
of life. Nothing Is more important to
the progress of our country and to eco-
nomic and political justice. The figures
I have presented show the basic situa-
tion that demands Congressional action
for the protection of this constitutional
right.

THE J'-IT TmiAL AMCNOMZMT

Now. Mr. President, in addition to the
provisions of the civil rights bill which
protect the right to vote through the use
of the Injunction, and contempt pro-
ceedings against those who may wish to
violate such Injunctions, the Senate
Judiciary Committee has added a so-
called jury trial amendment to the bill.
This amendment is worded as follows:

Amend S 83 by adding at the end thereof
a new part appropriately numbered and
reHding as fallows:

"PAKT — TO SCCriF THE KICHT OF THIAL BT
JL-RY TO PERSONS CHARGED WITH C<1NTEMPT
or COTRT IN AC-nf)NS OR PROC'ECOINOS IN-
STITUTED PURSUANT TO THIS ACT

"Section 1 In all cases of contempt aris-
ing under the laws of the United States
governing the ls.suiince of Injunctions or re-
straining orders In any action or proceed-
ing instituted under this a>,t. the accu.sed
shall enjt.y the rii^ht to a speedy and pvibllc
trial by an lnip;irtial Jury of the State and
district wherein the contempt shAil have
been commit red,

"This section shall not apply to contempts
commuted m the presence of the court or
so near thereto as to Interfere directly with
the administration of Justice nor to the mis-
behavior, misconduct, or disobedience of any
officer of the court In respect to the writs.
orders or pnx-ess of the court,"

Mr, President, much has been made of
thi.s amendment, but I believe I can show
from the voting figures I have aheady in-

troduced, plus the laws of some of the
States, that this amendment In practice
will nullify the protection of the right to
vote which the clvU rights bill Is designed
to protect.

HOW rXDEXAL JtjaiZS AKI tCLZCTTO

Let us look. Mr. President, at the very
fundamental facts to see how the Fed-
eral Juries which are to try contempt
cases If the amendment shall be enacted
will actually be selected, and how they
will be made up.

In title 28, chapter 21, section 1861 of
the United States Code, the qualifica-
tions for Jurors In the Federal courts
are given. The key paragraph reads as
follows:

Any citizen of the United St«t*« who baa
attained the age of 31 yeara and resldea
within the Judicial district la competent to
serve as a grand or petit Juror unleaa —

Then four exceptions are given, of
which the fourth reads as follows:

He Is Incompetent to serve as a grand or
petit juror by the law of the State In which
the district court la held.

I invite attention to that phrase. If
a man, by State law. is incompetent to
serve as a grand or petit Juror, then he
Is Incompetent to serve as a Juror in a
Federal court, not merely in the State
courts. In other words. State standards
for Jurors determine Federal eligibility.
This was contrary to the recommenda-
tions of the famous Knox committee
which wanted uniform Federal stand-
ards for the selection of Federal Jurors.
But the 80th Congress, dominated as it
was by the Republicans, decided other-
wise. It would be Interesting to specu-
late If this was part of the gentlemen's
agreement, or '"you scratch my back and
I will scratch yours" which has pre-
vailed for so long between most of the
Republicans and most of our friends
from the South.

In other words, Mr. President, a i)erson
21 years of age or over Is eligible to serve
on a Jury unless, among other things, he
Is incompetent to serve under the laws of
the SUte in which the district court U
held. And If he is incompetent by 8t«t«
statute U) serve as a Juror In a State
court, he is Ineligible to serve as a Juror
In a Federal court.

Let us see what the State laws are.

In the State of Arkansas. In the Parish
of Orleans In Louisiana, which Includes
the city of New Orleans, and in the States
of Mississippi. South Carolina, and
Texas, a person must be eligible to vote
in order to be competent to serve as a
grand or petit Juror in the State or
parish.

ARKANSAS

In Arkansas, the statute provide.s that:

Sec 101, Grand Jurors — Qualifications. No
person shall be qualified to serve as a grand
Juryman unless he is an elector and citizen
of the county in which he may be called to
fcerve, temperate, and of good behavior.

Sec 208, Preparation of lists of petit Jurors
and alternates. The Commissioners shall
also select from the electors of said coun-
ty •• • persfins to serve as petit Jurors.
(Ark, Ann Stat,, title 39 )

Therefore. Mr. President. In Arkansas,
one must be an elector in order to serve
on a grand or petit Jury or a Juit in
the Federal district court.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8605

In Arkansas — as is clear from the
tables I have inserted in the Record — of
the 232,191 potential Negro voters, only
67,851. or 29.2 percent, were even regis-
tered voters in 1955. Of course, many
fewer than the 67,851 actually vote.

Therefore, in Arkansas, if a Federal
court orders an individual to cease to
threaten, intimidate, or coerce a Negro
in order to assure his right to vote, or
if the court orders a local official to
place certain Negroes on the voters' list,
or to protect their right to vote in any
other respect, and if the court order is
deliberately not carried out, then the
individual shall— under the amendment
already adopted by the Committee on
the Judiciary— enjoy the right to a trial
by jury for failing to carry out the
court order and for, in fact being in
contempt of court. In Arkansas, the
jury will be composed exclusively of
those who are qualified to vote, and
those individuals or groups who are in-
eligible to vote or who fail to qualify
to vote — perhaps by the local election
official's very actions — are denied the
right to be on the jury lists.

Thus, the system feeds on itself. The
selection of juries, by law, is such that
the overwhelming number, and in many
cases all of the jurors, will be chosen
from the white voters who, in most
Southern States, would probably not
convict a fellow white man for pre-
venting a Negro from voting.

In those States which require ellgi-
bili^y to vote as a qualification for jury
duty — and the practice is more wide-
spread than the actual laws of the States
indicate — each discrimination would re-
inforce the other.

The great proportion of Negroes are
denied the right to vote. Because they
are denied the right to vote, they are
ineUgible to serve on juries. Because
they are Ineligible to serve on Juries in
thoie States, they would be unable to
protect their right to vote by Jury action
under the so-called Jury-trial amend-
ment.

That, Mr. President. Is the real mean-
ing of the trtal-by-Jury amendment, so
far as the States which require Jurors
to be qualified voters are concerned.

LOUISUMA

In Louisiana, including the great city
of New Orleans, It Is only in Orleans
Parish, that the prospective Juror must,
by law, be qualified to vote to serve on a
jury.

The pertinent section is to be found
in Louisiana Code Criminal Law and
Practice (1943) , section 194 (as amended
by L. 1944, No. 151 (parish of Orleans)).

Section 194 provides that:

Selection of jurors; • • • The said com-
mission shall select at large. Impartially
from the citizens of the parish of Orleans,
having quallflcatlons requisite to register as
voters, the names of not less than 750 per-
sons comi>etent under this code to serve as
Jurors. (La. Ann. Rev. Stat. Title 15.)

In the parish of Orleans in 1956, it
was estimated that there were 124,600
potential Negro voters. Of these, 31.880
or 25 percent, were registered to vote.

Therefore, in the parish of Orleans
In 1956. 75 percent of the Negroes of
the parish would be ineligible, by law,
apart from any other action or event, to

serve on Juries which would try those
who were charged with preventing Ne-
groes from voting.

Again, this is what the Jury trial
amendment really means, namely, that
those who are denied the right to vote
are also, by reason of that very fact,
denied the right to serve on Juries which
would try those who were charged with
denying the right to vote to otherwise
competent voters.

MISSISSIFPI

In Mississippi, at least 98 percent of
the Negroes 21 years of age or over ac-
tually did not vote in the 1955 guber-
natorial election, according to the testi-
mony of Governor Coleman. Ninty-six
percent of the Negroes 21 years of age
or over are not even registered voters
in the State of Mississippi.

In order to serve on a jury in
Mississippi, one must be a qualified
elector. The Mississippi Code— 1942 —
section 1762 provides that —

8ec. 1762. Who are competent Jtirors:
Every male citizen not under the age of 21
years, who is a qualified elector, and able to
read and write, has not been convicted of an
Infamous crime, or the unlawful sale of in-
toxicating liquors within a period of S years
and who is not a common gambler or habitual
drunkard, is a competent juror.

It follows from this that a person who
is not a qualified elector is incompetent
to serve on a Jury. Apparently, there is
the further restriction that not only must
one be registered, but the poll tax must
be paid as a prerequisite to serving as a
juryman, although Myers v. State (167
Miss. 76, 147 So. 308) . holds that one who
had paid one-half of his poll tax, the re-
maining half not being due under the
statute at the time of the trial, was a
qualified Juror.

When we recall that the Federal
statute provides that one may not
serve on a Federal Jury if he is incompe-
tent to serve tmder the laws of the State,
we can see that at least 96 percent of
the Negroes in Mlaciuippi, under the law
and quite apart from any further re-
striction In practice, are unable to aerve
on Federal Juries.

Therefore, in MisciMippl, as In Ar-
kansAs and the Parish of New Orleans,
Negroes whom the right-to-vote pro-
visions of the civil rights bill are in-
tended primarily to protect, are excluded
by law from serving on Federal Juries,
which— under the Jury trial amend-
ment— would try those who fail to carry
out the court orders to protect the right
to vote.

BOTTTH CAEOLINA

In South Carolina, article 5, section
22. of the constitution of the State, pro-
vides that —

Each juror must be a qualified elector
under the provisions of this Constitution,
between 21 and 68 years, and of good moral
character.

In State v. Waitus ((1953) 77 S. E. 2d
256), it was determined that the word
"qualified" meant "registered." So. in
South Carolina, one must be a "regis-
tered" voter in order to serve on a Fed-
eral jury.

In South Carolina, out of 390,024 po-
tential Negro voters — that is, nonwhites
21 and over— only 98,890 Negroes were

even registered to vote. Since each
juror must be a qualified "elector" —
and as "elector" means "registered"
voter— only one-quarter are even po-
tentially eligible to serve on juries. In
South Carolina, Negroes represent about
34 percent of the total population of
voting age, but only 16 percent of the
total registration.

Therefore, in South Carolina, just aa
large numbers of Negroes are similarly
denied the right in Arkansas, the Parish
of Orleans, and the State of Mississippi.
75 percent of the Negroes 21 years of
age or over would be denied, by law. the
right to sit on a Federal jury which
would try the cases of contempt arising
out of the provisions of the civil-rights
bill designed to protect their right to
vote.

TEXAS

In Texas, the statute pertaining to
jury service reads as follows:

Abt. 2133. All persons, both male and fe-
male, over 21 years of age are competent
Jurors, unless disqualified under some pro-
vision of this chapter. No person shall be
qualified to serve as a juror who does not
possess the following qualifications:

1. He must be a citizen of the State and
of the county in which he is to serve, and
qualified under the Constitution and the
laws to vote in said county; provided that
his faUure to pay poll tax aa required by
law shall not be held to disqualify him for
jiuy service in any instance (Vernon's Ann.
Tex. Civ. Stat. Art. 2133).

In practice, however, the jury lists in
Texas are made up from the list of those
who have paid their poll tax. This is
true, for there is no other means by
which a list of eligible electors Is estab-
lished— that is. there is no registration
as such other than the list of those who
have paid the poll tax.

In Texas, 90 percent of the Negroes
live in the 95 counties listed in the table
I have plAced in the Ricoao. In those
coimUes, of a potential Negro vote of
550,992 of those 21 years of age and over,
only 200,^^— or 38.0 percent— were reg-
istered to vote in 1066.

Therefore, In Texas, as In Arkansaa.
Mlsflatlppi, South Carolina, and the Par-
ish of Orleans, the fact that Negroes in
large proportion are not qualified to votn,
excludes them in large numbers from
Jury service in Federal trials.

Therefore, in those 95 counties in
Texas— as in the other 4 States— the
Jury trial amendment means that those
who are charged with failing to carry
out a court order to place Negroes on
voting Usts, or those who are charged
with preventing Negroes from voting by
intimidation, coercion, or threats, will
be tried by those whom they have al-
lowed to vote, namely, in a word, virtu-
ally all white juries.

Mr. President, I now wish to touch on
a matter which indicates that the situa-
tion is even more grave than that which
is indicated by the figures I have given.

I have been confining myself up to now
to the number of Negroes actually reg-
istered to vote, and have shown that by
reason of the poll tax still further num-
bers in certain States are disqualified as
voters, and hence are ineligible to sit as
jurors. I have furthermore Indicated
that in certain States an additional
hurdle is set up. which requires Nesroes

8606

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

to give a satisfactory interpretation of
the State or Federal Constitution.

However, in the States which do not
have explicit provisions confining Juries
to qualified voters, as well as In States
which do, In practice there is an addi-
tional barrier thrown up, namely, in the
way the lists of jurors are compiled.

I hold in my hand a copy of the famous
Knox report, made by 5 eminent Federal
judges in 1942 to the Judicial Confer-
ence. It deals with the selection of
jurors in Federal courts. I ask unani-
mous consent that the salient passages
of the report may be included in the
Record at the conclusion of my remarks.

The PRESIDING OFFICER iMr. Y.ar-
BOROUGK In the chair >. Is there objec-
tion'' The Chair hears none, and it is
so ordered.

(See exhibit 2 >

Mr. DOUGLAS. The Knox report—
and the famous Federal jud.se, John C.
Knox, was chairman of that committee —
points out that in many districts the
practice of making up a jury was sub-
stantially as follows: A jury commis-
sioner, and a clerk of the court, are ap-
pxjinted. cne from each party. I may
say in that connection that in the pai<t.
and, to a large extent at the present time,
the South is largely a one-party area.
There is usually only one clerk and one
jury commissioner.

These men, according to the Knox re-
port, wiite to so-called "keymen" in the
various counties and ask these keymen
to suggest jurors. It is a little mysterious
as to who these keymen are who are
chosen to nominate jurors.

Sometimes they are businessmen, and
sometimes they are local political lead-
ers. In any event, they tend, certainly
in the South, to be white citizens. If
there are any Ne2:roes who are designated
as 'keymen," and who therefore are
given the power to maj^e nominations, it
would be most interesting to have that
fact established for the record How-
ever, my information is that in practice
they are almost exclusively white .•south-
ern businessmen and white .southern po-
htical and professional leaders. These
are the men who make up the original
lists.

Tho list is then sent to the jury com-
missioner in the Federal court for that
district Then these commissioners
make their selections. In some cases by
turning a wheel, and in other cases by
picking' the names. Very few Negroes. I
think — certainly a very small proportion
of Negroes — find their way onto the lists.
Still fewer are selected for jury duty.
Therefore. Mr. President, the juries
which will try these contempt ca^es. If
the amendment is adopted, will be care-
fully wuinowed. and the Negroes of the
South will have very little representa-
tion on them.

now TME WHOU: THING WORK5

This discussion. I believe, shows how
the jury-trial amendment, when coupled
with tiie existing denial of the n^ht to
vote to thousands of Negroes, merely sots
up a cycle in which ;

First. Negroes are denied the right to
vote.

Second. A civU-rlghts bill, we hope Ls
passed by Congress to protect and defend
that right.

Third. An amendment is, however,
added to provide jury trials for those who
have prevented Neij;roes from voting.
/ Fourth. 3y law, Negroes are excluded
from jury lists because these lists are
composed, by law in five States and by
practice in many others, of those who are
on the voting lists.

Fifth. Therefore, the juries often
would be composed predominantly of
those whom the defendant has given the
piivileye of voting and largely exclude
ihoze or those groups who have been
denied the right to vote.

Sixth. The.<e jury members in turn
would find it very difficult to exercise
their fair judgment in civil-rights cases.
They will be making decisions in many
cases where there exists an atmosphere
of tension, coorcion. threats, and intimi-
dauon. If they support^ a Federal
judge's order protecting the voting lights
of Negroes, they know they will be ex-
po.sed to economic pressure and possibly
to physical violence. This would be true,
ill particular, of those jurors who might
be willing on grounds alone of justice to
support the order of a Federal judge.

But. for the most part, the jurors, be-
cause of the means of selection, will re-
flect the prevailing attitude and mores
of the dominant forces in their commu-
nities. And this attitude in mast sec-
tions of the South, either because of eco-
nomic and political pressure, or because
of tradition and practice, supports the
conditions which now prevail and which
substantially prevent Negroes from exer-
cising the franchise.

IT JVRT-T1H.\L AMENDMENT IS DtrEATFn WI
WILL GET MORE IIEPRE.SENTATIVE JCRItS

Conversely, if the so-called jury-
trial amendment is not passed, and if
the rigiit to vote is more fully protected
for Nei^roes and exercLsed by them, thus
wai in turn mean that jury trials — where
they are meant to be used in our judicial
system— will be by juries more truly and
fairly representative of the citizens of
the areas they will serve. Paradoxically
enough, from a verbal point of view,
the defeat of the so-called jury trial
amendment will in reality result in a
restoration and maintenance of trial by
jury in appropriate cases as it was orig-
in? I'y Intended to be used

In other words. If we defeat the jury
trial amendment, there will be many
more Necroes qualified to vote. and. be-
ms qualified to vote, there will be many
more Negroes on juries in the South, and
tho.se Juries, therefi^re, when a race issue
IS involved, will be better able to give
impartial judgment.

t::e jiry trl\l aviendment will make th»
rn-IL-RICHTS Bn.L inettective

The jury trial amendment, then, will
nullify the protection of the right to
vote in those areas where the right to
vote most needs protection. It will nul-
bfy the protection of Uie civil-nghts bill
and the right-to-vote provisions of that
bill in direct proportion to the discrim-
inations against voting which now exist.
Its effect then is to perpetuate those dis-
criminations rather than to do away with
them.

This is the real meaning, then, of tha
so-called "jury trial" amendment. The
right to a trial by jury means the right

of those who have intimidated, threat-
ened, or coerced Negroes from voting to
be tried by a Jury composed of those
whom they have not Intimidated,
threatened, or coerced. The jury will be
composed of those who can vote, but not
compo.sed of those who have been denied
the right.

I shall cite several cases to show how
this works in action. The first is a dra-
matic recent illustration of a case In
Alabama. The second is a case from
Mississippi, and I shall repd the excerpts
from the decision in that case to show
just how this system actually works.

the jcrt dcci.sion in the uontcomcrt
bombing c\sc

We have all been aware of the bus boy-
cott which occurred lai,t year In the city
of Montgomery, Ala. In that Instance
the protest of the Negroes was expressed
without violence and by a policy of pas-
sive resistance.

Let the Record show that there were
no acts of violence by Negroes; they
merely refused to ride tiie buses, and
they exercised great restraint.

In the concluding days of that struggle,
several Negro churches were bombed,
two of them l>eing completely destroyed.
Two young white men were arrested on
the charge of bombing those churches,
and m preliminary pohce examination
they confes-sed. The case was then sub-
mitted for trial, and the jury returned a
verdict of acquittal.

I hold in my hand an article published
In the New York Times for May 31. 1957,
describing the courtroom scene attend-
ing the verdict. I ask unanimous consent
that the article be printed at this point
m my remarks.

There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be prmted in the Record,
as follows;
(Prom the New York Time* of May 31, 1957)

Two IN Montgomert Freed in Bombing —

Acquitted by Whiti Jury or Attack on

Necro Church^Spectators Chcer VrmDiCT

Montgomery. Ala . May 30 - X*T> young

white men were acquitted late toUay of the

bombing of a Negro churth.

The verdict by the 12 white ]uror« came
after 1 hour and 35 minutes of deliberation
and brought an outburst at applause from
the packed courtroom after court had been
adjourned.

The verdict cleared Ra>Tnond C Brltt. Jr.,
27 year* old, and Sonny Kyle Livingston, Jr.,
19. of the charge of bombing the Hutchin-
son Street Baptist Church early on the
morning of January 10 during an outbreak
of Ttolence that followed the end of city-bus
segregation in Montgomery.

As the Jury returned to the courtroom.
Judge Eiigene W. Carter, of circuit court,
warned the crowd against any demonstra-
tu n. But the mtiment court wa."! adjourned,
the spectators burst Into loud applause and
cheering.

rZAJlS RACIAL RIOTINO

The verdict came after the prosecution
had warned that acqultUl might bring on
racial rioting In Montgomery.

Four churches, the homes of two minis-
ters supporting Integration and a Negro taxi-
cab stand and adjoining residence were
bombed in two outbreaks of terrorism fol-
lowing the end of bus segregaUon In Mont-
gomery.

Mr Brltt and Mr. Livingston were put on
trial this week only for the dynam.tlng of
one church. Mr. Brltt also faces ch.irges of
dynamiting another church and tl.e taxi-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8607

cab stand. Two other men are awaiting trial
on other bombing chargea.

State and defense attorneys alike waved
the banner of segregation in their closing ar-
guments. The defense appealed for a ver-
diet that would give encouragement to "every
white man. every white woman, and every
white child in the South who is looking to
you to preserve our sacred traditions.

William F. Thetford, chief proeecutor. told
the Jury "we were on the very edge of
racial rioting" before the two defendants
and two other white men were arrested and
indicted for the bombings last January.

WAKNS or THK KUkN

"We don't want racial rioting in Mont-
gomery," he said. "But if one can play the
game, both can. If you turn these men
loose tmder the evidence the State has pre-
sented, you say to the Ku Kluz Klan 'if you
bomb a Negro church or hcMne. it's all right.'

"Then," he continued, "the next thing you
know It will be your church and your house,
because It's a sword that cutb both ways."

John Blue Hill and John Harris, defense
attorneys, argued that the verdict would
"determine our very civilization and our
way of life" In the South and that it must
"go down In history as saying to the Negroes
that 'you shall not pass.' "

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, the
New York Times is a very responsible
and accurate newspaper. I point out
from the article something about the na-
ture of the defense appeal.

"The defense" for the two jroung men
who were on trial, according to the
Times, "appealed for a verdicC that would
give encouragement to 'every white man,
every white woman, and every white
child in the South who is looking to you
to preserve our sacred traditions.' "

The defense attorneys argued, again
to quote the Times, "that the verdict
would 'determine our very civilization
and our way of life' in the South, and
that it must 'go down in history as saying
to the Negroes that "you shall not
pass. " • "

After the Jury had been out for 1 hour
and 35 minutes they brought in a verdict
of acquittal. The account in the New
York Times says that this brought an
outburst of applause from the packed
courtroom after court had been ad-
journed.

This was a case of two men, who had
confessed that they had bombed the
churches, being acquitted upon the plea
that white southern manhood, white
southern womanhood, and white south-
em childhood, were all looking to the
jury to preserve their sacred traditions.

The defense attorneys argued "That
the verdict would 'determine our very
civilization and our way of life' in the
South and that it must 'go down in his-
tory as saying to the Negroes that "you
shall not pass." ' "

After that plea to the jury and the
charge of the Judge, despite the confes-
sion and despite the evidence, the Jury
acquitted the defendants.

I have criticized that decision, and I
have taken some very severe attacks In
return from the southern press. I am
not complaining about those attacks;
one should be expected to endure them,
as I do. I make no complaints. That is
what one must expect. I am ready to
endure other attacks In defense of what
I believe to be correct and right.

May I point out also that some years
ago a young Negro boy from Illinois went

down to Mississippi, where he was ac-
cused of whistling at a white woman.
I do not know whether he did this or
did not. But he was murdered, and his
body was thrown Into a stream. Two
men were put on triaL The circumstan-
tial evidence certainly seemed compel-
ling to me. The case was argued in a
courtroom in very prejudicial fashion,
one which certainly did not c<»iform to
what I would reguxl as due process or
proper standards. The Jury returned a
verdict of acquittaL That was the fa-
mous Emmet Till case. It was an Illinois
boy who was killed.

I think the Mississippi Jury In that
case disregarded what all Uie press re-
ports indicated as being the clear evi-
dence and the overwhelmingly prepon-
derant testimony.

CBAND JimnEB IN LOT7IBXAMA

Assistant Attorney General Warren
Olney m has placed in the record of the
hearings of the Senate Subconunlttee on
Privileges and Elections the case of
a grand Jury which refused to indict
where there had been a wholesale dis-
quallfleation of voters in Ouachita Par-
ish, La.

I ask unanimous consent to have some
references by Assistant Attorney Greneral
Olney printed at this point in the
Rbcoro.

There being no objection, the refer-
ences were ordered to be printed in the
RECOtD, as follows :

STATZMENT BT WAEKZN OLNXT m, OCTOBEB

10, 1B66

No study of the political practices followed
during the course of the 1956 presidential and
senatorial elections could possibly be ade-
quate or complete without Including the mass
disfranchisement in certain communities by
unconstitutional means of thousands of le-
gally registered voters. It presents a prob-
blem of major concern to the whole Nation
and would appear to lie within the inves-
tigative Jurisdiction of the Senate Subcom-
mittee on Privileges and Elections.

I should like to illustrate what is goihg
on, as well as to suggest how the subcommit-
tee might be of public service by giving the
facts on Just one small parish. I will take
as illustrative Ouachita Parish in the State
of Louisiana.

On January 17, 1956. there were approxi-
mately 4.000 persons of the Negro race whose
names appeared on the list of registered
voters of Ouachita Parish as residing within
wards 3 and 10 in that parish. It would ap-
pear that these persons were and are citizens
of the United States, possessing all of the
qualifications requisite for electors under the
constitution and laws of Louisiana and of
the United States, because a system of
permanent voter registration, provided for
under the laws of the State of Louisiana, was
in effect in Ouachita Parish and all of these
persons had registered and qualified for
permanent registration and had been al-
lowed to vote in previous elections.

As of October 4, 1956, the names of only
OM Negro voters remained on the rolls of reg-
istered voters for wards 3 and 10 of Ouachita
Parish, the names of vaan than 3300 Negro
voters having been eliminated from the rolls
In violation of the laws of Louisiana, as well
as those of the United States. This mass dis-
franchisement was accomplished by a scheme
and device to which a number of white citi-
zens and certain local officials were parties.

The scheme appears to have taken form
as early as January of 1956, and its prlnotpal
purpose was to eliminate from the list of
registered voters of Ouachita Parish the
names of all persons of the Negro race re-

siding in wards 9 and 10, and thereby de-
prive them of their right to vote.

On March 2, 1056, a nonprofit corporation,
organized imder the laws of the Htate of
Louisiana, and called the Cltiaens Council
of Ouachita Parish, La., was incorporated.
Among Its ostensible objects and purposes,
as stated In its articles of Incorporation, are
the following:

"1. To protect and preserve by i^l I^al
means our historical southern social institu-
tions in all their aspects;

"2. To marshal the economic resources of
the good citizens of this community and
surrounding area in combating any attack
upon these social Institutions."

Notwithstanding these stated objects, sub-
sequent developments have demonstrated
that one of the principal objects and pur-
poses of the Ouachita Citizens Coimcil was
and Is to prevent and discourage persons of
the Negro race from participating in elec-
tions in the parish.

The names of the offlcers. direetora, and
members of the Ouachita Citizens Council
wiU be made available to the subcommittee
if the subcommittee wishes them.

CAZBT OXrt PLANS

During the month of March 1956 the offi-
cers and members of the citizens council be-
gan to carry out their plan to eliminate the
names of Negro persons from the roll of reg-
istered voters. This scheme consisted of fU-
ing purported affidavits with the registrar of
voters challenging the qualifications of all
voters of the Negro race within wards 8 and
10, and of inducing the registrar to send
notices to the Negro voters requiring them
within 10 days to appear and prove their
qualifications by affidavits of three witnesses.
The scheme further consisted of inducing
the registrar to refuse to accept as witnesses
bona fide registered voters of the parish who
resided in a precinct other than the precinct
of the chaUenged voters, or who had them-
selves been challenged or who had already
acted as witnesses for any other chaUenged
voter. Of course it was a part of this scheme
that none of the registered Negro voters
would be able to meet theee Illegal require-
ments and upon the basis of such pretext,
that the registrar would strike their namea
from the roll of registered voters.

These people in the Ouachita Citizens
CoTincil appear to have succeeded either by
persutwlon or intimidation in procuring the
help and cooperation of the election officials
of Ouachita pariah.

COUNCIL USES FACnJTIKS

In AprU and May of 1956. the registrar
and her deputy permitted the officers and
members of the citizens coimcil to use the
faculties of the office of the registrar to ex-
amine the records and to>prepare therefrom
lists of registered voters of the Negro race.
The citizens councU was given free run of
the registrar's office and was permitted to
occupy the office and work therein during
periods when the office of the registrar was
not officially open to the public.

Between AprU 16, 1966, and May 22. 1956.
the members and officers of the Ouachita
Citizens Council fUed with the registrar ap-
proximately 3,420 docTiments purporting to
be affidavits, but which were not sworn to
either before the registrar or deputy regis-
trar of Ouachita Parish as required by law.
In each pwported affidavit it was alleged
that the purported affiant had examined the
records on file with the registrar of voters
of Ouachita Parish, that the registrant
named therein was believed to be illegally
registered, and that the purported affidavit
was made for the purpose of challenging the
right of the registrant to remain on the roll
of registered voters, and to vote in any elec-
tions. These purported aflldavits were not
prepared and filed in good faith, but were
prepared and filed without regard to the

8608

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

J me 10

actual legal quallflcatlonn of the registrants
to whom they referred.

ATTIDAVrrS ACCDTID

Prior to the filing of the purported affi-
davit*, there were In ward 10 2.389 persona
of the Negro racj and 4,054 persona of the
white race whose name appeared on tlio
Hat of registered voters. The affidavits lUed
by the citizens council challenged all of the
2.389 Negro voters and challenged the quali-
fications of none of the 4.054 white voters
registered in that ward. In ward 3 the (.iti-
zens council filed purported affidavits chal-
lenging the qualifications of 1,008 out of
the total of 1.523 Negro voters, but onlv 23
of the white voters who were registered in
that ward.

The registrar, knowing that the pretended
affldavlts were not sworn to as required by
law. and that the purported affiants had not
in each c.ise personally examined the rec irds
In the registrar's office pertaining to each
challenged registrant, accepted the pre-
tended affidavits for filing and mailed ccpies
of them together with printed citations to
the approximately 3.420 voters named
therein, requiring them within 10 days to
appear In the office of the registrar and
to prove their qualifications. The citations
and copies of the pretended affidavits -vere
mailed to large groups of registrants at or
about the same time with the knowlt^dge
that the ordinary facilities and personnel
of the registrar's office would not permit
the receiving or the proof of their qualifica-
tions from all of the registrants within the
10-day period. Of course it was Intended
that ""U challenged registrants of the Negro
race who were thereby denied an oppor-
tunity t'l prove their qualifications w-^uld
be eliminated from the roll of registered
voters.

However, reglstrtints of the Negro race re-
sponded to these citations in large numbers.
During the months of April and May '^arge
lines of Negro registrants seeking to pmve
their qualifications f jrmed before the regis-
trar's office, starting as early as 5 a m. But
the registrar and her deputy refused to hear
offers of proof of qualifications on bi'half
of .iny more than 50 challenged Negro regis-
trants per day Consequently most of the
Negro registrants were turned away from
the rem.strar's office and were denied any r.p-
pnrtunlry to establish their proyjer registr.\-
tlon Thereafter the registrar and her
deputv struck the names of such registrants
from the rolls.

INTERPRrr.^TtON' REQT'IRED

As to the NeifTO voters whose n.vmes have
thus been stricken fr>m the roil and who
sought to register as voters, the reg'strar
and her deputy, at tne instigation of the
.Citizens council and under the color of au-
thority or the Louisiana Revised Statutes,
required such applicants for registration to
give a "reasc-nable Interpretation " of a clause
of the Constitution of Louisiana or of the
United States and no similar requirement
was ordlnarllv Imposed upon persons of the
white race Regardless of the interpretations
given, the registrar and her deputy declared
them to be unreasonable. In this manner
Negro applicants for registration, although
possessing all the legal qualifications for
voters under the laws of Louisiana and of
the United States, were denied their right
to register and qualify as voters.

For this serious condition there Is no ade-
quate remedy presently available U) the De-
partment of Justice. A criminal prosecution
begun after the election would not restore to
roll of registered voters of Ouachita Parish
the names that have been unlawfully re-
moved. It would not protect the Intei^rlty
of the election of officers of the United .States
in the November election

The Department of Justice has not been
blind to the pijssibllUy that this kind of
unconstitutional disfranchiseme:;: of citi-

Mns of the United States might occur and
that more effective legal remedies are needed.
The Attorney General In April 1856. pre-
sented proposals to both Houses of Congress
for legislation which would authorize him to
apply to the Federal courts for preventive re-
lief by way of injunction In cases such as
this. In testifying In support of these pro-
posals the Attorney General pointed out to
the Congress that although under present
statutes the Department can prosecute after
such deprivations of the right to vote have
occurred, the Department could not seek
preventive relief when violations are threat-
ened. The Attorney General then Illustrated
his point as follows

"In 1952, several Negro citizens of a certain
county In Mississippi submitted affidavits
to the Department alleging that because of
their race the registrar of voters refused to
register them. Although the Mississippi
statutes at that time required only that an
applicant be able to read and write the Con-
stitution, these affidavits alleged that the
registrar demanded that the Negro citizens
answer such questions as 'What is due proc-
ess of law?' "How many bubbles In a bar of
soap**', etc. Those submitting affidavits In-
cluded college graduates, teachers and busi-
nessmen, yet niine of them, according to the
registrar, could meet the voting require-
ments. If the Attorney General had the
power to Invi ke the injunctive pn cess, the
registrar could have been ordered to step
these dlscrlmlnat.:ry practices and qualify
these citizens acc<^rdlng to Mississippi law "

The events which I have recited In
Ouach't.i Parish. La , demonstrate how justi-
fied the Attorney General was in his plea
t«5 the Congress for legislation permitting
him to seek preventive reiief in such cases
from the courts.

NOT CONFINED

The disfranchisement of American citizens
Is by ni) means confined to Ouachita Parish
or to the State of Louisiana. The Depart-
ment la In receipt of a complaint under date
of September Jl. 1956. that a similar scheme
ustnif the same technique. Is in operation In
Rapides Pari&h. La . under the guidance of
a White Citizens Council. It is alleged that
wiihm a 10-day periud the council had
wrongfully caused the elimination from the
rolls of over 200 properly qualified and regis-
tered Negro viters

On September 22. 1:J56. a similar c<5m-
plalnt was received from Pierce County. Ga ,
It bein,? alleged that In August the qualifica-
tions of approximately 25 to 30 percent of
the Negro voters of Pierce Cout.ty were chal-
lenged while no ch.iileiiges to any of the
white Voters were made Thereafter most
of the challenged voter«^ names were stricken
from the list !--o that they cannot now vote,
although properly qualiiled. The full facta
of this complaint have not yet t)een ascer-
tained

These developments should demonstrate
to everyone who hel.t^ves in the basic prin-
ciples of the United States Constitution
that it is indeed regrettable that the legis-
lative proposals of the Attorney General
seeking civil remedies to protect the con-
stitutionai right to vote sliould ha-.e been
bottled up m the Senate Judiciary Ciimmit-
tee .-ifter having p.w*ed the House. The fail-
ure of the Cvini;resa to act In this particular
has left the Department of Justice and the
courts without the remedies and means nec-
essary to secure the honesty and Integrity
of elections for Federal i.fflcers.

Under these circumstances. I respectfully
suggest that a special resp<-nslblUty rests
upon the Senate Subcommittee on Privileges
and Elections. This subcommittee is that
agency of the Congress most directly con-
cerned with elections. It is now engaged in
the study of poUtlcal practices during the
presently pending elections. If this sub-
committee would hi, Id public hearings con-
cerning this unconstitutlonaJ disfranchise-

ment of citizens of the United Sates. It
would indeed be, to quote the chidnnan'a
letter of Invitation. In the Interest of pub-
lic enlightenment. It would also be of aid
In the coiislderatlon of legislation in the next
session of Congress. If such hearlr.g8 were
held In one or more of the places from which
these complaints emanate, these abuses
might well be stopped. I venture to pre-
dict that public hearings In tbes<; places
prior to election would result In ths names
of hundreds of qualified voters being im-
mediately restored to the registration rolls.
Such a decision on the part of the jubcom-
mlttee would be most helpful In ccntribut-
Ing to a free and fair election.

ADDrriONAL CoMMXNTS or Warsen Olmct
III. FrsauART 21, 1957

Depaitucnt or J jstic*.
Hon EMANun, Ctllei.

Chairman, Subcommittre No. 5 of the
Committee on the Judiciary.

Hou^e of Representatives, Washing-
ton. D. C.

DrAR Me. Cn.LEa; On February 13 Mr Jack
P F Gremilllon testified before your sub-
committee. A part of his testimony related
to a voter registration civil-rlghts case arising
in Ouachita Parish. La., and to the ictlon of
a Federal grand Jury convened In Monroe,
La . to inquire into that and other ct'il-rlghts
cases. Certain facts which the Department
of Justice has in its files suggest that Mr.
Grcmllllon's testimony might have left a
misleading impression in a numb-T of re-
spects. Accordlnrly. we feel obliged to pro-
vide you with information which we have
which is inconsistent with the Imp'-easion
left by Mr OremilUon's testimonj These
facts have not previously been prevlded by
this Department to Mr. Gremilllon. We are.
however, sending him a copy of tils letter.

We refer herein to Mr OremilUon's testi-
mony by subject matter and transcript page
number

interpretation of Constitution oy regis-
trant, page 682:

"Mr KrtATiNC Do you have an ed jcatlonal
requirement of some nature Ir Lov.lsiana In
order to vote?

■ Mr CitEMiLiioN The rrqulremfnt with
reference t<3 education provides t ley shall
be able to read and write and interpret one
part of the Constitution, of their ohcice

• Mr Klating. One part of thj United
States Constitution"'

• Mr CiHEMiLLUiN. Yes.

"Mr Kkatinc And they can chOTse It?

Mr Grfmillion Oh, yes In otl.er words,
the registrar of voters cannot say. 'I want
you to explain something' that in |-T>po«slble
to explain They have the right of choice
Insofar as concerns the sectic n or phrase
of the Constitution they wish to interpret.
They have their own choice on that, and
nothing Is foreplanned or forewarned."

COMMENT

In none of the 10 partshea In Louisiana
which have t)een the subject of Inveatiga-
tions by the Department is there any evi-
dence that the registrar permitted the appli-
cant f )r registration to chixjse which clause
of the Constitution he wished to Interpret.
Specifically, In the cuse arising fron-. Ouachita
Parish, the investigation by the FBI dl»-
closed th.it the registrar of voters in exam-
ining applicants for -registration used a card
on which was written an excerpt from the
Constitution, which card was given to the
registrar by the Citizens Council o' Ouachita
Parish. In one Instance Mrs. Mae Lucky,
registrar of voters of Ouachita Paiish, asked
an applicant for registration whai our form
of government Is. The appllcai.t replied.
"A democratic form of government." The
registrar said, "That's wrong — try a^n.'
The applicant said. "We have a -spublicaa
form of government." The regL- trar then
said that that answer, too, was \.Tong and

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8609

that the applicant would have to return after
the next election to reregister.

Reply affidavit on behalf of challenged
ToterB, page 667:

"Mr. Getmtixiow. • • • When such a reg-
istrant la challenged, the registrar of voters
l8 required, under the law. to forward a no-
tice of the challenge, a complete copy of the
same, together with a form which the chal-
lenged registrant has to execute by three
bona fide voters registered In the same parish
to the effect that the challenged registrant
U a bona fide resident of that parish. This
form Is sent to the challenged registrant at
the time that the notice of challenge Is sent.

"If the challenged registrant does rot ap-
pear within 10 days, the registrar shall re-
move his name from the rolls. If, however,
the challenged registrant appears with three
bonb fide registered voters to assert the au-
thenticity of his residence In the parish be-
fore his registrar of tbe voters, or deputy
registrar, the challenge shall fall and the
voter's name shall remain on the rolls. See
Louisiana RevUed Statutes of 1950, title 18.
sections 132, 133. and 134."

COMMENT

In none of the ten parishes which were the
subject of FBI Investigations did the regis-
trar make It a practice to send a form of reply
affidavit to the challenged registrant. On
the contrary. Investigations In Bienville,
Caldwell. De Soto. Jackson, La Salle, and
Ouathlta Parishes disclosed that the registrar
in those parishes did everything to discourage
the filing of reply affidavits In the statutory
form and generally refused to accept them
when offered.

In Ouachita Parish the registrar refused to
accept as witnesses on behalf of a challenged
voter bona fide registered voters of the parish
who were not from the same precinct as the
challenged voter. She also refxiscd to accept
as witnesses bona fide registered voters who
had themselves been challenged. She also
refused to accept as witnesses registered vot-
ers who had already witnessed to the quali-
fications of another challenged voter.

In Caldwell Parish the registrar refused to
accept witnesses on behalf of a challenged
voter unless they were accompanied by a law-
enforcement officer and a member of the
citizens council to Identify them. He even
refused to accept white persons as witnesses
for Negro voters on the grounds that the wit-
nesses were of a different race from the race
of the challenged voters.

In Bienville Parish, where 560 of the 595
registered Negro voters were challenged, the
registrar consistently refused to accept affida-
vits on behalf of registered voters which
were in the statutory form and, as a result,
the names of every one of the challenged
Negro voters were stricken from the voting
rolls.

In Jackson Parish, where 953 of the 1,122
Negro voters were challenged, the registrar
also refused to accept for filing affidavits on
behalf of challenged voters, which affidavits
were In statutory form. As a result, all of
the challenged Negro voters, with the excep-
tion of two who were physically disabled
and therefore unAble to fill out voter appli-
cation cards, were stricken from the voting
rolls.

In a number of parishes when challenged
Negro registrants came to the registrar's
office In response to the challenging cita-
tion, they were told by the registrar that
they would have to see a private attorney
in order to get the matter straightened out.

Ouachita incident was exceptional, pages
670-671, 703-703:

"The CHAiaMAif. Mr. Attorney General, I
am reading from page 145 of the transcript
of these hearings, where there was testimony
given as follows:

" 'In Louisiana the White Citizens Councils
have conducted a campaign to purge as
many colored voters from the books as poe-

Cni 542

slble. In Monroe, La., representatlTes of the
councils have actually Invaded the office of
the registrar of voting for the purpose of
purging colored voters. The Assistant At-
torney General in charge of the criminal
division of the Department of Justice tes-
tified in October 1956 that over 8,000 voters
had been illegally removed from the rolls of
Ouachita Parish, in which Monroe Is lo-
cated.'

"Would you care to comment on that sir?

"Mr. Geemiixjon. Yes.

"I actually do not know anything offi-
cially, or nonofflclally, about the activities
of the Citizens Council In my State. I am
not a member, and I actually do not know.
But I do know that up at Monroe they did
have some difficulty with respect to voting.
But that is definitely not a general rule
throughout the State, and I think that is
more or less an exception."

"Please do not attach too much signifi-
cance to this Monroe affair in Ouachita
Parish about which you already received
testimony. An occtirrence like that is typi-
cal in any State where political battles are
Involved. I personally know that that was
a fight between two candidates in the
mayor's race, and one candidate had the
Negro votes and the other used this means
of getting them off until that election was
held. I regret that that had to happen. But
do not Judge the State of Louisiana by it.
It could happen In any other State In the
Union where you have politics. See what
I mean?

The Chaikman. Yes, sir.

"Mr. Gremiluon. So do not pay any at-
tention to that Monroe affair. That is
strictly politics, and that is why the people
are back there today."

COMMEKT

With respect only to cases which have been
investigated by the FBI, the following num-
bers of Negro voters were challenged In
each of the following parishes:

Bienville, 560; Caldwell 330: De Soto, 383;
Grant, 758; Jackson, 953; La Salle, 345; Lin-
coln, 325; Ouachita, 3,240; Rapides. 1.058;
Union, 600.

Grand Jury inquiry, page 677.

"Mr. Gremuxion. Mr. Dalton. one of my
assistants here advises me on something that
we were talking about In the Ouachita
matter, the Monroe matter, and I want to
remind the committee of this: that there
were two grand Juries that investigated
these alleged discrepancies or purging of
the rolls.

"The first returned an indictment, then
the second one was convened, with Mr.
St. John Barrett — I believe his name was —
assisting, an assistant sent down from
Washington. So that grand Jury also failed
to send down any indictments.

"So let me remind ycu this matter was
investigated by two Federal grand Juries."

COMMENT

There has been only one Federal grand
Jury empaneled In Louisiana which has in-
quired into civil-rights violations. This
was empaneled on December 4, 1956, and has
not yet been discharged. It was in session
with respect to civil rights matters on
December 4. 5, 6 and 7, January 29. 30 and
31 and February 1, 6 and 12. Witnesses
were subpenaed and other evidence pre-
sented to the grand Jury in connection with
the cases arising In Caldwell, De Soto and
Grant Parishes. No indictments were re-
turned in these cases. On February 12,
1967, an attorney from this Department out-
lined to the grand Jury the evidence which
the Department had relating to cases aris-
ing in Bienville, Jackson and Ouachita
Parishes, which evidence the Department
believed indicated the commission of of-
fenses against the laws of the United States
and which merited presentation to a grand
jiu-y. After deliberating in private the

grand }ury announced fhrou^ Its foreman
that it had determined that there was no
poflsibility of indictments being returned in
the Bienville, Jackson and Ouachita Parish
cases even though the evidence was pre-
sented to them and a full inquiry con-
ducted. The grand Jury went on record as
not desiring to hear any testimony in con-
nection with these latter cases.

Rereglstratlon of "Purged" Voters, Mon-
roe, Ouachita Parish, page 672:

"Mr. Keating. Have those names been put
back on the rolls?

"Mr. Gremillion. Abont 99 percent of
them are back on the rolls, Mr. Keating.
That was under the provisions of the law
which I read to you from page 2 of my
statement."

COMMENT

Prior to the filing of the challenges in
Ouachita Parish there were approximately
4.000 registered Negro voters In the parish.
On October 6, 1956, after the "purge" wa«
over and when the registration books closed
for the November 6 general election there
were 694 registered Negro voters. Thus,
there were in excess of 3,000 Negro voters
deprived of the right to vote in the general
election of November 6.
' Sincerely,

Wabeen Olwet, m.
Assistant Attorney General.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, the
point I am making is that with the selec-
tion of juries in the Federal courts in
the South being what it is. both by stat-
ute and by practice, then considering the
temper of the communities, and consid-
ering the fact that the jurors must go
back into the communities from which
they come, and that they do not have
the protection of life tenure which a
Federal judge has, there will be far less
justice if a jury-trial amendment Is in-
cluded than if it is knocked out of the
biU.

I hope, in later speeches which I In-
tend to make on this subject from time
to time, to produce additional evidence
showing the great reluctance — ^in most
cases the refusal — of southern jurors to
convict white men for o£Fenses against
Negroes, even where the preponderance
of the evidence of grave offenses is over-
whelming.

If there are now instances of Juries
refusing to convict in cases of 'grave of-
fense, I think we can get some idea of
their added reluctance to convict In
cases where the violation is simply de-
priving Negroes of the right to vote.

Mr. President, can you picture juries
in Alabama, Mississippi, Oeorgia, South
Carolina, or northern Florida convicting
registration officials who, by one artifice
or another, effectively prevent Negroes
from registering to become qualified vot-
ers? That is the reason why many of
us, and I hope ultimately the majority
of the House and Senate will agree with
us, do not wish to accept the jury-trial
amendment. We believe that in the in-
terest of Justice, which is what we
should serve, this cause will be better
aided by having the judges, who are
southern whites, who come from south-
em communities, and who share the
mores of those communities, but who are
somewhat insulated from improper pres-
sure by life tenure, make the decisions,
than by having cases tried by Juries
chosen from carefully culled Jury lists,
which either completely or prep<Mider-
antly exclude Negroe&

8610

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

THX liIMIS8n»FT DICI8ION WHITrWASHINO THl
UBZKATTON OF A JUmT

A recent Mississippi case Indicates
some very humorous yet tragic features
on this point. It is the case of Oliver
Lee Walker against the State of Missis-
sippi, decided on appeal by the Supreme
Court of Mississippi on December 17,

1956. The original citation is volume 91.
Southern, second series, page 1948, but it
is reported in the very excellent Race Re-
lations Law Reporter, volume 2. for April

1957. This law reporter is published by
the Vanderbilt University School of Law.
a white university— and a very reputable
university. I may add.

Walker was a Negro. After being con-
victed of receiving stolen property and
being sentenced to 3 years in the State
penitentiary, he appealed. One of the
grounds of his appeal was that there was
a systematic exclusion of Negroes from
the list of qualified jurors from which
the petit jury was drawn.

The flerures which I have introduced
into the Record for that county, namely,
Bolivar, show that there were something
like 21,805 Negroes of the age of 21 years
and over, but only 511 of whom were
registered.

The court said, as the text appears at
page 440 of the Vanderbilt University
Race Relations Law Reporter :

Actually the proof showed that there were
14 Negro qualified electors In the county, and
that the board of supervisors, at the regular
April 1955 meeting, when the Jury list for
the ensuing years was approved, Included
In the list of potential Jurors for the year
seven, or one-half of the Negroes, who were
qualified.

That was in Bolivar County, and there
was no less than 21,805 potential Negro
voters in that county.

There were 511 Negroes registered, but
the court said there were only 14 who
were "qualified," meaning that the poll
tax and other disqualifications had been
heaped on top of the difficult registra-
tion requirements.

Seven of those fourteen Negroes were
placed on the jury list. Therefore, the
court said, there was no prejudice in the
selection of the jury, although none of
them actually sat on the jury.

Of 21.805 potential Negro voters, only
7 were placed on the jury list. None of
those was selected actually to serve on
the jury. But because the number of
qualified Negro voters was only 14. the
court then said that since half of those
qualified were placed on the list, there
was, therefore, no discrimination. But
in practice, the original court officials
selected only one three-thousandths of
the total number of Negro voters who
were 21 years of age and over. The uis-
qualification was in the ludicrously and
tragically small percentage of the poten-
tial voters who were declared to be quali-
fied. That is where the hitch lits.

These figures are used by the Supreme
Court of Mississippi as an argument to
show that it was not a biased selection,
the court saying, on page 441:

Although the proof showed no Negro served
on the Jury In the March 1956 term of court,

this was not subatantlal evidence of dia-
crlmlnatlon against NegroM.

Wl SHOUU) OO INTO THIS MATTZB ffriXX MOSa

rXTLLt

Mr. President, this Is merely the first
speech which I intend to make on this
subject, because I think we need to go
very thoroughly into what this proposed
jury trial amendment means. We need
to see in even greater detail how biased
the selection of jurors in the South gen-
erally is, both by statute and by prac-
tice, and we need to review some of the
decisions of juries in the past to see how
difficult it has been for Negroes to get
any real Justice when their Interests con-
flict with tha«'e of the whites.

Mr. President. I am about to yield the
floor, but before I do so I ask unanimous
consent that there may be printed In the
Record at the conclusion of my remarks
editorials from the New York Times, the
Ogden I Utah > Standard-Examiner, and
the Philadelphia Inquirer, and a letter
to the New York Times.

There being no objection, the edito-
rials and letter were ordered to oe
printed in the Record, as follows:
Exhibit No. 1
SouTHniM Regional Council, Inc.
From: Research office, Southern Regional

Council
Re Nej?ro voter registration in Southern

SUtes.

The attached material on Negro voter reg-
istration was complied In the summer of
1956 from official record* or from the best
estimates available from reliable sources In
each county. The registration figures are
for 1956 except in Arkansas, where only 1955
flgTjres were available. There have been
newspaper reports that Negro registration
has decreased In MlMlsslppl. but the South-
ern Regional Council cannot supply accurate
figures for this State. The State Times of
Jackson conducted a survey of Negro regis-
tration In some Mississippi counties In 1956.
and excerpts from Its report are Included.

We do not have registration data for Ten-
nessee. Because of Texas' extensive geo-
graphical area, and consultant old not travel
throughout the State's 254 counties. It Is
estimated that 90 percent of Texas' Negro
population resides In the 95 counties In-
cluded in this report. The lack of registra-
tion data for many counties In North Caro-
lina does not mean that there were no
Negroes registered: we could not secure the
number of registrants or a racial breakdown
of registrants In these North Carolina coun-
ties. On all other States, a zero, blank space
or dash means that there were no Negro
registrants known to our sources of Informa-
tion. If a county has no Negroes registered.
the column. "Potential Negro Voters." should
be checked to determine If there are potential
Negro registrants. This column Includes
the number of nonwhltes 18 and over in
Oeorgta and Kentucky; those 21 and over
In all other States. The majority of the
nonwhltes In the South are Negroes, though
a few persons of other races are found In
some counties and Included In the figures
reported here.

The Southern Regional Council Is aware
of the excess of registrants over potentially
eligible persons In some counties. However,
these are the figures furnished from official
records or other reliable sources. Where
there Is an excess. It may be due. In part, to
the failure to purge registration lists and or
population growth since 1950.

County

IMOpo-
l«>ntl»l Ni-
Itro vol«r.

10.16 num-
ber ol N>-
f row r«t«-
loreU

AutaiiKft . .............

4,(H!
4.4»l
7. l.M
XW)I
42)
«, 4'i>
t.vrn
H.3ni
7,i:^

■i.m:

A. 4:t 1
l.nii

3N0
3.111

4, .Mi
\.KV,

;». 1 .^;

2.«*<il
■Hi

IS. n\
4il
•V -A 1
.'., 4i..
T. f.TJ
1.4W7
7(li
J.hHi.
f>. '■'*
T '»4!
4.IIW
7.211
X.iU

i:i. »■/■.:

).3>4

4."ra

.1.1110
KW64
4.1113
«. .M2
14. .M»
10 .tH

HA

4.V4W3

h.stw

34. n7y
4. Ml
MM

5. .m:

%:■»
1". \v>

A. XV,

K, 7H1
«. itlt
.MKI

14.1.'.;
a. >\.vi

2. S3.1

n';h
(a

73

Hal(l»in

r.2S

Bvl>)ur -

zn

Bibb

Ztt

Blount

Bullijck

r.

HutU>r

mn

Cfilh»Min

l,wn

Chmiib^rs

a:9

Clvrokw? ---

2S0

Clillt.'ii

3.W

Choctaw

112

Clirkf -

Clay

rw

' *l*f"'iiri»e . --

m

ColT.i

frt»

('oltl.Tt

ini

C'lntfuh

Cnoti^

IH)
4.VI

( 'oviuiftoO --

1T5

W)

Ml

\h\U-

I)i;iii,<

mo

IH- K-ilb

Kln>*)n' -

KM

Kmtmi'*"'*

l.MM

Y. towiih

2,niw

Fivrtt<»

3-JO

Franklin

aiu

< irtvi^ - - --.

J.S7

Hal*

!.■«

Henry

«»

Houston...

1, 7U0

jM.*kv)U

Jffffnton

7, mm

KM

IjAiwlen^ale ---

4«A

«)«

\*'>' ..

I.inti'siofw . ........

MM

I>itwn'li*^ .

Mamn

1. lUO

MiwlL'tiin

l,.'ilM

.Mafi'UKO . .-

ITT)

\!;ylon

'JIM

Nfar«l;iUI

Mohilf -

.Moum*-

IKI

Mdiiigoniery

\l(irtf:in .

2, i;-;

ano

l*irki*ns .... .--....

no

I'lke

7Ji

Ran'.olph

1,171

Rawll

.•;tviby

.Wl
375

St Clmr

7.'i<l

Stimtrr

2».^

T<illa<li'«:» -

1.134

'^ll.'*<':^kx)^a .. .

6.. "VIM

\\ .ilkir

Z.NUU

W'.lsllIUftnn

an

Wilcn

Wiii.'sion

1

1>*.V1 (vn.vi^. normhitc. '21 y»iir^ iinil over

l'W>. miniNT o( Npinoeji rficL'tcrwl

I'tTtnit rtTSflcrt^

110^345

63. 3M
1U.3

AKKANSAS

County

Nt'lfro
I)o|iii!ii-

tlon
OVlT 21

Ni'irro
ri-j! u-
triuits

.\rkin«,a» ..

.^•ihli-y

HaiU-r

Bviiinn

H.«.n.' ....
llrullry....

Calhoun

Ciirrnli

Chiift

ClirW.

(•l:iy

Clchumf ..
rif\i l.ind..
Coliimiiia..

Coiiw ly .

('ruiirhi'a<l-.
Crnwlord .
CriUt-nilfii.

('n»ss

Dalliw

l><sha

Dnw

iulliklKT...

5,l«2

i

4a

2.744

1,277

13

ri. W24

■i,TJS

fi

2

1,061

.'. «13

2, IHfi

MM

414

Ifi, 49.^

4. (HI

2. .IfM
fi. .M I

3, IIM
1,4*1

S0.1

1,»>1

U

6

(I

1.210

»44

2

2. .W8

1,0«>7

0

0

371

9S7

1, .127

2V2

21

1,3.';2

723

i.rvu

2,.SI8
1,(1.%

Prrcpnt

33 •

ii.ft

44 I
Ml

1.V4
37 4

3.S n

17.1
M »
W .1
A. 1
8.2
17 9
41.1
88.7
33.3
2».0

1957

n

s

33S

ft

aoB

l.HOO
A .'9
2W

113

7TO

17S

373

2JA

l.filM
2.niw

I

1.700

,non
ion

MO

1. 100

l.-UU

m

^*n

IK)

2, Wii

SM

AM

r»

1,171

M»

an

TM

2a.i

1.134

6. ."ilU

an

516,345

lU.)

33.*

11.6

44.1

a&i

U.4

XS.0

3.5 n

17.1
6t) fi
39. .I
6.1
8.2
17 9
41.3
88.7
33.3
29.0

ARKANSAS — Contlnucd

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD

rLOKiDA — Con ..inued

SENATE

86fl

County

1950

popula-
tion
over 21

19,M
NpRro
rpK In-
trants

Percent

Franklin

01

5

3, 751
370

40
6.244
l,.'i7.l

i,4<k;

407

62

2.067

21.174

144

3.004

\rA
7. .'i72

4. >«S
2. 107

20'J

.1. 267

0

23
0

2, .130
231

5

1,4.12

717

460

100

27

1,21.1

6,774

IR

1,0.%!

f.7

1.610

1,3«1

7K2

IK!

80.1

5

'"i."x4o

3, «1 1

i.aii
I'

K1
0

2. .W)

6.1

3, .WT

8»^

lai

0

I.V)
am

.17

2, SHI

413

41

II

661

231

3

0 !

2, 570
31
411

2^^

9.M

25.3

Fulton

(JarUuid

67.2

(J rail t

62.4

(JrPtiM'..

li5

lltrnp.'^tr ml.

27.7

Hot ."^[iririK

45 5

}Iow:ih1

32.7

Inilt'rurnirnce

24.6

l7;ir(l

43. 5

Jiickw n

.18 8

JifTt'rsdii

27.3

Joliii-^on .

12 5

I-.TlavrttP

34 4

I.:iwr. iio'

I>*

40.8
21.3

Liiiciilri

2H. 9

I.Utl.' KiMT

I/<i»!;iIl

37 1

87.5

I><iii 'ki'

24.6

Maili><>ii

Miiri '11

Mill<T .. . .

5. (ff)
ll,'<7'i

4. \m

24

2. .17X

1

7 020

131

1". 22f.

294

1.7.S4

14

42f.

1. 1«-J

2S, K81

102

1(1. 734

set

94

3

2. '■>7<
(,in

.i

6,4.^4

f.y

72f.

3. .M't
33.1

36. 8

M Lv'^lvMI'lii

32.7

MiiiiriH'

30 9

Moiittoiiiiry

.Nf\;i.:;i

Ni'wi.iti ..

62 5
32.0

i^iui hiti

31.6

I'l rrv

48 9

flilMl(>!! . .

23.4

I'ikf

2!*. 2

I'.iiislt

11. 1

l'< Ik

I'olN'

3.1.2

I'r.iliii-

7.1. 5

l'l]l.l^kl

2^1.0

K.iiiif.pilih

5.1.9

■^t. Fmiu .>■

21 4

-;illnr

42.4

■^(iitt

47.9

■■•rircv

■^t'dtt-stuui

24.7

^t\ iiT

shirp

38.5

.-^lollr

I nt.in

\ :in Hijrrii .

30.5
i2.5

\\ ;i!'tl lilt ton

12.9

Whil.'

34.7

\V,«„JrulT -

2fi 9

-^■(•ll

10.4

l!i.'il) crnsus. nniiw liil^, 21 yi-;ir? ami over.

I'.i.Vi nuirit.fr of .Ni'^rois rusbtt-rrvl

rcjciiit rcj;i.sUri'd -

2.U 191

tiT. S.M

29.2

FLORIDA

County

19.VI po-
t^nllrtl N>-
gro voters

19.16 num-
Iter of Ne-
gro*^ reRis-
terod

.M.'ii'hu:i

9, 4.«i
M>>

4. (ris

1.4(lh

3. .144

12. 2.M

.M«
4«.2
879

1.2:«i

1.*I2

3. .Vu

A2. 682

1.229

.<s-

.V.. KVl

14. .121

872

MM

10. %M\

203

5H4

1. !29
1.9H3

4<M
1,034

869

^O-M

24,*41

32^
1.764
6. 843
3,272

176

5, 1 10
3.017

11.213

2. 107

3. 113

M:lk.T

H.iy

:«ii

2 012

Mr.i.lfonl

M9

Mn'viir.l .

2. 160

Mrn« ur'l

6,9.18

(".iltioiin .

zn

( 'Ili. 'otti'

268

("itriis .

680

(■l:iv

1.193

('(tllllT . .

741

("oliinihia

I):i'ti'

1.645
19. 048

Df .-..to....

Oiiir . -

H07
181

Diu.il

27. 368

Kvcainl 111

FliClfr

6.73.3

64

Fruiikliti

621

(iwlsilin

5

(iilt lirist

29

IllU'los

2f.2

Oulf

4KI

Hamilton

.V)7

Ilsxrflif

37,1

Ilcndrv

1.3,5

IliTnamlo

Illphlrtnds..

622
1,243

lIillstMirough

8,8.16

Holmos .

130

liuliiin RiviT

427

.T;»ckson

3,430

JcffiTSon

183

Liifnyctlp

0

I.akp

l.<.p

1,363

1.818

l/cnn . ...

4.046

603

LiIm^Iv

1

County

1950 po-
tential Ne-
gro voters

1956 num-
ber of Ne-
groes regis-
tered

MadLson

«, 1.51
4.425
8,387
1.374
2,043
2,123
1,177
406

14,321
9.58

22, 2.13
1,713

12.118

15.492
5,199
6, 0.53
3,732
928
2.896
6.88!
1.703
2.606
1.945
2. 4.53

10,415

833

1.0,11

1,056

1,010

Manat« .

1,680

Marion

4,324

Martin

706

Monroe

1,6,52

Nassau

1,223

Okaloosa

606

Okpochobce

348

Oranpc - -

3,137

OscKOla

358

Palm Beach

6, ,530

Pasco

624

Pinellas

8,477

Pnlk

4,989

Putnatn

1,770

St. Johns

2, 051

St. Lucie

1,813

San ta Rosa

730

SamsotT.

783

Seminole

2,242

.'^iimter

790

Suwannee

Taylor

565
91

T'n on

6

Volusia

5,761

Wakulla -.

345

W.ilton

9.14

Washington

743

IW.V) renins, nonwhite 21 years and over.

19,16 niiml>er of Negroes registered

Percent registered

366.797

148.703

40.2

CEOSGIA

County

Nonwhite

populat ion

over 18.

1950

Negroes

registered,

1956

Applinp

1.356

897

S58

1.819

8.461

229

1.23.1

2.404

2.6.19

1. 1C7

25.993

1.588

451

4.693

i.26y

4.755
8.797

2.riG

3.232
Z()62
1.494
3.578

183

772

3\272

1. 510

1,030

473
6.249
2.148
2.070
1.222
3.935
3.133
4.40!<
2.451
1.861
6. 788
1,806
4.390
72
0
6,231
8,694
2.863
3.887
11.773
1.020
4.790

379
1.838
3.371
3,597
1,340
47
1.261
6,046
25

•70

SB, 347

14

470
6,069

641

1,068

Atkins<)|i

406

Bacon

8

Baker

0

Bal'lwin ..

2,487

Bank.s

32

Barrcw

413

B^-Tow

702

Ben Hill

918

Berrien. ..

~^

Bibb

5,140

Bleeklev —

39

Brant'.ev

175

Brooks

707

Brv;Ji - „-

Bulloch

885
1.795

Burke

399

Butts

1,414

Calhoun

126

Camden .

1,556

(^andler

1, 174

Carroll

939

Catoosa

129

Charlton

12

("hii(h;.ni

9,720

Chattahoochee

8

ChaltAoea

1,020

Cherokee

.320

Clarke

2,866

Clay

97

Clayton

27.5

Clinch

423

CoM)

1.948

CofTee

880

Colquitt

1,047

CoIumMa

487

Cook

7M

Coweta

1.348

Crawford

125

CrL<!p -

835

Dade

45

Dawson

0

l.)ecatur

895

IV K^lh

2,660

Dodge

2.068

Doolv

1,008

Dougherty

2,130

Douslas - .....

r30

Karly

226

Echol.s

19

Effingham _

Elbert

211
986

Emanuel ......

1,657

Evans

494

Fannin....

63

Favette ....

U

Floyd . . .

3,730

Forsyth. ....................

120

Franklin

300

Fulton

Oilraer

34,441

6

(ila.scock

21

Oivnn ...

3,185

Oordon

348

CEOSGu — Continued

County

Grady

Greene

Gwinnett

Habersham..

HaU

Hancock

Haralson

Harris

Hart

Heard

Henry

Houston

Irwin

Jack.son

Jasper

Jen Davis

Jefferson

Jenkins

Johnson

Jones

Lamar

Lanier

Laurens

Le*

Liberty

Lincoln

Long

Lowndes

Lumpkin

McDuffle

Mcintosh

XIacon

Madison

Marion

Meriwether..

Miller

Mitchell

Monroe

Monteomery.

Morgan

Murray

Muscogee

Newton

Oconee

Oglethorije...

Paulding

Peach -

Pickens

Pierce

Pike

Polk

Pulaski

Putnam

Quitman

Rabun

Randolph

Richmond

Rockdale

Schley _.

Screven

Seminole

Spalding ,

Stepher« ,

Stewtirt ,

Sumter

Talbot

Taliaferro

Tattnall

Tavlor

Telfair

Terrell

Thomas

Tift

Toombs

Town."!

Treutlen

Troup

Turner

Twiggs

Union

Upson

Walker

Walton

Ware

Warren

Washington

Wayne

Webster

Wheeler

White..

Whitfield

Wilcox

Wilkes

W ilkinson

Worth

Nonwhite

Kegro«>9

population

registered,

over 18,

1956

1950

3,442

527

3,548

2,586

1,751

1,000

381

300

Z357

1.421

4,094

1,8.10

721

319

3.380

275

1.80!

1327

867

388

3, 657

1,529

3,83.1

443

2,171

800

1, .171

4.36

2. .327

670

l,a34

»42

5. .IRS

237

2,809

891

1.717

416

2.223

6.36

2,230

673

936

473

7.298

3,537

2. 4.16

29

2.825

2,453

1,617

3

695

1.061

8,3.10

2,767

82

73

1,1.18

3.10

1,879

1,197

2,914

,54

2.0.56

141

4,821

136

6,727

1,207

1.372

. 6

f,. 9,55

345

2.88.1

737

1.613

8S7

3.264

"7:J8

96

28

20.031

9,987

3,860

•1,5:J9

932

446

2,201

229

602

418

4,270

640

2.1.5

80

1,295

425

1, 915

372

2.795

«l,3a)

2,371

248

2,295

,W1

1,005

*45

71

17

4.971

473

23. «M

6,372

1.322

£63

1.184

134

6,146

729

1.631

22

8,075

* 1,151

1,268

514

3,463

»68

7.441

485

2.7.57

210

1,575

888

2,384

1,681

1233

325

2.375

«101

.•1,054

IM

8,246

LTOO

.3, 576

913

2,6.31

155

3

0

1,041

18

9.423

2,036

2,00?'

418

2,593

3.14

0

0

3,822

M2

1,389

1,136

3, 236

598

4.979

l/m

2,R«1

200

6,387

1,3*>3

1.644

1.448

1.313

0

1.101

476

192

189

859

951

1.841

2,18

3,748

263

2.621

327

4.837

322

1950: Potential Negro voters 18 years of age and
over. 633,697

1956: Number oi" Negroes registered — 163. 389

Percent registered 2.5. 6

I 1954 data or 1956 totals divided on a basis of 19.14

Negro-white ratio (some counties do not report racial

breakdown for 1956).
» Estimate. Polk did not report a racial hreakdowa-

• 19.12 Negro-white ratio applied to 195<j total

♦ 1954 data.

8612

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

LOUISIANA

NORTH CAXOLINA

SOUTH CAXOUNA

if

Purish

A(3i(lla

Alk-n

A scfiLt ion

Assuniptloii...

Avoyellt's

B«»urtifnrd

Blpnvllle

BoswitT

Twldo

CsUrasiPii

('Ia(l*.-ll

C'anijToii

CiitjhouU

('l;ilN)rii<>

Concoplia

De Sdto ..

Ka,st H.iton Rouge

Kast Carroll

Ka.st Ki'lkiana

Kviiiiifeiine

Knuikim

(iraiit

Iheria. .V-

IliervllUi

J.U'knon

J'-ITi-rson

J»"fft"rs<)n UavU

Iji/iiyctti'

Iji/DUrchf

La Siill.- _.

I.idiiilii

I.ivirn!-;toti

Ma<li.«)n

Mori'liiiii.st'.

N:»triMuchi'3

()rl«in<

Ouurhita

ri4<|imnliifs

I'olnti- ("ouiK'tf

KapHlt^

Ri'«l River

Kichl.iii.t...

Sabine

St. FU'riianl

St. Clurles.

St. HfliMi*

St. JLirnei

St. rotin the Bapt.st...

St. I.rfuiilrv..

St. .Mint in

St. Nf iry

St. 'I' uiimany

'l";iiiKipahott

Ti-nsas

T«>fTfhocne

Inion

Wriiiilllon

V'lTiion

Wik'hiiuton

W elxiter

\V(>f<t Baton Rouije ...

West Ckn.ili

NVi'.-rt h.'lici:ui.i

\\ inn

Esttmat*<l

.N euro
[H)[iulatii>n

over 1\,

4. .sno

2. 470
4. 1<M)

3. .JHO

4. Kill
1,!*4()

:\. >*m

4;*, 770

14, wo

J, 430

2. 07(1
5.UM)
4, .Vid
C. 4M0

40, 7110
,=., \St\

<i. :wo

3. ."<o
5.07(1
l.riNO
7. 1.10
7. I 111
•J. iW

i:i. fwo

■J. HMl

s. '«H0

"•id

.">. AS)

1 , >v;«i

>\. 100
x. i'.»0

**, :(.'-iO
Jt. t'4111

ll.. 400
■-'. Mo
'i. VIO

111, '■<»>

■J, i^KI

,■: jTio
■J. l'«i

1. 140

2. :!.''iO

•:. 170
;(, 740

.( 7:«»

l''>. "lOO

4. toe

7 vjo
4, l,",o

V, 'S-
4. ■■'O

). 1 1'* I
2. P«>
1. 47"
i;. Vji
li, 'Hi'

:i. >.«i
1. ).ii

4, 'HII

:', 4,sii

reg >tt>rrtl,

lyx)

County

K.%tini,iti>>1 N'l'uro po|.iii:ituiii rwr- •] |„ ]

IT.'''. TiiiiiiU-r of .Ni'ifriie.- rriii^ti r''<l

I'lTi. in ii'K.,steri'd

3,448

l.Sll
1,*2«

\.'m)

I. VA)
5K7
4M

«. .VW

0. 244
4.V)
2:(H

XJO

17

5«7

7r,2

8, •>2«

0

1,3(U

3,21^2

(i.TO

K>>4

4,225

2. 411

1, 113
•\iW
l,rtH()
4. >4H
1. "2

7 42

I, \m

1. \<\-i

I)
q:4.i

2. «'>4

, V(()

:-. 7'<2

41

1. fl',4

3. nv)

1..M.'
740

1. (V.

'<\■^

\.'H>i
I.'HM

J, ! 1 7

-', (21 ;
I ( IWI

J. Vtl

2, '"W
l,'V7
3 749

n

"SO

'■J«t
,«t'!

XMl
, N»i

7t«

n7

31,

1. 1:0

.■^hi. ll"*)

I'i!, 410

^l.'i

MISSISSIPPI

The -r It,. Tiniiw. of J,iclc<i,ti, \lis< , siirvvi'-l iniiriUT
ri( (i.un'irs III ih.' fi:i it I'lV, |.. ,|,trr:i;iii,- fh;un;'-i ;n
\oi;rii i'i;i<(ritioii -iinr.' Ii(,i2 Thi^ I'l.Vi ui'l l'*.*;.' •i'\jis.
liilioii tiKurt-s iL^teil t»-i.jw ,iri' itiuM- rei,' i,«-il b\ fbo

M.llr 1 jri.'N.

County

Voiiwh.te

('0(!iil:iti()n
ovor Jl

N'fcriws

rrei-i-

t.'r.sl.

IJ.'xi

.N'eB'oes

ri'ijis
t 1.

1 '.<.•.:

HimU . .

3.", if.'l
4. nu

3. -uy

1. 400

1 >w:t
y, \l\

4, vJi
1 , 7 4')
I,7"«l
4, 'Ctl
1,412
■i. .^A

470

4. 10.^

Oi»i

ll

11

2

3.I

0

1

13

44(1

2, ^'K)

nil

0

1

3

3

3-'
1)
1

is

SU

Miiriou

(lark-

.-oiilh

Cillioiin

'1 IIIMl-H

\\ iiisi:iM,ii ...;".";""

B.nto.i

1 v>,iniii'na

Sliiirkrv

CtKHt.lW

('ivinif'oii ..

It i» uiih.i

Alamani'*'

AU-xaiidiT

Alli'Khaiiy

Anson

A.sh*"

Avery

Beaufort

B*^!!!'

Bladen

Brun.sw ick

Buiutinit)*'

Burke

("aharru.s. .

CaMwell

('ii(i)ilen

Ciu-(eret

('lV.<Well

Catawlvrt

ChntlKim

("lierokiv

Chow.in ...

Clav

ru-vehwvl

('l)IU(IlllU.S

("raven

("unifxr',in.l

Curritui k .'.

I>ure

I' i\ l.l,*on

!>«% le

I'ut>lui -.

Durham _

K.leeiiiriii»-

F^rsMh

Kninklin

( i Jclill

I i.lle>_

I irnh'im

( iriin ille ,

( irectie ,

I iiiil.'orit ,

H.ilw'.u

M ir:ie(t . ,

H,l\ * IKI.I ._,

Heii'lersoii

Herlfonl..

Hoke

Hvle...

In-lril

Jiek-ain

Jolin^l..!!

Jooe.-,

Uv %>

I>"n4)ir

Lincoln

.McDowell

.Nf lO'O

M I. liMin

M iri;n

MecKlriii.ur-,'.. ..

\!ircl'e!L

.Monieonu-ry

.MiHire

.\;t<ii

New H iriiivw

Nort ri:lin(i(l>0

( IlL-iort

( )r mi'e

I'linlico

r i.'>juo(iUik

I'ell.icr .

f'T'iiiim.'iu-.

I'erNi.ii

l-itf

I'olk

K:in(|o!;,H

Kiclirnori.l

l\o(»'x.ii

KocK ;i;i.'ti.i!u

How 111

Roth, 'orrl

Painp>iiii

Si^i.r'i iii'l

Staniv

Stoke, _■■

Siji' V

Swiin

Tr;ins>h mu

Tynll

'nion

\' iniT.

wike ;;;;;

WiniTi

^\ L-^hlllv'tOIl

W It iiita

U iviie . .

W.lkes

WiUon

V Klkin

V JillTV

1Q.V1 po- IQ.Viniim-
toiiiial Ne- \m't of Nt^
ijro voters ] g.i\n-» rouls-
tered

{), H97
51 ti '
147 j

B, 1 4;(
l.M I

i.M ;

7, Olili
7, Olli
.1. 49»'>
3, VIl
U 'Wl
l.S.M
.■i, 1''<M
i, '^74

1 -m
4 tH.3

2. ><7S

3, ttt")
172

■J, i\s\
44
f. »^,^2
7, W7
H, 44*i

14, r-

1, lo-J

241

3. Mw!

I 143

7,33»i

■20, 101

1 J, >4."i

2.\ o27

(., (143

\ liU

2.344

113

7.17V

3. fiMI
22.3tl«
1 4. XH\

5, U24

4MM

1 3iy

I.. Jlo

4. J'l
1,3)7
5.3S7

7:(2

fi. (iMi

3 21 1
10. 2ti6

1. .M<3
7a(i
i(4h

105

R. 1 17

?.( 472

3,i

l.«iO

>. ■«»1

II.TIJ

ll.liT,-.

!«. J»l

3. 3Ui

4. 3S.S

1. >4«

4 'H-.I

4 INI

2, -NO

4, \\H
14.0.-7

7W4
Z273
(1. lAi
22. ' »'. J
(i, P'tt
7. UNO
2. S2H
S.('irt)

5, 7<*l
2,.tSt

«.r2

1, 172
71 Ki
.'tvi
>l.tV

4, 'vfVi

7, I7«

2i.!((i2

»i. WW

2. 7:«i
l.'l

l"i. 141
1, 4^2

lO, *v4
.i7'i
ll'>

3.300

1, 3C0

200
4011
MX)
,VV)
4. 2U0

KW

.W

350

" '" ■

"'l

aw

1

-

320

s*

ik"^)

13

HI 10

i ...

^. I < a I
'(-■io
yoii

12.5
7l«)

1 100

1, 2(1)
I'o

2, a'<(

,'41 1

'4 1)

07j

1 111.'
'.'. 4411

;>, 44.'.
Imi

1. 4<ai

4<"l

fit)

laai
7ia)

H*)

4Wi

l.oy.'i
I laa)

5, 'aal

MJO

1, .iOO

1. va)

211)
W)

County

.\hlx.'yvill«>...

.\ikeii

.Mli'mlale

.Vnderson

B:iniN'rif

Barnwell

Bead for (

Berkeley

("Hlhouii

Charl«•^Io[^

riierokiv

Clu'.sur
f'he.sUrfVltl..
("lirenilon ...

Cnlh'loii

DiirloiKloii

Dillon

Doritle>!ter

VMgeflelil _ ..

K:iirri. hi

Kloreiio-
( ti»orK> Ifivi 11..
( irivnv ille ..
( Jret*nvk tMxI ...

II:ini|>(on ,

Horry

Ja.sin-r

K'epitiaw

I-annksTer

IjiUfl-O*.

\jiv^

I^'XhuIon

McCorTiuck . ..

M inon

M irUmrn

Ne» t«TTy

()(t)nt«<-

( iriinitehuri! . .

I'irken<

RiehUlil

Siiluila

S(mrtiinliiirif ..

Sumter

1 ' n ion .

\\ i!li:iin>liurn.
Vork

1<».V1

potential

.Neifro

votcra

3,
«,
3,
«,
4,
4,

s.
4.
34,
3,
(i.

10.

svi

4h.'i
77'i
(i24
12.^
437
111
(*2
7HX
0,V»
.'7',*
7'iN
(.V
".20

10.V4
numhcr

of

\ eerno5

ri'KlallTttl

4

312

,",

'Ct 1

1'.

i^'-l

.(21

17

l.so

IV

7V.>

4

wr

(i

<MU

,(

■>i

~

lavi

,',

III

y

:(I3

1,

JV.

4

'irff»

2

I'i''

H.

iWiN

"

4(iO

',

>>'».

■)

4'."

1>'

1 V«

>

VA

•>,

.4Jv(

17,

■-4..

14.

^07

4

^7'l

li

l.'l

10.

\*A

1, vai
3.'aj

3. laai
,vai

7,"<l

2, (Kai

3, 200

0

(\, laai
l,(aa)

(kV)

3. '<«)
I 2(ai

1. J(a>
W, iiai

4, laai
wai

1 (Ha)

2. liai
y. (Ill
2, "-ai

.4,'^ I
2,7(11
1, nai
I. laii
1, "<ii

7(ai
1. vai

l'<i

0

1. '<ai
■it\

2,(aii
i ill

uiai
12. ."iiai

7,<»ii

1, ""lai

1. "^ai

•«ai

2.'»ai

Percent

0,4

15 1

0 0

3(1 U

II,
l.V
2«,
3«
0
17

"il
57
12
17

(.1
13
IH

V

(*
2>«
52 .'S

3n 0
7
M

:n

14

«

24

0

an

HI

11

:«4

44 (I
HI <

31' 9
12 2
30 7
7 4
X «

^•>0(Vn'iin Noin»li,(e. 21 ^i •irs of .ijc mi.l ovf
I'.iVi NiirriN-rol Nckilk'^ r.-ui.->(ei..il
I'lTii'iiI n uislercl _.

TEXAS

son. 024

WM, Huri

Z. i

County

I'tvi [lo- I I't.V niim-
lenti-il \^- Ut of .N(v
i{ro voler.« ' Kro*^ reKij-
I leretl

\ iiiier-.iin , .

.\llUe01ie. .

Ail.^tiii. . ..
Hal lev ..,
Ri^Irop ..
Hell ,

Bexar

Hou le
Mri-ori 1
Hr,l/o^
Biirli-xiM

CliMwell .,

( aoip .

('a.*v

("tliiniturs

('t>4M(>kl-»'

Collin ..
Coli>r,elo
DulLi,i
Da»xin ...
Didion
De W ,lt

Kclor

Kill- ....
t'aMJ.

Kil'a

!'.>»' c«- 11 'U, \\'<w* lilies. .'1 \, .Hi if a^e or ,

icr... >ty. 741

K.mniii

layette. .

Folt Hell.l

Kr«'sione. .
(> ilvot.in..
( tonzules.. .

( ita\ -nui

('(^•KK

(iriini*i

'•iia<lalu(>e.

Ilarilin

MarruH

H irriioii.. .

llii><

Ileujjrson,

■.:i23

1 4H«

3, V^

2..t«

l,o4.'

112

141

7H

;i. i>^

), 1(^1

'■. -STS

i,2n4

'il. (Ill

1 "., 4W7

VM (

3. 01 J

4. (-1)

2. 7(a

•i. HIK

■1.HA

2, .(M

KJ'i

1 7X--.

<M

l,'«4i.

774»

4, IT.'

0(7

>«7('i

XX*

fi. 447

WW

2. 077

:i.''iii

2. ■■|(.7

1 iw

:.4, .02

1", r.jii

W 1

>.l

l,:v.2

2(1

1. V7,'i

3H»

^«^

'2>iU

,Vh4I

1.7U

3. i:w

1, 4 li

4, M.'

1,^44

1 S.-1

(i3H

2, IS.-,

1, 244

4, 4,f7

K*

3. I«7

1,44«S

1 \ 5a)

6.41X)

2, 1.34

t«U8

3. KW

1,117

H. .'SW

2,308

3,427

7fl7

2. nil

(UW

1 "(15

837

&•-.. (i7y

3A,aM

12. "VIO

3,014

7IK

210

2..SJ1

1. 4(a

1957

TtXKs — continued

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

TiBomiA— Continued

8613

vnoiNu — Continued

County

Hill

llopktns.
Houston.

Hunt

Jackson..

Jiwper

Jefferwin.

1950 po-
tential Ne-
gro voters

Jo nil sou „,.

Jones

Kaurmaa „ .

I^mar

l.avaca„„

I.** \\\

i«(n mil!

j-if^rty

l.imejtone

I-ohlKx-k I.

Mrlit-nnan .

Madion

Marion

^^alago^(la

.Midland IIIIIIII"

Niilani

Moiiipomery..

Morrio

.Na(?<)t!doche8

Nivarro

.\ew(/)n

.Nuif»«..

Onmtie

I'anoUi ..

I'olk '".'.'.'.

l'o((cr

I<«1 Rjyw

Holiert*>n . ...

Itookvrull

Bd-'k :

Salxn?

Shu AuKiistine ....

San Jaruilo

Stwltiy

>riiilh

'I'fimnt

'I.iylor ,

Tr.iv is

Trimly

V(>shur

\iptoria...

ViilkiT

AValW

\\ listiin^tou...

NN'harton .

Wirhila

\\ illmm.^jn

Total,

2,445
1.305
4,(»1
3,411

093

2.700

ai.477

1,048

700
4,782
4.617
1,2V1
1,3V0

2. .538

3, 3.M>
8,050
4,481

13.32fi
1,352
3, ()H('i
2.787
1,2.58
2,735
3, .530
1,,52«
4,378
6, 574
1.024
.5, 1S2
2,5.18
3, iXV,
2. fi24
2,408
2,787
4,371
770
«,614
1, 108
1.515
1,SW1
Zor^i

\2,!m

%.405

l.H. 8«0
1, 576

Z 051
4.322

3, l.V)
3,057

4, .■«7
:i93.5
3.203

1956 num-
ber of Ne-
groes retcis-
tered

County

650.002

1450 nonwhite In 05 counties 550,902

I'j.Vi .Negroes rettistered in these 95

"Kinltas 209. R07

rerr«ntage re(!isteri<l as. i

Note. — Texan hnn 2."4 conntleR. More than
!tO pertvnt of the Ne)rro iK)piil)[tion reflden In
the ;».') lountiew llste«l here. The tljroreH of po-
(eritial Neero voter* are romplled from the ren-
ciiH. The numbers rejrlMtered are from the
fcioutheru regloual lountU.

VntGINIA

County

lO,* po-
tential Ne-
gro voUts

le-lfi num-
l)er of Ne-
groes" recls-
tered

A'ftitiiiir

2,840

1. lu;^
l.<««

2,K'A

1, 107
4, 24K

0,50
480

2, 01 ft

7y

«<1

6, !ia

(1

2, 4«:i

3, ;4.'i7

3,(I8»)

2(ai

1,0.30

2.702

4,480

74<i

13

220
3,'iO
l(i8
.5.V>
Mfi
202

1,1H,5

170

21

l.Ofifi
12

70.1

200

0,55
4()fi
11
704
284
1,150
255

.^lU'rnarle

Alleffiiiny

Amelia

.A inherit .'

.\|>rxitnattoi

.\rlinnion

.Anirii.sta

Bdh .

Btxifi.rd ...

Bland

Bill et oil rt

Brunswick "..

Biirtiao.'in

Biicklnchara ]..

C lMl|lUll \\\'

('aniline

enroll ".'"."!!.']

Charle.s City ".

Charlotle, .....

Cliesterfield 11

CUrke

CfHlli

CiilpMjifr

CuiutxTlaad

1.907
1,0*

452
340

738 Dickenson

874 Dinwiddle "'

2,023 Elizabeth City '

1.157 Essex :

557 Fairfax

1.273 Fauquier

10, ,567 Floyd I..

370 Fluvanna

144 Franklin.

1.274 Frederick '"

1,721 Giles

674 Gloucester...

616 Goochland

1.426 Ora\son

1,626 Greene

1,804 Greensville '..'.

2.016 Halifax

6,038 Hanover

561 Henri(»

913 Henry

1,174 Highland

1,023 Isle of Wight

1,182 James City

1,361 King and Queen

422 King Oporge

Z015 King William

1.513 Lancaster

1,081 Lee

2, f>«4 Loudoun

1..5;i6 I.iOUiS3 l.I

1,364 Luneburg

013 Madison

712 Mathews „

533 Mecklenburg

1.114 Middlesex I

283 Montgomery

3, 1(>3 Nansemond

.*il Nel.<)on

601 New Kent...

572 Norfolk I"!

61.^ NorthamptAn

3,713 Northumnerland

8.571 Nottoway

739 Orange

KVS Page ."

\Am J'atrick

1.-360 Pittsylvania

1, 808 Powhatan .

1.406 Prince Edward '

1.063 Prince George

3, 7,')0 Prince William

1,9(VJ Princess Anne

1,006 Pulaski II

813 Rappahannock

Richmond

Roanoke

Rockbridge

R(x>kingham

Russell

P<^tt

Shenandoah

Smyth

Southampton

S|X)t.sylvania

Stafford

Surry

Sas!»'i

Taiewell

Warren

Warwick

Wiishinpton

W'cfitmoreland

Wise

Wythe

Vork

INDEPEXDtNT CITT

Vinrinla Beach City

Warrick Citv

Alexandria City

BrLstol City

Buena Vista

C liarlottesvllle

Clifton Forge

Danville

Fre<lericksburg

Hampton '

Harrisonburg

Hopewell

LjTichburg

Martinsville

Newport News

Norfolk

Petersburg

Portsmouth

Radford

Richmond

Roanoke ......

South .Norfolk

Staunton

SufTolk

aw, 807

1060 po-
tential Ne-
gro voters

163
7,879
6,073
1.594
6,563
%912

236
1,301
1,750

214

365
1,960
2,515

462

357
1G06
a 675
3,388
3,2.53
3,474

103
3.957
1..S90
1,795

987
1.888
2,015

257
Zn08
Z602
2.905

976
1,1.39
7,655
1,.5«8

9.59
8,9:41
1,882
1,150
8.848
S. 105
Z118
3,607
1,791
313
686
9.2ri
1,349
3.468

ai29

5,724
1.524
1,165

617
1.077
2.321
1,211

409

370

187

231

2S9
7.072
1,470

800
1.041
4.U34
1,667

663
7,129

741
2. 2K1
1.376

6«k3
1,600

* Included with Hampton,

6,120

704

148

3.070

645

6,517

1,224

1,644

4.33

017

6, .506

Z825

11.754

4Z028

0.309

19,106

369

48.2.57

0.420

1.4.34

1,397

3,004

1956 num-
ber of Ne-
groes regis-
tered

87
395

0)

126

1,118

106

104

82

307

48

HO

613

657

63

87

790

621

764

814

400

11

735

330

a05

325

1,146

415

97

631

361

600

79

150

335

212

465

1,148

352

240

1,426

620

716

655

247

110

80

602

329

725

175

1,800

695

3.30

235

539

3i5

78

75

36

75

83

575

;«5

3.S0

310

MO

267

137

148
331
207
1('>0
607

100
868

1,640

110

29

2.110
171

1,448
.^57

Z087
185
3,10

2,506
.352

3.341

9.328

1.407

3,444

144

11.. VM

2,408
868
28.1
476

Coimty

1990 po-
tential Ne-
gro voters

lOSfinom-
ber of Ne-
groes regis-
tered

INDinNDKNT CITY— COn.

WtHlamsbarg

869
722

04

Winchester

91
15

Oatox

Colonial Heights

7

Chesterfield Court House

Fall Chdrch

90
564

it

Waynesboro .

130

310

Covington.

Norton

136

19.W census, nonwhite 21 yws of age and over.. 422, 670

19,16 number of Negroes registered 84 931

Percent registered 20. 1

Hon OF METHOD OF DXTI3UUNING TOTALS

Because of rounding, the 1960 potential
Negro voter figures given on the State lists
are not. In all cases, the same as the census
figures. Therefore, in establishing the per-
cent of Negroes registered, we have used the
official census figures for the totals for non-
whites 21 years of age and over, on the one
hand, and the number as given on the State
lists by the southern regional council for
the number of registered voters on the other.

The figures compiled by the southern re-
gional council are the best figures available
and while they may be criticized in some
minor resp>ects. there are no other more ex-
act figures wtiich are extant.

Report to the Judicial Convekence or the

COMICITTKZ ON SSLEPTIOlf OT JUBORS, 1943
USE OF KETICEN IN RTTKAL AREAS

If the present practice followed in many
rural districts of asking Individuals known
as keymen to suggest names of persons
who might be available for Jury service is
used. It should in all cases be coupled with
the procedure, explained elsewhere in this
report,' of requiring the person whose name
is BO suggested to furnish a cconpleted ques-
tionnaire which will satisfy the Jury OGm-
mlsslon that the nominee possesses the quali-
fications which fit him to act as a Juror. It
would also seem advisable that the key-
men asked to suggest names should be
those citizens of the district who are most
likely to be impartial and who are known
to have a high sense of civic responsibility.
This should be required particularly when
the persons suggested by the keymen are
not personally known to the court, the
clerk, or the jury commissioner. City and
town officials, school authorities, ministers,
doctors, and leading businessmen would
seem to be the most likely sources for suit-
able lists of names. It may also be well to
consider the advisability of not calling too
often upon the same persons to furnish
names. By varying the sources of names it
appears that a fair and qualified representa-
tion of all the community is more likely to
be obtained.

• • • • •

It will be observed that tmder the letter
of the law. all that the commissioners need
do is alternately with the clerk to place
names of qualified Jurors In the box or
wheel. However, the Investigations of the
committee show that most commissioners
now do much more than that. Further,
there are many districts where there is no
IM^tense at literal compliance with the stat-
utory requirement. The present activities
and powers of the Jury commissioners may
be outlined somewhat as follows.

> See p. 67. infra.

li

8ei4

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

psocvanrg iva:

TI10 elerlr aiKt tlis Jury eonunfsBloner
BonMtlmoi arcttng jointly but more often
IndepvntfcDtlj at one another Mud letters
requesting designated persons to recom-
mend names of prospective Jurors. Some-
times compiled sources such as telephone
and other directories, Btate Jury Ilsta, etc.,
ars used. In many instances, names of per-
sons known to the clerk or commissioner are
pdaced upon th« llata or into the box or
wheel. Sometimes a eomblnatlon of any
2, or an 3 of these methods is used in
securing the names of prospective Jurors.
Further dlacusaloa of the methode em-
ployed In securing names appears in the
section of this report dealing with the
sources of names of proapectlTe Jurors.*

PEKPAKATiorr or na&czs ros tux box
After the names have been secured by
these means some commissioners hare them
typewritten on cards. A few prepare the
cards in longhand. Many bare this work
done by the clerical staff of the clerk's
ofBce. but some use their personai clerical
assistants. Usually the commissioner elim-
inates the names at those he knows, or
thinks, to b« exempt or disqualified or un-
desirable for Jury service. Where letters
requesting names of proepective Jurors are
sent Jointly b/ the clerk and comn\lasloneT,
or where the clerk and ccmmlssloner work
together on other sources of names, they
sometimes select names alternately, or Lhe
clerk wlU use half the alphabet and the
commissioner the other half.

(Prom the New York Times of June 7, 1957 J
JrsT TaiAi.

The silent filibuster that has been ^otng
on all winter and spring against the adnUnls-
tratlon's mild clvll-rtght£ bill nas now ended
in the House, and formal debate on the
measure has begun at last. The bill has a
pood chance of passing there; but even If It
does It will come up against much tougher.
and longer-winded, opposition In the Senate.

Very different from the filibuster threat,
and in some ways even more serious. Is the
jury-trial amendment that wl'.I be proposed
as an addition to the bill In the House and
that has already been added to It In the
Senate version, which Is still In committee.
This amendment la the brainchild of the
astute Senator e:rvtx of North Carolina, and
there is no doubt that It has a specious ap-
peal. But It Is really a device to undermine
one of the most important provisions of the
pending bill.

As Introduced by the administration, the
bill permits the Attorney General to seek
injunctions In Federal court to prevent local
officials from denying voting or other civil
rights to anyone. The Ervln amendment
provides Jury trial for persons cited for con-
tempt for violating injunctions so issued.
Since trial by Jury Is one of the great guar-
anties of the Individual against the power
of the State, It may seem at first glance that
this Is only a reasonable effort to Insure
that Justice Is d^ne.

But actually It Is a means to block en-
forcement ot the court decree either until
it is too late to do any good or Indefinitely—
inasmuch as few if any southern Juries
woiild be likely to approve Federal action In
such cases. Jury trial for contempt cita-
tions under tue circumstances envisaged in
the clvU rli^hu bill U not and never has been
a normal legal procedure. A* b«nator Cass
of New Jersey pointed out -jesterday nana
of the S<5uthern States In the forefront of
the effort to defeat the right-to-vote l'?a;is-
latlon has a provision for Jury trial In con-
tempt cases of the kind here Involved.

The procedure envis.<\ijed In this bill Is
designed primarily not to punteh an official

•See pp. 13-30. supra.

for committing a ertme, but to prevent him
from mmmittlng a crime. The court's rl^lit
to punish him for ignoring that kind of
restraint is an expression of the authority of
the court ItaeU — an authority which, in
Chief Justice Taft's words alluded to by
President Slsenbower. "is essential unless
ws are prepared to embrace anarchy."

Mearly 2 months ago Senator Doneuk* of
Illinots entered in the CowannoNAi,
Rbcobo a detailed and Interesting tnief on
this whole subject, pointing out that the
Jury-trial amendment Is not only meant to
hamstring enforcement of the law but may
wen be unconstitutional Itself. It would
"deny to the Government of the United
States its duty and its power to give the
citizen effective protection in his right to
vote and In his fundamental rights to equal
protection and liberty suid security under
law. "

I From the Ogden Standard-Examiner of
June 3. 1»671

OUTCRT roi JUEIKS

A pertinent provision In the civil rights
tHLls, which President Eisenhower's adminis-
tration Is hoping to see passed, calls for
punishment for those adjudged in contempt
of court for denying civil rights to any
person.

Many southerners are doing their best to
prevent passage of civll-rtrhis legislation and
one of the dehiylni; tactics Is their demand
that those accused of being in contempt shall
be given Jury trials, although contempt is
not an offense usually tried by a Jury.

One of the best answers to the southern
argviment. in our opinion, was ouule last week
In the Senate by Senator Paoi. Douolas.
Democrat, Illinois, ■rvho insists that the Negro
will not Krt civil rights in the South If the
Jury trial demand Is met.

"In the first place." DoiTct.As ssld, "the
selection of Jurors can be manipulated so
that only those Jurors will be chosen who
will not convict a white man for preventing
a Negro from -voting It k< possible there-
fore to get Ju.st about the tlnd of Jury the
community wants. Purthe more, when the
Jurors have completed Uie.r work they go
bark into communltJes in which they live.
If they have tw )ught In a vi rdlct supporUng
a Federal Judge In an Injunction matter pro-
tecting the Negroes' right to vote, they know
they will be exposed to ecr>nomle pressure
and possibly even phys'r.ii violence "

To the shame of the South, what the Sen-
ator says is true Although the Federal
Judges In the South are all southerners, the
South will not trust them, knowing the
Judges will defend and enf, rce civil righu
for Negroes ss well as others.

[From the Philadelphia Enquirer of June 5.
1957 1

New StTBACK rot Crvn, Rights Bn.L

In their stubborn light to prevent the p-xa-
sage of any civil-rlghts legislation that
wou'd re-Uly work to protect minorities,
southern Congressmen have put forward
varl(,U3 propofcils which nppear to stem from
a high-minded concern for the rights of
others.

The latest Is the adoption of an amend-
ment to the adnilnlstratlon clvll-rlgjita
measure which would guarantee Jury uiala
to those accused of violating Federal court
Injxinctions against denial of civil rights.

On the surface, this may look fine. The
majority of the Senate JudlcUry Committee
which voted for the amendmeut advanced
all manner of argumenta in favor of the
right of trial by Jury,

But what the Senators— mostly southern-
ers—^id not say is that it would be difficult
if not Impossible, t^ get a conviction from
southern Juries of anyone accused of deny-
ing the right of a Negro to vote. In other
words, a Uw with this trlal-bv-jurv provi-
sion In It wouldu t work in the'dtates where

It Is most needsd. Ik woukl be a meaning-
less gsstura.

The administration. In preparing its bill,
provided that persons charged with denying
voting rights to any person in violation of
Federal court injunctions should be tried by
Federal Judge*. This was not dreaoMd up
slnoply to get around Jury trials. It followed
a well-estahUabed legal practice of trial by
Judges alone in contempt proc«edlnga. And
the southern foes of dvll rights have not
seen fit to challenge this practice until thay
could serve their own purposes by doing ao.

Since the elvlKrlghts bill was Introduced at
the beginning of the current session of Con-
gresa. It has run into one obstruction after
another. Only now, after S months, is a bill
ready to be debated on the floor of th«
House. In the Senate, tt has not been ap-
proved finally by the Judiciary Committee
and Chaimuux Eastulmo. an all-out sup-
porter of racial discrimination, is In no hurry
to complete action on it.

The fight is not over. But unless ths R»»
pnibilcans and the northern Democrats vig-
orously counter theae southern nuineuvers.
the result Is liable to be no clvll-rlghts legis-
lation at all, or a blU which will have little
practical effect in protecting minority rights
in the South.

[From New Tork Times of Uay 6. 1»57J

Lrrmis to the Eorroa: To TkT Civn, Rights

Case — OPPoamoN to Juet As Dkvics To

DeTEAT PIOQBAM Is BikCKEV

(&rrot s Note.— The writer of the follow-
In? letter has served as legal adviser to
UNRR.\ and to the D N. Secretariat, and
was United States Reporter at Congrerses of
Comparative Law at The Hague and in Lon-
don. He U professor of law at TuUne Uni-
versity I

To the EDrroB or rtn New Toax Times:

Warren Olncy 3d, the Assistant Attorney
General, is Justified in condemning bllU
now pending in the Congress which require
Jury trials in contempt of coxirt cases. These
cases arise from the National Oovemmenfs
proposed legislation to authorize the Attor-
ney General to bring civil suits In InsUnces
of threatened violations of voting rights and
of other constitutionally guaranteed civil
rights.

The pn-oceedlngs in the project of the
National Government would tie "suits ir.
equity" which would not require Jiu-y trials,
but the cotmterproposals that there be Jury
trials in such civil "suits in equity" come, as
Mr. Olney describes it. from "opponenu of
more elTectlve enforcement of t^e constitu-
tional prohibitions ajralnst official discrimi-
nation based on race or color."

He says that a "disastrous" effect of the
proposals to require Jury trials In such cases
"would be to give Juries the completely
novel power* to substitute their Interpreta-
tion of the Federal Constitution and laws for
that of the Federal Judges."

JUST SYSTEM IN SOl'TH

The opposition of Mr Olney to the use of
juries in civil liberties cases' arising In
equity Is not a contradiction. It may be
readily explained and understood In the light
of the general repressive conditions prevail-
ing In most of the South today, the conse-
quences of which are that requirements and
presuppositions for the admiiiistxation of the
Jury system do not exist.

The Jury system cannot flourish if the
Jury Is not free from fear and if it cannot
make objective determinations.

The Introduction of the Jury into equity
activity, when it is not constitutionally re-
quired, under the social circumstance*
which obtain in most of the South at pree-
ent would, as Mr. Olney says, be a clever
device to nullify civil rights legislation. In-
deed, it would pass off arbitrary determina-
tions as determinations made under the rule
of law.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

y

Tou will, recall that a bifurcation existed
between common law and equity In the his-
tory of Kngllsh law. The Jury system ob-
tained at law, but did not In equity.

The Attorney General is wise In Invoking
institutions of the civil law. such as equity,
to secure constitutional rlghU of the Negro
people which have been denied for almost
a century, and which have been nullified In
much of the South despite the recent de-
cisions of the Supreme Court of the United
SUtes.

StTPPOBTKES or EQUALrTT

The southern racists not only seek to In-
timidate the Negro, but also to silence the
white people who recognize the equality of
the Negro, who support the authority of the
Supreme Court, and who give their primary
allegiance to the Nation. Against these
forces the southern racists have directed a
cold terror, the force of which perhaps has
not yet been appreciated elsewhere in the
United States.

Under such circumstances of intimidation
and fear which prevail throughout most of
the South today civil rights legislation
would be negated If enforcement thereof
were entrusted to Juries functioning in the
midst of the cold terror. The situation
which now exists in most of the South re-
calls the situation in feudal England, which
explains in part the emergence of English
equity.

Similar conditions of cold terror In the
South today also Justify the use of equity
for the enforcement of cerUin civil righU
of the Negro in an area of law where there Is
no question of constitutional guaranty of
trial by Jury.

You are correct, therefore. In writing in
your editorial of April 26 that the proposed
legislation of the National Government "la
essentially moderate legislation, but its pas-
sage could have profound effects In extend-
ing a real equality of citizenship to the
Negro in many paru of the country where
equality does not now exist."

MrrcHEUL Feanklin,
New Oelkans. La., April 30, 1957.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I yield the floor.

8615

DEPARTMENT OP DEFENSE APPRO-
PRIATIONS. 1958— AMENDMENT
Mr. O'MAHONEY. Mr. President, I
submit, on behalf of myself, the senior
Senator from New Mexico [Mr. Chavez).
and the senior Senator from Illinois [Mr.
Douglas] an amendment proposed to be
offered to H. R. 7665. the military appro-
priation bill, when it comes before the
Senate.

The amendment which I am submit-
ting will be referred to the Committee
on Appropriatior.s. where It will be my
purpose, and the purpose of its support-
ers, to lay before the committee reasons
why we believe the amendment should be
adopted.

Let me say for the Record that after
the passage of the National Security Act
of 1947. which was the act that under-
took first to unify the military services
of the United States, there were con-
stant attempts to bring ahout unification
in the services of supply.

The Department of the Army, the De-
partment of the Navy, and the Depart-
ment of the Air Force each has Its own
procurement division. It has been
pointed out over and over again that
these three different procurement serv-
ices In the three different departments
of defense exercise an overlapping juris-
diction and cause the purchase of more

material of common supply for the mili-
tary forces than is actually needed to
provide the Army, the Navy, and the Air
Force with the materials, the food, the
clothing, and the various other supplies
which are needed.

This matter has been under investiga-
tion during the past 10 years by various
committees of both the Senate and the
House, under the leadership of Repre-
sentative Bonner, who headed a sub-
committee investigating a part of this
problem, under the leadership of Repre-
sentative Hebkrt. of Louisiana, under the
leadership of Representative Hardy, and
under the leadership of the Senator from
Texas tMr. Johnson], the Preparedness
Subcommittee of the Senate, investigat-
ing the armed services, handled an in-
vestigation of this matter.

Bills were introduced, and objections
were made to the bills in the depart-
ment; but finally, in 1952. when I was
chairman of the Subcommittee on De-
fense Appropriations of the Senate Ap-
propriations Committee. I brought about
the enactment of a rider which has since
been known as the OTylahoney rider, a
legislative rider on the appropriation bill
for fiscal 1953. The rider is known as
section 638 of the Defense Appropriation
Act of that year, and it reads as follows:

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, and for the purpose of achieving an
efficient, economical, and practical operation
of an integrated supply system designed to
meet the needs of the military departments
without duplicating or overlapping of either
operations of functions, no officer or agency
In or under the Department of Defense, after
the effective date of this section, shall obli-
gate any funds for procurement, production,
warehousing, distribution of supplies or
equipment or related supply management
functions, except in accordance with regula-
tions Issued by the Secretary of Defense.

(b) This section shall be effective 60 days
after the approval of this act.

At the time the amendment was
adopted and the provision was written
Into law, it was assumed to be sufficiently
plain and expUcit to make sure that the
various supply and procurement sys-
tems of the three parts of the military
forces would be unified. I am sorry to
say that has not been the fact. The
three services are still competing with
one another That is so in the face of the
conclusions reached by the various Ijr-
vestigating committees of Congress. In
the face of the action by the Appropria-
tions Committee, and in the face of the
action by Congress, supported by the
signature of the President, in passing the
bUl containing the so-called CMahoney
rider.

The Hoover Commission, through its
task forces, has been most diligent in
recent years and months in pointing out
that the purpose of the law is being
utterly disregarded. Perhaps I should
not say "utterly"; perhaps there has been
some attempt to bring about the elimi-
nation of overlapping and waste by co-
operation among the departments, but
the overlapping purchases are still a
great source of waste.

Only this year, when the House was
holding its hearings on the Defense Ap-
propriation biU for 1958. I found, in the
first part of the hearings, this exchange

between Mr. Shxpparo, of Callfomia.
who is on the committee, and General
Twining, head of the Air Force. This
extract from the hearings wAs sent to me
by the able leader of the majority in the
House, Representative John McCob-
MACK. of Massachusetts, who has also
called attention in the House to the
economies which can be obtained If only
we can bring about observance of the
law, I read this extract from page 1070
of Part I of the Defense Department
hearing in the House:

Mr. Shxpparo. Having had an opportunity
to review the respective missions that are as-
signed to the Army, Air Force, and Navy,
have you any suggestion to make at this time
that you think would be beneficial to the
security of this Nation that has not hereto-
fpre been discussed? I am not referring to
the dollar aspect now. I am referring to the
mechanism of the military and all of Its
complexities as you have the ability to an-
alyze it?

General Twining. That is a pretty big
question.

- Mr. Sheppaxd. I know it Is, and that Is why
I am asking you about It.

General Twining. I think the things that
we can do we have already started to do. I
tlilnk It Is Important that the services be
brought closer together, and each should
learn to trust the other more and we should
make mutual use of such facilities as the
other may have to help the overall operation.
In other words, we must have mutual trust
and confidence between the services to sup-
port each other. Instead of trying to accom-
plish the whole task independently. This
we must avoid. We are making strides In
that direction, but I think there Is more
room for Improvement.

Mr. Shxppakd. j want to compliment you
on that comment: It Is a very constructive
observation on your part. I do believe you
could xise that admonishment to aU
branches of the services and not address it
to any particular branch.
General Twining. That Is correct.

Mr. President, this is precisely what
the sponsors of the amendment are at-
tempting to do. In drafting the amend-
ment, in cooperation with the task force
of the Hoover Commission, I have sought
not to eliminate section 638 of the Appro-
priations Act of 1953, but to strengthen
it, to make it more effective, and to make
it mandatory upon the Secretary of De-
fense that he take immediately the steps
which are necessary if we are, at last, to
succeed in having the three agencies act
as one in the purchase of supplies which
all need alike.

Mr. President, there was published in
the Hoover Commission Task Force Re-
port on Food and Clothing for April 1955,
a history of the progress of the attempt
to bring about this economy. Section 3,
beginning on page 84, is entitled "Back-
ground Prom the Standpoint of Con-
gress." This history takes up pages 84.
85. 86, and 87.

I ask unanimous consent that the ex-
tract from the Hoover Commission task
force report be printed as a part of my
remarks in the Record at this point.

There being no objection, the extract
was ordered to be printed in the Rjeooro,
as follows:

Sbction m. Background Froic the Stand-
point or CoNci

An evaluation of the organizational stnie-
ture of the subsistence supply systems within
the Department of Defense could not be

8616

CONGRESSIONAL RECX)RD — SENATE

June 10

eompletelT made without revlevlnf th« ex-
tensive CoDgrewtnniM bMtflngii, rtwifnnil to
bring about a more effective and eOclent
supply management program for all common
Items.

Soon after the outbreak of the Korean
hoatllltles. the Congres* became conceme<t
over how well the Department of Elefenee
was marshaling the Nation's resoorces under
the Industrial mobilization program. Among
others. Senator Lyndon Johnson. Congress-
men HAjtOT. HtBZBT. and Bonnkx headed the
subcommittee investigating vartons facets
or this problem. The Bonner subcommittee
of the House Government Operations Com-
mittee devoted Its attenUon to Federal Sup-
ply ICanagement with particular emphasis on
the miiltary aapecU. This subcommittee. In
Its report of June 27. 1951. covered, among
other problems, the leglalstlve framework
for Military Supply Management and bad
this to say:

"|n the public mind, unification of the
Armed Forces was achieved by the National
Security Act of 1947. An evaluaUon of the
field operations under this act and lU later
amendments shows that unification, from a
standpoint of military supply, rests largely
on paper."

The subcommittee vigorously complained
in the same report about each department
manning and operating a supply system for
common items and pointed out that "should
the Air Force be permitted to organize and
operate its own supply system, the Depart-
ment of Defense would be underwriting a
program of Uiplicatlon rather than the uni-
fication sought in part at least by the act of
1947 ••

Further InvesUgatlons by the Bonner sub-
committee in the fall of 1951 disclosed that
the Air Force was continuing to build a
separate supply system for common-use
items. In the winter of 1953, the Hardy and
Hubert subcommittees also held hearings
which reported disturbing facte to Congress
concernJ.^ certain phases of military supply
operaUons. The former committee reported
on the deflclencies In the purchase funcUons,
especially In the category of automotive ma-
teriel, and the latter reported on duplication
and Inefficiencies In the procurement, stand-
ardization, and cataloging fields. As a re-
sult of these Investigations, which appeared
to confirm the generally held Congressional
opinion that the Defense Department was
guilty of waste and extravagance, the atti-
tude of Congress Is clearly demonstrated In
the following excerpts from the S?nate de-
bate on June 38 and 30. 1952.

Senator Paci, Douglas Introduced, on the
floor of the Senate, a bill Identical to that
previously Introduced by Representative
BoNNKi on the fioor of the House. H. R.
7391, as an amendment to the Appropriation"
Act for thp Department of Defense: "to pro-
mote econt^my and efficiency through reor-
ganization and Integration of supply and
■ertce activities within and among the
military departments." Under the proposed
bill, the functions of the Munitions Board
would be transferred to an Under Secretary
of Defense for Supply Management who
wmid be responsible to:

"(a) Develop standardised procedures and
forms and service function:

"(b) KUmlnate dupIlcaUon and overlap-
pin? within and among the supply activities
of the raUltary departments in the fields
of production, procurement, warehoualne
and distribution.

"(c) Establlah and operate depots for com-
mon items and other common supoly and
service installations throughout the United
States^

••(d) Develop unified logistics organla-
tlona overseas;

"(e) Establish and operau a program to
systematize scrap recovery. redUtribution of
excess material and surplus disposal and
coordinate such programs with the Depart-
ment Of Defense and with those of other

1957

departments and acenetas of the OoTemmcnt
itavlng reBpooatblUtles In those fields;

"(t) Develop plans for recruitment and
training of a professional corps of supply
personnel within the Department of De-
fense-
Senator Saltonstall entered Into the de-
bate and said:

"When the untflcatloir bill was paasril In
1947. the amendment which the Hmnmpiyr Is
now proposing was considered. It was one
of thoee steps which the committee felt It
did not want to take at that time. It feit
It should not go that far In concentrating
so much power In the Secretary of Defense.
That was one of the problems which Secre-
tary Fy>rrestal had confronting him. Times
have changed, and conditions have changed.
Personally. I think there U considerable
merit in what the Senator from Illinois U
proposing. I want the record to show that
I Join with the Senator from Texas In sug-
gesung that the Senator Introduce a bill on
the subject In Jsnuarr. and pursue It. so
that the Unification Act may be amended
somewhat along the lines the Senator from
UUnoU proposes. I believe It shoiUd be
amended."

Senator O'Maromxt concluded the debau
by accepting the suggestion of Senators Ltn-
DON Johnson and Saltonstali., and obUinlng
the concurrence of Senator Douglas, in the
following statement:

•J wish to say to the Senator from nilnols
that the Subcommittee on Defense Produc-
tion was unanimous in Its feeling that the
principle of toe Bonner amendment should
be enacted into law. But the conamlttee was
aware of the fact that It could not be en-
acted Into law on an appropriation bill. I
want the Senator to know that personally
I have consulted with the Secretary of De-
fense and the Director of the Bureau of the
Budget. I spoke to both of them and told
them that the economy measure must be
carried through. At the same time, I recog-
nize the fact that the Committee on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House are
entitled as a matter of right to have the op-
portunlty to examine Into the far-reaching
changes which would be made In uninca-
tlon."

Accordingly, as an Interim measure, sec-
tion 6Sa to the Derense Appropriation Act,
or wbat u commonly known as the
O Mahoney rider was substituted for H. R.
7C9I. and adopted. It provided that.

"la) Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, and for the purpose of achieving an
efBclent, economical, and practical operation
of an integrated supply system designed to
meet the needs or the military departmente
without duplicating or overlapping of either
operations of functions, no oHicer or agency
m or under the Department of Defense, after
the effective dale of this section, shall obli-
gate any funds for procurement, production
warehousing, distribution of supplies or
equipment or related supply management
functions, except in accordance with regula-
tions Issued by the Secretary of Defense.

•'(b) This section ahaU be effective eo days
after the approval of this act "

The proposed Douglas bill was not resub-
mitted to the new 83d Congress, primarily
because of the reallnen-.ent of Congressional
rommlttees and the apparent desire on the
part of Congress to give the new adminis-
tration an opportunity to become oriented.
The Rlehlman subcommittee, which imder-
took the work of the former Bonner subcom-
mittee, held hearings, however, on May 11
12. and 20. and June 16. 1953. to determine
what steps have been taken by the Defense
Department to Improve military supply
m.inasement since the enactment of the
O-Mahoney amendment. Their report on
these hearings sUted that:
"It Is the conclusion of the subcommittee
that the good IntenUona expressed by the
various directives and by the O'Mahoney

amendment have brought about only a slight
degree of progress although It belleyee that
the regnlattona and dIrectlTee were well
conceived."

The subcatnmltteeli general conclusions
were as follows:

"The subcommittee concludes that prog-
ress In the improvement of military supply
management is distinguished by an inordi-
nate slownees.

"The departments, on the one hand, agree
unanimously with the need for carrying out
the basic regulations for supply management
improvement. On the otber band, they tn-
sUt on further committee studtes. dwell on
the consequences of a fourth service of sui>-
ply.' insist that the departments mtut tan-
prove themselves first and allege ^that the
regulations really apply to another aerrlce.
In the meantime they proceed as rapAdlj
as possible to revise their present stock man-
agement systems, each In tu own pettcm.
thus actually widening the dlSerencca in the
very areas where they should be brought Into
harmony.

"The subcommittee has beard the familiar
testimony of agreement by the department
representatives with cerUln policies which
must be implemented. It has heard many
admissions of the present weaknesses of the
departmental supply systems. It has heard
the promises that before another year pasaea.
things win be under control. The printed
hearings of Congresslorial Investigations are
fraught with testimony of this kind This
has been equally true of the testimony before
the Bonner subcommittee of the aad COn-
grese.

•Secretaries of the mlllUry departments
have come and gone. New Congresses and
Congressional committees take up the cudgels
in behalf of more efficient Oovemment oper-
ations. There Is even a new administration
which promises to create a top level organi-
ratlon with a reassignment of delegated pow-
ers to provide more effective action. The one
constant In this great amount of activity Is
the uniformed forces, each dedicated to the
preservation of Its own systems and proced-
ures.

"This devotion to duty and to the creation
of a service esprit de corps. Is particularly
laudable In strategic and tactical operations
A blind loyalty to the separately adminis-
tered theory as applied to the business
phases of mUltary operations, however can
be costly and wasteful. It Is hoped that a
bold philosophy of the administration's As.
sistant Secretaries of Defense can provide an
enlightened and buslness'lke guidance to as-
sure the Nation that It Is getting maximum
military security with a minimum of waste
due to poor management."

The subcommittee 8 hope did not, howerer
materialize for despite the Intent of Con-
greee and In fact the actual Uw of the land
as expressed In the OTHahoney rider the'
Assistant Secretary for Supply and Loglrt'ca
in complete disregard of Department of De-
fense Directive 4000 8 that was Ifsued In ac-
cordance with the requlremenu of the Uw
published a policy statemesit ol November
13. 1953. with respect to an integrated supply
system for common -use items, which stated
in part:

"The experience of the military depart-
ments Indicates that In order .o reduce sup-
ply problems to manageable proportion,
emphasis at this time would be more sdvan-
tageously directed toward greater efflclencr
within Indivldnal departmental supply sys-
terns and supply management functions,
development of fiscal piocedural means for
effective and economical cross servicing
among the military services, and the clcecst
practicable coordination of departmental
■"PPly systems. Future supply studies will
not be confined to a review and analysU of a
category of materiel, but will be directed
toward the accompliahnaent of the forego-
ing principles on the basU of placing first

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

things first. In addition, in Une with the
policy of this office to remain out of opera-
tions, the responsibility for conducting
studies as they are required wUl be delegated
to the military departments. Since the di-
rective setting up the supply studlee is not
in oonformlty with this approach, It is ac-
cordingly being rescinded."

Mr. O'MAHONEY. I also ask unanl-
moua consent. Mr. President, that the
full text of the amendment which I have
already submitted be printed in the
Record at this point.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be received, appropri-
ately referred; and, without objection,
will be printed in the Record.

The amendment, submitted by Mr.
O'Mahoney (for himself, Mr. Chavez,
and Mr. Douglas) was referred to the
Committee on Appropriations, as fol-
lows:

Amendment intended to ije proposed by
Mr. O'Mahonxt (for himself, Mr. Chavxz
and Mr. Douglas) to the bill (H. R. 7665)
making appropriaUona for the Dep»artment
of Defense for the fiscal year ending June
30, 1956. and for other purposes, viz: At the
proper place In the bill Insert the following
new section:

"Src. — . For the purpose of achieving an
efficient, economical, and practical Integrated
supply system designed to meet the needs of
the military departmenU without duplica-
tion or overlapping of either operations or
funcUons. the President, within 180 days
after the date of enactment of this act,
shall submit to the Congress his recommen-
dations for a civilian managed agency, to be
under the supervision and direction of the
Secretary of Defense, which shall be respon-
sible for the procurement, production, ware-
housing, distribution of supplies or equip-
ment, standardization of Inventory control
and other supply management functions for
common supply items other than combat
equipment, material, and directly related
combat Items."

At the proper place In the bill insert the
following new secUon:

"Sbc. — . SecUon 638 of the Department
of Defense Appropriation Act. 1953, Is
amended to read as follows:

"••Sec. 638. (a) Notwithstanding any
other provision of law. the Secretary of De-
fense shall take such actions as are neces-
sary to achieve economy, efficiency, and ef-
fecUveness In noncombatant services, activi-
ties, and op>eraUons through the elimination
of overlapping, duplicaUon, and waste with-
in and among the agencies of the Depart-
ment of £>efense.

"'(b) The Secretary of Defense. In order
to provide for the effecUve accomplishment
of this section. Is hereby authorized from
time to time to transfer, combine, and co-
ordinate noncombatant services. actlvlUes.
and operations within the Department of
Defense.

• '(c) The Secretary of Defense Is further
authorized to transfer such property, rec-
ords, and personnel and such unexpended
balances (available or to be made available)
of appropriaUons, allocations, and other
funds of the mUitary departments, as he
deems necessary to carry out the provisions
oX this section.' "

8617

CLAIM OP CHRISTOFFER HAN-
NEVIG — CONVENTION BETWEEN
THE UNITED STATES AND NOR-
WAY

The Senate resumed the consideration
of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 185)
to implement the convention between
the United States and Norway for dis-

position of the claim against the United
States on belialf of Chrlstoffer Han-
nevig.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. Mr. President, the
pending business is Calendar No. 378,
House Joint Resolution 185, which is a
noncontroversial measure.

The pending joint resolution would
confer jurisdiction upon the United
States Court of Claims to adjudicate a
claim of Chrlstoffer Hannevig of Norway
against the United States, based on the
requisition of certain properties by agen-
cies of the United States Government
during the First World War.

The vaUdity of this claim has been
consistently denied by the United States
Government. Because the matter was a
source of longstanding irritation be-
tween the United States and Norway,
however, a convention was concluded,
effective as of November 9, 1948 (62 Stat.
1798), under which it was agreed that
the Harmevig claim would be referred to
the Court of Claims, with possible appeal
to the United States Supreme Court, in
the event that the two governments were
imable to reach a settlement by diplo-
matic procedures.

Such procedures having reached an
impasse, article II of the convention
has come into operation. Under that
article, it was specifically recognized
that the provisions for reference of the
claim to American courts would be "sub-
ject to authorization by the Congress of
the United States." The present joint
resolution, therefore, has as its purpose
the enactment of the requisite legislative
authorization to enable the United
States to comply with an international
obligation assumed in the treaty. In
other words, Senate Joint Resolution 64
merely gives effect to the procedures con-
templated by the Senate when it origi-
nally gave its approval to the Conven-
tion.

House Joint Resolution 185, the com-
panion bill, was approved by the House
of Representatives on May 20, 1957.

The amount of the claim for which re-
covery will be sought before the Court of
Claims consists of $25 million in prin-
cipal, together with interest computed
from 1917 at the rate of 6 percent. The
claim is predicated upon losses sustuned
by Hannevig as a result of requisition
orders affecting property interests which
Hannevig is alleged to have had in cer-
tain ship construction and operating
companies during World War I.

Despite its belief that the legal basis
of the claim is very doubtful, the De-
partment of State is anxious to have the
issues adjudicated and disposed of once
and for all by our courts to remove the
case as a continuous irritation between
the United States and Norway, and to
comply with our obligation under the
1948 convention.

In my opinion, passage of this bill will
contribute to more harmonious relations
between the United States and Norway,
and I therefore commend it to the Sen-
ate.

I may add, Mr. President, that Senate
Joint Resolution 64, the companion bill,
is on the calendar as Calendar No. 376.
It is Identical with the House-passed
resolution, and has been reported by
the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. JAVrrs. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. O'MAHONEY. I yield.

Mr. JAVrra. I understand this bill
has been cleared with the minority side.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. It has been
cleared, yes.

The PRESIDINQ OFFICER. Is there
objection to the present consideration
of the joint resolution?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the joint resolu-
tion (H. J. Res. 185) to Implement the
convention between the United States
ajyi Norway for disposition of the claim
against the United States on behalf of
Chrlstoffer Hannevig.

The joint resolution was ordered to a
third reading, read the third time, and
passed.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. Without
objection, the preamble Is agreed to.

Without objection. Senate Joint Reso-
lution 64 is indefinitely postponed.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRI-
ATIONS, 1958

Mr. O'MAHONEY. Mj. President, I
now move that the Senate proceed to the
consideration of Calendar No. 416, H. R.
6500, the District of Columbia appro-
priation bill. This bill is not to be acted
upon today, I may say.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
clerk will state the bill by title.

The Legislative Clerk. A bill (H. R.
65C0) making appropriations for the
government of the District of Columbia
and other activities chargeable in whole
or in part against the revenues of said
District for the fiscal year ending June
30, 1958, and for other purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion of
the Senator from Wyoming.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to amsider the bill
(H. R. 6500) which had been reported
from the Committee on Appropriations
with amendments.

Mr. HUMPHMTT. Mr. President, will
the Senator yiem?

Mr. O'MAHONEY. I yield to the Sen-
ator from Minnesota.

ADDRESS BY GEN. LAURIS NORSTAD

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, the
life and career of Gen. Lauris Norstad.
the supreme allied commander of Eu-
rope, has been of particular interest to
the people of Minnesota. General Nor-
stad is a native Minnesotan of whom his
predecessor General Gruenther once
said:

He has one of the keenest strategic minds
in the world today.

Over the past weekend, liflnnesota has
been honored with the return of this na-
tive son to deliver the commencement
address at St. Olaf College in Northfield
yesterday. General Norstad was award-
ed an honorary doctor of laws degree by
St. Olaf College. While on the campus,
he himself awarded commissions to the
members of the ROTC group at St. Olaf.

Mr. President, I wish to join with
fellow Minnesotans in expressing thanks
to General Norstad for his willingness to

8618

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

return to his native State to honor us
by his presence and inspire us by his
message.

General Nm^tad's commencement
address was entitled "NATO; Plan for
Peace." I ask unanimous consent that
the text of this address, as well as an
article about General Norstad's visit
which appears in this morning's Minne-
apolis Tribune, be printed at this point
In the RxcoRo.

There being no objection, the address
and article were to be printed in the
RjccoRi), as follows :

NATO: Pi^N roK Peack
(Remarka by Oen. Laurla Noratad. supreme
allied commander. Europe, at the com-
mencement exercises St. Olaf College,
NorUxfleld. Minn., Sunday. June 9. 1957)

SUFKZMK HeADOUARTKES

Aujio Powers Eueope.

Paris, France.

*The honors which St. Olar College l.s
according ua today are doubled for me by tho
fact that I share them with this graduating
claaa. My emotions are particularly engaged
because of my family's many asaociations
here, and because aa a boy I knew thlH
school, this city, and this countryside. My
roots are deep In Minnesota. If it had not
been for the turn of events that sent me to
West Point. I would have followed other
members of my family to St. Olaf. and felt
with you the pride and affection that
thoughu of ones old school always en-
gender.

Before leaving my post at SHAPE, I long
considered what I would say to you. It oc-
curred to me that your class of 1957 Is being
graduated 12 years after the Second World
War, whereas my class of 1930 was gradu-
ated la years after the First World War— the
war that had been fought, so my generation
was told, to end all wars. This coincidence
led me to compare our situation then with
yours now. In my Judgment, you have the
better of It — and by an Impressive margin.

To be sure, the 27 years between my
graduation and yours — one generation— may
seem long, as science teaches us to measure
progress. But I can assure you, from my
own experience, that 27 years seem but an
insUnt where fundamental changes In na-
tional outlook are Involved.

The June when I was graduated fell a
few months after the great financial crash
which ushered In a worldwide depression and
marked the end of an era. The year of the
crash— 1929— was the year of the Kellogg-
Brland Treaty, whereby great nations
renounced war forever. The year the depres-
sion began— 1930— was the year of the Lon-
don Treaty, whereby the major victors of
World War I agreed to reduce their most
powerful weapon, their naval armaments
The Irony is, 1930 also saw the emergence of
Hitler, whose Nazis then scored their first
important success at the polls. Democracy
had already lost the day in Italy, and In the
Far East the war clouds were gathering Be-
fore another year was out. Japan would at-
tack China through Manchuria. Thus
almost at the very hour that one-half of the
world was taking its first tentative steps to-
ward astlng peace, the other hall was setting
Its grim course toward war.

How did my generation face this dichot-
omy? Yours could say we did so with
pious hope rather than with realism. And
you would be right. But, in Justice to rav
class of 1930, what is so plain now was
not so then— that our American policy of
Isolation and avoidance of International re-
sponsibilities was more appropriate to the
small nation we had unUl recently been than
to the flrst-class world power we had ac-
tually become.

The class of 1930 was brought up in a
country flanked by vast oceans and by

friendly neighbors. Even at that late hour
and In the very shadow of the outer world's
rancor and fear, we saw no reason to chal-
lenge the national credo that America's free-
dom and the prosperous harvest we fully
expected to reap again were providentially
Insulated from the surging disorders of other
continents.

Alas, that's bow it was with us. And, in
course of time, our bitter harvest included,
along with the material prosperity, the
frightful war that afflicted your childhood.
Let me now explain why I view your sit-
uation, your prospects, with optimism. As
with us, a menace confronts you, too— the
menace of communism, whether overtly
armed or Insidious. You are more fortunate
than we were because you are aware of
your danger— it has been branded for you.
Equally important, that part of the world
which thinks as we do is keeping watch
against the threat. With the rest of the
Pree World, the United States has closed
ranks against it. Best of all. from your
point of view, the Idea of outlawing war,
which In my generation was no more than
a hopeful and Idealistic abstraction, has
taken on a more meaningful form. Our
power today Is In place, alongside that of
our many allies and friends, to keep war
from happening.

Here, then, it the essential difference be-
tween your generation and mine. You start
in an era of unequalled prosperity. There
is. to be sure, an outer danger, but It has
been r'H:ognlzed. and many nations stand
with us to keep It from breaking loose upon
the world. This does not mean that you
will necessarily have an easy time. In some
ways, your problems may be much harder
than ours because the world, by reason of
the new InterrelatlonahljM of nations, has
grown more complex. But at least you know
what you are up against; and ready at hand,
for your enlightened use. are the means for
nourishing those values which St. Olaf has,
I am sure, taught you to cherish— the Ideas
of freedom under Justice.

What first turned us from the old view-
point to the new? What made us now
recognize for the first time the Interests, the
responsibilities we shared with like-minded
nations' The answer Is, the enemy— an
enemy who had been our ally.

When World War II ended, our only wish
was to bring the troops home. While we
were so doing, while we were dismantling
the greatest war machine In history, while
we were scrapping airplanes, tanks and ships
by the thousands and tens of thousands, we
suddenly discovered that the Soviets, ' far
from scrapping their weapons, too. were
holding fast to them, developing new ones
and stockpiling them.

What roused us to the Soviet's perfidy was
no one action, but a scrlea— the threats
against Iran. Greece. Turkey, and Berlin
one following hard upon the other. Our
first counter was to offer the shelter of the
Truman doctrine to TUiey and Greece
Next, when the Soviets wantonly blockaded
Berlin, we improvised the airlift and broke
the blockade. Finally, and most Important-
ly, m April 1949. Western nations, we among
them, signed the pact that brought to life
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization—
what we call NATO.

But the Soviet threat, as it materialized
had two edges. Those actions of ours that
I have cued were devised to blunt the mili-
tary edge. No less dangerous was the eco-
nomic edge, for communism breeds In pov-
erty and sUgnatlon. The buckler' we now
presented was the Marshall plan. It was
broad; It was strong; it was unique. It was
also effective. Thanks to Its protection
Western Europe's recovery from the almost
mortal wounds of war was rapid, spectacular.
Thus, we Americans were astonished to
nnd that, in the space of a few years, we had
climbed down from our tower of isolation-
ism to the common ground of international

cooperation. We had helped to organts* th*
United Nations and had Joined It. And tta«
Southeast AsU Treaty Organisation. And
the Australia-New Zealand-United 3Utea
Pact. And the Organisation oX the Ameri-
can SUtee. The Baghdad Pact we alao
helped to organise, though we are not XuU
members.

TradiUonally. our Middle West hss been
Isolationist. Myself a middle westerner, I
shared our general astonishment — and. later,
our pride — at how far our country had niored
forward into the world. What Imprn—w
me most today about our move Is that It was
a response not to any partisan or partchlal
stimulus, but to the will of the American
people as a whole. From the Truman doc-
trine to the Eisenhowtr doctrine, whiit we
have done in the world has been a forth-
right expreeeion of the wUl— the hopes — oX
the Nation.

Our historic move has gone furthest Into
Western Exirope. We and our allies, hiving
fought two bloody wars there, have Joined
hands again to prevent the third and tlood-
iest. Where we have Joined hands U hATO.
To the subject of NATO, lU origins, act.leve-
ments. and Ideals. I shall now addrest my-
self. Let me begin by declaring my convic-
tion that the free world possesses no vehicle
able to carry it more surely to the gcal of
peace, no tool better adapted to the mainte-
nance of the AtlanUc community's material
well-t)elng. no idea in deeper accord with
the dignity and security of man.

There were many reaaons why we and
these other nations should have como to-.
gether. but the most compelling was an
emotion— fear. Eastern Europe was Soviet
up to the Elbe, and Soviet power was strain-
ing against thU frail, artificial froitler.
Across it. the still free countries of Western
Europe were paralyzed with terror. Fac-
tories were Idle, stores were empty, despair
prevailed.

Into thU gray atmosphere, in 1951. :ame
General Elsenhower, charged with organis-
ing the common forces authorU»d bj the
treaty. Because NATO's every act dcrlvea
from this treaty, and because the treaty
speaks for Itself in clear tones. I will (luote
Its preamble:

"The parties to this treaty reaflirm their
faith in the purposes and principles o the
Charter of the United Nations and their
desire to live in peace with all peoples and
all governments.

"They are determined to safeguard the
freedom, conmion herlUge and civUlsition
of their peoples, founded on the primiples
of democracy, individual liberty and the rule
of law.

"They seek to promote stability and well-
being in the North Atlantic area.

"Ihey are resolved to unite their effor's for
collective defense and for the preservation
of peace and security."

NATO's military achlevemenU have been
Its most conspicuous because Its ea-Uest
preoccupation was military. Hdwever. the
NATO Idea has also been made manifest In
associated fields, all contributing to the
vitality- political. Industrial, and spiritual—
of the member nations. In contrast to pre-
NATO Europe, factories are now humitilng.
stores are thronged, and confidence U e/ery-
where. Granted, Western Europe's magnif-
icent recovery cannot be credited to NATO
alone, but it could never have come so
quickly or on so broad a front without con-
fidence in NATO's strength and durability

The Soviet threat remains, but opp<wing
it now are not fifteen different natlona. each f
threatened with separate and consecutive ^
engulfment. but one community far too
massive for even the voracious Soviets t«. at-
tempt. The forces of this community have
been welded together by NATO for the first
time in history, and have been deployel aa
one. to deter and to defend. Together -.heT
give hope to ally and warning to foe that
aggression cannot succeed.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

We of NATO call these forces the Sword
ahd the Shield. The sword Is our retaliatory
weapon. It includes the great power of our
Strategic Air Command, and the Bomber
Command of the United Kingdom. These
long-range air forces are augmented by a
variety of atomic components in the Ni^TO
commands, sea, land and air. The viist
destructive power which they embody has
been and will remain a most Important ele-
ment In the deterrent strategy.

Their effectiveness In no way suffers from
the probablllly that the Russians will in-
crease their own atomic quotient; for what
deters the Russians now Is their knowledge
that no matter what damage they might In-
flict upon our alliance, the alliance Is al-
ready able to retaliate In such crxishlng
measure. Because of this potential of ours,
it is hard for me to believe that any ad-
versary would deliberately open an action
which was bound to Invite his own destruc-
tion.

The risk of war. so lessened by the sword
forces, is further lessened by the forces of
the shield. Since these forces are largely
conventional, the question Is sometimes
asked whether they are needed In this nu-
clear age. Let me tell you about them
briefly. They are drawn from air, ground
and naval units supplied by mb and all our
allies, from Norway to Turkey. Their
strength in numbers Is considerable and is
multiplied by the fact that, while diverse In
origin, they man the line together. They
are therefore at once weapon and symbol,
and as such they add mightily to the deter-
rent.

The line they man has come to be the most
sensitive and most critical in the world. No
other line between the Communist bloc and
the West Is so wfll defined. No other line
Imposes such firm commitments: the 15 na-
tions ranged behind It have agreed that an
attack against one will be an attack against
all; they have pledged a common defense.

If this line were not held, or were held
only thinly, an oppxartunistlc aggressor might
be tempted to cross it and thereby confront
us of the West with an accomplished fact
and with the fateful decision whether to
try to expel him. If we faUed to try, we
would default our solemn commitments, and
that could be the end of the alliance. If
we did try, it would be argued that we were
the first to use force, and the terrible respon-
sibility for starting the war would fall to us.
But, say that our forward line is defended
along its more than 4,000 miles, and defended
In such strength that considerable force
would be required to break through it. Then
the decision to use force first, with all Its
fateful Implications, would be the aggres-
sor's. Because such a decision would precip-
itate the avalanche of our retaliatory forces.
It is inconceivable that he would take It
without due thought. Hence a shield able
to hold even momentarily would discourage
action either headlong or opportunistic.

So the Shield forces, like the Sword forces,
are part of our deterrent; their purpose Is
to prevent a war from starting. However, if
the deterrent should fall. If war should come,
the Shield would still have a critical func-
tion. It. would defend NATO territory while
the Sword forces were cutting the aggressor
down.

All these considerations, these subletles
of high strategy, may seem far from our green
and pleasant State of Minnesota. Defense
of the NATO line may seem less urgent to
us Mlnnesotans than to the Norwegians, the
Germans and the Turks who live along it.
But I know, and I tell you, that NATO's
shield Is also ours.

Because I have talked so long about ttrat-
egy. you musn't assume that I consider war
IneviUble. I do not. On the contrary, the
prospects of peace seem to me brighter than
a few years ago. For example, discussions
of disarmament are under way in London.
The sincerity and seriousness of the Russians

8619

remain to be seen. In any case, the essen-
tial condition for an acceptable plan Is dear
enough. It Is that the pall of apprehension
of a surprise attack be Uf ted from the world.
President Elsenhower has stated this elo-
quently. If there can Indeed be a meeting
of minds here, a niatchlng of reality with
reality, a trading of fact for fact, then the
heavy burden of armament may In time be
laid down, and the world— it will be your
world — can stand easy and breathe.

My elders used to long for the security, the
tranquinity, the "good old days" of their
childhood. There were few such daj^ In
mine, overshadowed as It was by the First
World War, Just as yours was by the Second.
Here, I am confident, the parallel stops. For
ahead of me lay the depression and, thanks
to man Is obtuseness, the certainty of a Sec-
ond World War; whereas ahead of you,
thanks to the wisdom and means we have
so painfully acquired, lies a surer, happier
prospect, the prospect of the good new days.

The man who was responsible for Norstad's
appointment to West Point also was in the
audience yesterday. Representative Aucnsr
ANDutSB3f. ReptibUcan. of MlnnesoU. was
among the slumnl of St. Olaf to receive clU-
tlons at the program.

Honored with Norstad yesterday were Dr.
Paul Ovrebo, chief of the devices branch at
Wright Patterson Air Force Base. Dayton,
Ohio, who received an honorary doctor oX
science degree.

Peter D. Tkach of Minneapolis, widely
known as a music administrator in the Up-
per Midwest, received an honorary doctor of
music degree.

Dr. Clemens Granskou, St. Olaf president,
presented citations to the distinguished
alumni. Besides Andresxn, they included:

Mrs. Cora Helgeson Ormseth, Havre, Mont.,
Dr. Henrik J. Svlen, Rochester, Minn.; Dr.
Bennett Ellefson, New Tork, and Dr. E. Clif-
ford Nelson, Minneapolis.

I From the Mlnneap>olls Morning Tribune oX
June 10, 1957]

NoESTAO Says NATO Forces Are Too Pow-
erful FOB Russ To Attack
NoRTHFiELO, MiNN. — The forces of the
15 NATO nations are so massive that not
even the "voracious Soviets" would attempt
an attack. Gen. Laurls Norstad told the
graduating class of St. Olaf College here
Sunday.

"What deters the Russians," Norstad said,
"Is their knowledge that no matter what
damage they might inflict upon our alli-
ance, the alliance already Is able to retali-
ate In crtishlng measure."

Norstad, who is supreme allied command-
er In Europe, said North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) forces are so power-
ful that "their effectiveness In no way suf-
fers from the probability" Russia will In-
crease Its own strength.

Norstad, an Air Force officer, defended
the ground forces. "The question is some-
times asked whether they are needed In this
nuclear age," he said.

The line held by the ground forces of
NATO Is the "most sensitive and critical"
In the world, the general said.

"If this line were not held, or were held
only thinly, an opportunistic aggressor might
be i«mpted to cross it and thereby confront
the West with an accomplished fact and
with the fateful decision whether to try
to expel him. If we faUed to try, we would
default our solemn commitments, and that
would be the end of the alliance.

"If we did try, it would be argued that
we were the first to use force and the terri-
ble responsibility for starting the war would
fall on us.

"But, say that our forward line is de-
fended along Its more than 4,000 miles, and
defended in such strength that considerable
force would be required to break through
It. Then the decision to use force first, with
all Its fateful Implication, would be the ag-
gressor's."

Norstad was awarded an honorary doctor of
laws degree by St. Olaf. He received tho
honorary hood from Doctors Agnes Larson,
history professor, and Tillman M. Sogge,
professor of economics and sociology.

Watching the ceremony were members of
Norstad's Minnesota family — his mother,
Mrs. Martin Norstad, two brothers and a
sister. Norstad's daughter. Kristin, who ac-
companied her father here from Washing-
ton, also was In the audience.

Norstad. born In Minneapolis and reared In
Red Wing, Minn., considered going to St.
Olaf. His brother. Rev. Predrlc Norstad
of Minneapolis, Is a St. Olaf graduate, as are
other members of the family.

But his appointment to the military acad-
emy at West Point came along before he
had a chanw to enroll at St. Olaf.

PRICES AND WAGES
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, In
current discussions as to rising prices,
the charge is often made that the pri-
mary cause is the increase in wages.

The June 1 issue of Business Week
magazine contains an excellent article on
this very question which I Invite to the
Senate's attention. It Is titled "A New
Look at Prices and Wages." I ask
unanimous consent that it be printed in
the Record at the close of my remarks

The PRESmiNQ OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)

Mr. HUMPHREY. This -article Is
based on the recent report on productiv-
ity, earnings, costs and prices prepared
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics at the
request of the Joint Economic Commit-
tee. When this report was released, cer-
tain writers were quick to point out that
It verified their position that wages are
indeed the major cause of inflation.
Business Week, however, throws a wet
blanket on any such conclusion. It
states:

Although the BLS report ducked the Issue
of causes, the burden of the report — which
was clarified by Clague in an interview with
Business Week— cast considerable doubt on
the thesis that wage Inflation has been the
primary cause of price inflation through most
of the postwar period.

In regard to whether price Incresises
followed wage boosts or vice versa, the
article makes this comment:

One obvious way of trying to determine
which caused which would be to measure
whether labor costs or prices moved up OrBt.
Subjected to thU test, unit labor costs seem
to have followed prices uphill through most
of the postwar years — and particularly in
those years when the inflationary heat was
most intense.

Those who take the dogmatic position
that wage increases are the cause of in-
flation should take special note of the
article's concluding paragraph:

It's clearly g<4ng to take fuller and deeper
analysis to prove or dlqirove the wage Infla-
tion thesis. For now, Clague Is satisfied with
a cautious and essentially negative conclu-
sion: "Union rates didn't always lead the
procession and aren't necessarily • major
originating factor in Inflation."

I Should note for the Recokd at this
point that Mr. Clague is Commissioner
of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and a
highly respected Government servant.

.i

8620

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

Exhibit 1
A Nsw Look at Pkicks and Wages

A veibal battle bu raged all throughout
the postwar years — both In closed negotia-
tions between unions and management a:id
In public policy debates — over the question
of Just how much wage Increases have had
to do with price Inflation. The key to the
argument Is whether or not wages have been
gaining faster than productivity

Theoretically, if productivity rises as much
as wages, then prices need not rise at all.
That's bec!>use higher paid workers turn out
proportionately more goods.

CONrUCTING VIEWS

Those who hold that wage Increases are
responsible for the price rises in the postwar
period argue that steep union pay boosts
have not always been accompanied by simi-
lar rises In productivity. What has hap-
pened, they say. Is that Industries experi-
encing only small productivity rises, never-
theless, have been forced to raise washes a.-s
much as industries with larger productivity
gains to their credit. And the result lias
been an overall increase in prices, the argu-
ment goes.

Opponents of this wage-inflation thesis
counter that the hl^h wage increases could
not spread to Industries where prodiictlvUy
gains were small if it were not for the fact
that Inflationary conditions already existed.
They also claim that workers' real earnings
actually have risen only as much as their
productivity and that higher money wages
have been necessary just to enable workers
to remain In the race with the rising cost
of living.

BLS STXTOT

The latest episode In this long-run debate
develops out of a report on productivity,
earnings, costs, and prices Ewan Clague's Bu-
reau of Labor Statistics prepared at the re-
quest of the Senate-House Joint Economic
Committee ( Business Week. May 25. 1957.
p. 52 1 .

Clague's report showed that average hourly
earnings. Includlns: fringe supplements. ros«
61 percent from ia47 to iy56. while output
per employee man-hour rose only 26 per-
cent. This fact was quickly seized upon by
a number of Washington cnrresp<.ndents is
proof that wage gains had in fact greatly
exceeded prtxluctivlty and were the principal
cause of the 28-percent price rise for non-
farm goods and services.

WAH.MINC

But Clague himself made no such interpre-
tation. And the BLS report urKes extreme
caution in interpreting the data to prove
cause-and-effect relationships 'Prices." savs
the report, "are subject to numerous in-
fluences of changing market conditions and
costs of production, and a change m pri.-e
cannot be explained by reference to any sin-
gle fact*ir, tven one as large as labor costs.
Where the flkcures indicate that prices ard
unit labor costs showed about the same
Increase, or that one or the ofher showed a
greater Increase during a particular year or
perl.Hl of years, this should be taken as a
description of what happened and not neces.-
sarlly as an explanation of what caused the
change "

Alth lugh the BLa rept)rt ducked the issue
of causes, the burden of the report— which
was clarlfled by Clague in an interview with
Business Week— cast considerable doubt on
the thesis that wa»?e inflation had been the
primary cause of price inflation through most
of the postwar period.

cause unit labor costs are affected not only
by the Increase In hourly earnings but also
by the number of man-hours required per
unit. "It Is In this sense." says the report,
"that productivity Is a crucial element In the
wage-cost -price relationship • • • the mar-
gin within which wage Increases can be
granted without Increasiha; production costs
or curtailing the amount available for other
Income payments "

Average hourly compensation Increased 61
percent from ltt47 to 1956. but unit labor
costs rose only 28 percent. And prices of
goods and services produced by those workers
Increased 23 percent over the 10-year period.
Does this establish proof of a wage-cost-
price Inflation^ Ciague argues not neces-
sarily—no more than it establishes prcxif that
wage boosts are a direct result of rising
prices.

One obvious way of trying to determine
which c.iused which would be to measure
whether labor costs or prices moved up first.
Subjected t ) this test, unit labor costs seem
to htive followed prices upniU throu»jh most
of the postwar years— and particularly in
tho.se years when the inflationary hen', w.is
most intense.

CNfT LABOK COSTS

The relevant data for studying the rela-
tionship between earnings and prices the
report liolds, is not average hourly compensa-
tion but unit labor costs An Increase in
average hourly compensation means an In-
crease in labor costs only to the extent that
U exceeds the Increase m producHvi:y— be-

WHAT HAPPIMi:!)

CL^gues study starts with 1947 because
that was the first pi^twar year In which BL3
had adequate benchmark dau on produc-
tivity The immediate postwar Inflation.
Cl.i»;ue says, w.us essentially due to the vast
liquidation of wartime savings and heavy
consumer demand for g(x>ds that weren't
available during the war At the same time.
workers who had been enjoying heavy over-
time earnings during the war, were striving
to maintain their weekly take-h.^me pav
through boosts in hourly earnings. But
Clague holds that it was the ternflc llqulda-
tlon of wartime savings and the buying spree.
rather than the boost in wage rales, that
shoved price.s up so fast in 1946- 1948.
Nothing but a serious postwar recession and
a bii< rise In unemul<jymfMU c>juld have pre-
vented that inflation, says Clague

In 1949 and 19.50. unit labor costs actually
declined to 104 5 (1947 equals 100 1 from
their 1948 level of 106 But prices moved up
from 106 5 in 1948 to 108 in 1949, and lo9 m
1950, So prices were rising m those years.
*hile unit labor costs dropped a bu

In 1951. bt>th prices and uiut labor costs
took a h\j, leap upward The reas<.n. Clague
says, was Korea, and the attempt to build
a wartime econonry in a hurrv on top of an
already fully employed peacetin.e economy.
In 1952 and 195J. both prices and labor costs
continued to move up more slowly— but labor
c.wts went f.nater than prices In 1958.
labor costs had just about drawn even with
prices ;• .r the peri.>d ihnt began in \M^
Tnen m 1954 and 1955. prices widened the
gap above labor cwsts a bit further The
reason f.>r tnis. particularly m 1955 says
Ciague. was the otuiet of the great capital
spending boom, which pvished up prices of
capi'...tl and Industrial good.s faster than
Wildes

The year 1956. however, looked like a
mod^l ,-f ccwt inflation — for pnxluctivlty
s'>..d s'.li:, average hourly compensation
climh*.d 4-, percent, and unit labor c.ats
r>'.se by the same percentage Nonfarm
price-, Dse 3 2 I>ercent — apparently pushed
there by rising unit labor costs.

MIXED REACTION

ISome economists and businessmen don't
ao.-ept Clagues evidence that Ub-r costs
h.xvp lagged behind prices during most of
the postwar years as conclusive pn>)f that
rising wages were not the chief Initiating
factor In the postwar inflationary trend
They argue that employers often put their
pri.-es up first, in anticipation of coming
wage boosts that they fei: were inevitable

Hence, they maintain. Clague's data won't
acquit the unions of the charge of bavlng
caused Inflation by forcing excesslv; wage
denmnds.

Meanwhile, labor spokesmen will use
Clague's data to show that labor's ncome
tn the pxMtwar years — measured In terms
of constant prices — has Increased cnly aa
much as the gain In actual produnlvlty,
and win Insist that fast-rising money wages'
have constituted the workers' only defense
against price hikes Induced by otht-r fac-
tors, iuch as wars, growth In public and
private debt, consumer buying sprees, and
captul spending booms.

It's clearly going to take fuller and deeper
analyses to prove or disprove the wi ge In-
flation thesis. For now. Clague Is sntlsfleil
with a cautious and essentially negatl -e con-
clusion "Union rates didn't always lead
the procession and aren't necessiirlly a
major originating factor In inflation. •

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President. I
susKest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.

The legislative cleric proceeded .o call
the roll.

Mr JOHNSON of Texas Mr Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that the
order for the quorum call be rescinded

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordeied.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
Mr JOHNSON of Texas. Mr Presi-
dent. I should like to call to the jtten-
tion of all Members of the Senat.; that
we will meet tomorrow moining at 9 30,
and that we will meet every mumir.g this
week at 9:30. in the hope that w may
be able to complete action on the appro-
priation bills which are now on the
calendar, as well as on the mutual secu-
rity authorization bill, and perhaps also
on the atomic energy treaty, in the event
it Is reported to the Senate.

Mr. JAVrrs. Mr. President, w.ll the
Senator yield ^
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yleM
Mr JAVITS. What would b.? the
Senators di.'^posltlon with respect to
committee meetings which are regularly
scheduled for those hours or siortly
thereafter^

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. They will
be handled as they are always handled
under the Senate.-? procedure. The
chairman or the ranking minority
member of the committee will a-ilc the
leadership on each side to make such
a request, or perhaps make the r«quest
themselves after clearing it with the
membership of the committee. If
there Is no objection, the committees
will be Riven permission to meet.

It Ls impossible to have committees
meeting and have the Senate voting at
the .same time. »

Mr. JAVITS. I may say to the iSena-
tor that we have been trying to hold a
meeting of the Committee on Rules and
Administration, and this will have been
the .second time that it will have been
caught by an early meeting of the
Senate, and the impossibility of g.-ttlng
any Senator to ask permission or to have
permission granted that the committee
meet to deal with some very important
business.

Mr JOHNSON of Texas. I do not
know what the Senator means by the

i

word "caught." The Committee on
Rules and Administration has been func-
tioning very effectively throughout the
years, and I have no doubt that it can
continue to transact its business.

If there is sufficient urgency to Justify
the holding of hearings, I am sure per-
mission will be granted.

The Senator's administration has an
interest In the appropriation bills and
in the mutual-security bill, in connec-
tion with which the Secretary of State,
as recently as 3 o'clock this afternoon,'
has requested action within this week, if
possible. That cannot be done if we
meet only on Monday, Wednesday, and
Thursday. We must meet early in the
morning and sit until late in the evening
to accomplish that much work.

Of course, there are times when we do
not have such measures on the calendar.

The Senator from Texas would like to
proceed with the consideration of one of
the appropriation bills this afternoon.
But under the rule an appropriation bill
must lie over for 3 days, and it cannot be
taken up until tomorrow morning. How-
ever, b^lnning at 9:30 tomorrow morn-
ing we will consider the bills, and we will
attempt to avoid what Mr. Adams, the
"Assistant President." calls a lag in Con-
gressional work.

A number of appropriation bills and
a number of other Important measures
have been placed on the calendar. The
Senator from Texas will reconmiend that
the Senate convene early and remain in
session late, with no committee meetings
being held, until we can dispose oi those
measures, which must be acted on before
June 30.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield further?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield.

Mr. JAVITS. The Senator from New
York Is only trying to ascertain from the
Senator from Texas whether in a proper
case he would be sympathetic to such a
request. I have in mind measures pend-
ing before the Conmilttee on Rules and
Administration, having to do with an
amendment of rule XXII, and which
may have some bearing on the consid-
eration of some important proposed civil-
rights legislation.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. The Senator
from New York well knows that the
Senator from Texas is the author of a
proposal to amend rule XXII. The Sen-
ator from Texas Is under no illusions,
however, about being able to amend rule
XXII before proposed civil-rights legis-
lation Is acted on, l)ecause under the
rules of the Senate, as the Senator from
Texas has previously Informed the Sen-
ator from New York, cloture would not
apply on a motion to consider a pro-
posed change in the rules, and he has no
doubt that there would be some extended
discussion of a motion to consider any
such amendment that might be reported.
The Senator from Texas expects some
one will move for action in the field of
civil ri.'hts as soon as the House has
concluded Its action, which will be in
the next few days. I do not think it
would be the better part of wisdom to
take action on any of the rules pro-
posals pending before the Committee on
Rules and Administration without full

8621

and adequate hearings or without giving
interested persons an opportunity to
state their positions, although the posi-
tion of the Senator from Texas is well
known both iil his own State and
throughout the countiry. If the commit-
tee, in Its judgment, desires to hold
hearings on the subject, and It desires
to hold them this week, and if that meets
with the pleasure of the Senate, of
course. It can be done. The Senator
from TexM will have no objection.

Mr. JAVITS. I do not wish to detain
the Senate or the Senator from Texas
with a long recital of the fact that I
have been trying for more than 2 months,
without success, to schedule hearings.
Be that as It may, I think It is sufficient
for this purpose to have the expression
of the Senator from Texas. I may add
that I know the whole country appre-
ciates the point of view of the Senator
from Texas with respect to the matter
of rules, which has been evidenced by
his sponsoring, himself, together with
the largest nimiber of Senators ever to
sponsor any such bill, a proposal for an
amendment.
I thank the Senator from Texas.
Mr. CHAVEZ. Mr. President, wUl the
Senator yield?
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield.
Mr. CHAVEZ. It happens that, under
the rules of the Senate. I am the chair-
man of the subcommittee which is
handling the largest appropriation bill
in the Senate, Involving possibly $12
billion more than the cost of all the
other departments of the Government.
We are trying to comply with the de-
sires of the leader of the majority, but
we are holding hearings — important
hearings — and we cannot rush through
In a few days a bill providing for a
budget of $38 billion.

It is my purpose to continue the hear-
ings. If it is necessary for members of
the subcommittee to come to the floor
to vote on any bill, we shall be here
to vote. But I do not want to say that
we will not meet tomorrow morning at
10 o'clock and continue the hearings on
the Defense Department appropriation
bill, which is an important bill.

It is my desire to comply with the
wishes of the Senator from Texas and to
report the bill as soon as it is impossible
to do so.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I thank my
friend from New Mexico, who is always
cooperative.

As the Senator from New Mexico so
well knows, the Conmilttee on Appro-
priations has the permission of the Sen-
ate to meet during the sessions of the
Senate throughout the year. It is the
one committee for which an exception
Jias been made.

So far as the Senator from Texas is
concerned, he is perfectly agreeable to
having other committees, meet when, in
the Judgment of the leadership and the
Senate, It is necessary for the committees
to transact business. However, the Sen-
ate now has ready for consideration four
appropriation bills. The fiscal year will
expire on June 30. These bills must be
passed and go to conference with the
other body. The conference reports
must be agreed to and adopted by both
Houses, and then sent to the President.

It Is hoped that It will be possible to
do that between now and June 30 In the
case of the 16 regular appropriation bills.
Action has been completed on only 4 ap-
propriation bills. That means there are
12 appropriation bills remaining.

Today is June 10. If we acted on one
appropriation bill a day, it would require
practically every day remaining this
month.

In addition, there is pending in the
Committee on Foreign Relations a very
important treaty which the administra-
tion Is anxious to have considered.

There is also the Mutual Security bill,
on which the Committee on Foreign Re-
lations has acted, but the minority views
on which will not be filed until Wednes-
day. No hearings, even, can be held on
the Mutual Security appropriation bill
until the Mutual Security authorization
bill has been passed. The House is wait-
ing for the Senate to act first. So these
considerations make It very Important
that the Senate convene early and stay
late.

Thus far we have avoided Saturday
sessions. Thus far the Senate has
passed some 300 measures. Thus far we
have a very creditable record. But we
must realize that we are now coming
around the last bend in the road. Be-
tween now and June 30 It will be neces-
sary for us to work overtime.

Then. If we do our job well, we will
have the months of July and August and
whatever other months may Xx necessary
in which to transact business which does
not have a deadline.

Mr. CHAVEZ. That is the very reason
why I think it is important that the Sub-
committee on Appropriations which is
handling the Defense Department bill
proceed with its hearings. As I stated
before, more money is provided in that
bill at this time than in all the other
appropriation bills combined.

We will try to comply with the desires
of the majority leader to work with dis-
patch. I do not think that even the
foreign aid or any other bill is more im-
portant than the appropriation bill con-
cerning the Department of Defense. I
hope that, if it is not contrary to the
desires of the Senator from Texas, the
majority leader, we may proceed with the
hearings and try to report to the Senate
a bill which will meet the demands of
the moment.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. There is
nothing in the mind of the majority
leader which would prevent the Senator
from New Mexico from having his sub-
committee meet mornings, afternoons,
or evenings.

The session has been rather light to-
day. There may be some yea -and -nay
votes on the appropriation bills; but in
the long history of the Senate, the Com-
mittee on Appropriations has always had
permission to meet during the sessions of
the Senate.

The Subcommittee on Department of
Defense Appropriations is a part of the
Committee on Appropriations, and It
may meet as often as it chooses and sit
as long as It d^es. I know that under
the chairmanship of the able Senator
from New Mexico, it will perform its
duty as 11 sees it.

8622

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

Mr. CHAVEZ. I know the order as to
the committee's meeting : but I still de-
sire to worlc and cooperate with the Sen-
ator from Texas.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texa.<i. The Senator
f rem New Mexico always does that.

Mr. CHAVEZ. I thank the Senator
from Texas.

ADJOURNMENT TO 9:30 TOMORROW

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, if there are no other Senators who
desire to address the Senate, then, pur-
suant to the order previously entered. I
move that the Senate stand in adjourn-
ment until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morn-
ing.

The motion was agreed to; and i^at 4
o'clock and 55 minutes p. m. > the Senate
adjourned, the adjournment being, un-
der the order previously entered, until
tomorrow. Tuesday. June 11. 1957. at
9:30 a. m.

NOMINATIONS

Executive nominations received June
10. 1957:

DiPARTUKNT or rax Kim Fobcz
Richard E. Uorner. ot Cailiornla. to be an
Aauatant Secret&ry of Uie Air Puree.

In THE Navt

Having designated in aocordance with the
provlstoDS of title 10, United States Code,
section &23i. Rear Adm. Robert B. Plrie.
United States Navy, for commands and other
duties determined by the President to be
within the contemplation of said section. I
nominate hira t«o have the grade, rank. pay.
and allowances of vice admiral while so
serving.

Vice Adm. Cato D. Glover. Jr . and Rear
Adm. James H. Thach, Jr.. United State*
Navy, when retired to be placed on the
retired list with the rank of vice admiral In
accordance with the provisions of title 10,
United States Cod*, section 5233.

In THi: Ala Fohci

The foMowlng-named officers for promo-
tion In the Regular Air Force under the
provisions of sections 8298, 8299. and 8304
title 10, United States 0;de. All officers are
subject to physical examination required by
law.

UAJOB TO LinnrKNANT COLCNXL

Line of the Air Force
Brinton. Rachel W., 21330W,
Stulb. Joeepii Q., Jr.. 773CA.
Clark, Wallace N.. 10401A.
Cheney. James S., 8336.^.
Dech. Robert W.. 7941A.
Loomer, Perry D.. Jr.. 11I37A.
Rydstrom. Jean F . 7982A.
Pawlowskl. Harold I.. 8T70A.
Ward, Joseph L., &001A.
Bruch. George D.. BOSaA.
Hannlgan. John F , 9445A
Taylor. Joe D.. 6d86A.
Kandel. Alfred. 8730A.
Selfert, Henry L.. 12702A.
CafTall. Joseph M.. 18077A.
8tubt)8, James M.. 9300A.
Williamson, PhlHp J. 11754A.
Clark. Joaeph J. F.. l25a5A.
Mangerlch. Walter E.. 8971A.
Pearson, Ralph J.. lOOQOA.
Hesler. Robert A., 6407A.
Beasley, William D.. 6443A.
B'nnett. Donald B.. 6485A.
Burns, Robert. M80A.
Phaneuf. Eugene O . «(484A.
HugheU George K.. 8514A.
Suta. Nicholas H., 6664A.
Knaus, John V.. 9155A.

Latham. WUUam R.. Jr.. 672aA.
McQulgan, Thonras H . B732A.
Wemleln. Prank A , 6733A.
Baucom. Oeor^ B . Jr . fl734A.
Sexton. Rafph B . 6737 A.
CaldweU. Herman B.. Jr . 6738A.
Zachmann. Robert P. e739A.
Lavler. Eugene C . a742A.
Cousins. OUe C , 6743A.
Cole. Benjamin H . 674AA.
Conner. William F.. 6745A.
Schmidt. Fred C, Jr., e74aA.
Asprey, William P.. 9748.^.
Fahlstedt, Alfred A , 6750A.
Howell. Ernest M., 6751 A.
Blood. Arlle J.. S753A.
Wlnebrenner. Lt5ul« B.. 6755A.
Sharp. Charles B.. 675dA.
WysocJti, Chester C. 6737A.
Reed. Vincent R., 675eA.
Baker. H.iIIls H , 6781 A
Bcgren. Stanley K . e782A.
Lynns, Ralph J . 0763.^
Taylor. WlilUm B . 8784A.
Heard. Wade C . 6785A.
Nash, Rusaell J. 8786A.
Faulk. MelTln W . 6767A.
Dowllng. James K.. 6770A.
Foster. John W. 6771A.
Becnel. Jo.seph R.. 6773A.
rtrathv Ciarltnn O . 8774A
Ha.ssenminpr, Marshall O , 6775A.
S.mnn. Bdwln H . e776A.
Egan. Paul P. O . 6777A
Jones. Ge.Ti^e P . Jr . 1R071A.
No'A-ark. Ch irlee O . 877aA.
Hoffman. Harold J . 6779A.
Hunter. James H . 6781A.
Simon. Edward R . 6782A.
Weaver. William J . e784A.
Kendrlck. Donald. 8786A.
P'.sh, Vinton A., 8787A.
Stone. Lvnn B.. 6788A
Plourd. Webster W. 6789A.
Boatrtght. Loyd A . e790A.
Dereskevlch. Alger S . 8791A.
Ulrich. Robert C . 180630.
Crowder. Pu^bert G . 6793.\.
Nestor. Joseph E.. Jr.. e794A.
C'.ertcl, Henry J. ff795A
Peafcody. Prentice B . 8798A.
Beall. Arthur W , 6797A
RawU. Charlea A . 6798A.
Warner, Cjeorj?e O. 6799A.
Buckley, RuseeU W . 6800A.
McCredle. Casslus M, 6801A.
Schott. Carl V . 6a02A.
Carlson. Ragnar L.. 6o03A.
Pllktngton, Thoma.s M . 6804A.
Bertllni?, Stephen J . 6808A.
Douglas. Gene L . 9R07A
Speer. Maurice B. 680gA
Verbruggen. George J . 8810A.
Hardy. Kermlt W, 8811 A.
'".otchey. Robert E. 681 JA.
Hannley. Vincent P. 6ai3A.
.Martin. Ralph G.. 6815A.
Coade. William A . eSl'iA
Elder, Harold W , Jr . 68 17 A.
Oyler, George C, 88 18 A.
Zohn. Bernard. SSaOA
Stanley. Gregory Q . esaiA.
Wilson. Jeraid B.. 6823 A.
Cocke. Charlea B.. Jr . 88a4A.
Koazarek, Prank A.. esaSA.
Duncan. Ivan M., 6326A.
Rector, Walter S . 6330A.
Menth. Blaine B . 8831A.
Schou, Andrew J . e'02A.
Anderson, Bernard B.. 6833 A.
Allen. John T. 6834A.
Campbell. Herbert M.. 683&A.
Lockhart. Rusacll D . 8837A.
KnabeL Lewis J, 6838A.
Moll. Robert O.. 8839A.
Dreaaer. CorneHua 3.. 6840A.
Campbell. Dick M., 6842A.
Arnold. Robert W, 6843A.
Lueke. Kenneth L.. 6844A.
Hu&key. Homer A.. 684aA,

Landwehr. Virgil H. 604dA.
Ashley. George R., 6850A.
Scales. John C. 8831 A.
Baker, Carl K , 6a«2A
Haas. Cheater R , 6866A.
Vlck, Jotin 0 . 6S58A.
Maloney, Bdward J . OBSS A.
Miller. Bdwln M . 6e«0A.
Demun. Earl E , 6&61A.
Mlneur. George E.. Jr., 6882A.
Rethman. Vincent C . 88fl4A.
Watklns. James D , 68«5A.
Brelndrt, George J.. 6886 A.
Orubaugh. Oiover P . e807A.
Grlfflth. Prank T.. a888A
Flannlgan. Ealpb B.. 68flBA.
Greene, Grovar Y . 687 lA.
Webb, Joe S, 8873A.
Stanton, George L.. 6874.A.
Hemmlnger, Georfe C , 6875A.
Johsnsen. Emeirt W , 8876A.
Karably, LottIs 8 . «Wr77A.
Jonea. James M.. MTtA.
Glenn. Charles S . 6680A.
Vega, Carl E^ 6881A.
Arnold. DLzon J . 6882A.
Schlndlcr, Wilbur J . 6383A.
Kurowskl, Walter C . 6a84A.
Barclay. Enrol D . 6SMA.
Hare, Jamea C. 6J87A.
McCarthy. John P.. Jr . 68a9A.
Brantner, Jamea A.. 8890A.
Reed. Everett G . 6881A.
Patch. Dwight D. 6S92A.
Shay. Michael. 6894A.
Thornton. William H. Jr. 8900A
Miller, Danforth P.. Jr , 6t*01A.
MarUn. Patrick J . eSOZA.
Kochel. Michael J , 8908 A.
Bowman, bam W. Jr, 6807 A.
Gainer. Hubert W . 6e08A.
King. James P . SOllA.
Gibson. Dick P. 6912A.
Jonea, Richard O . 69 ISA.
McGregor. Oris E , 891 flA
Walters. Robert W , 6917A.
Du«r. Elmer H . 6dl8A
Reed. Bdward B . 0B19A.
Leach. George S . 6fl20A.
Rogers. Woods W . Jr . 692IA.
Boyd. Edwin I . 6022A
Barber. G«<Trge A , 6925 A
SUnley. Ralph W , W38A.
Murphy. Bruce C, eoaSA.
Oustafaon, Wayne A . 6W30A.
Latane. David K., 6&32A-
Ward. Jamea A.. 6334A.
McGulre. Thomas C . 6935A.
Hill, Charles H . «9t»6A.
James. Harold C . e938A
Brunson. William P.. 6040 A.
Mannon. WULard B.. 6941 A.
Robblns. Harold W., e94iA.
Govocek. Joseph G., 6944A.
Weaver. Marvin B . 6945A.
Polivka. Emll W.. 6947A.
Newell. Edward W , 6948A.
Karas. Christopher J . 6951A.
Wagner, Carl B. e052A
Peterson. Martin B.. 6853A.
Henderson. Walton B.. 6954A.
Bowman, Frank M.. 6966A.
Martin, Charlea A . 6956A.
Osgood, Lynden T.. 6957A.
Mears. Forrest E.. 6959A.
Debons. Anthony. 6961 A.
Thompson. Lorenzo M.. 090SA.
P^rtlg. Norroan, eCMA.
Witt, Lynn B., Jr., OOOOA.
HlppensUel. Charlea R.. e9«7A.
Welaa. Sidney. 6970A.
RelfstecJt. Calvin D., 6971A.
McOee. Jowph B.. 6974A.
Rohr. Loudln L.. 8975A.
Seay. William W.. (J97flA.
Wallace, Wesley P. e977A.
Scurlock, Reagan A . 6878A.
Gllea, Melvln C. eSSOA.
Molyneauz, Stlas B. 69eiA.
Bland. Ruakln M , 6083A.
Riddle. Edmund R., Jr., 6986A.

1957

Ash. Robert P.. 8r., 8987A.
Hammond. WUllam, 6989A.

Blanco. Ira J., 6992A.
Monaco. John, Jr., 8903A.

Bruey. Thomas J.. e995A.

Barbour. Walter R., 6996A.

Berry, Gleneth B.. 6997A.

Tracy. Joseph F.. 7000A.

Gooch. Ritchie B , 7003A.

Loftus. Joseph F.. 7005A.

Tatum. William. 7009A.

Harris. Joe L., 7010A.

Caples. Robert O.. 70i2A.

Ziellnskl. Urban J., 7013A.

Lawler. John F.. Jr., 7014A.

Bero, Francis. 7016A.

Westberg. Kenneth C. 7017A.

O'Rourke. John B.. Jr . 7019A.

Cruver. Harry P., 7022 A.

Brasler. Carl O . 7024A.

Ross, William O, 7026A.

Loughran, Harold R., 7027A.

McCurdy. John W.. 7032A.

Barbel. Zeneth O, 7034A.

Tlmm. Paul A.. 703eA.

Quesada. Anthony. 7O40A.

Bcherer, John J , 7043A.

Crowder. Harlan B , 7044A.

Ransier, Harry D., 7045A.

Mcintosh, Wayne W , 7046A.

Carey. Robert H . 7047A

Parks, Richard W.. 7048A.

Mahon, August C. 7049A.

Stublarec. Michael J , 7050A.

Haaf, Arthur H, 7051 A

Connell. Leonard T., 7052A.

Skelton. Milton B.. 7065A.

Matako. George. 7057A.

Torr, Francis E . 7058A.

Sandlfer, John D.. Jr.. 7059A.

Jones, Waldo B., 7060A.

Etevltt, Ralph G., 7061A.

Davis. Jerome N., 7062A.

Berry. Edmund B . III. 7063A.

Burnett, Melvln M., 7065A.

VanDeusen, Clark B.. 7066A.

Schwartztrauber, Ernest P.. Jr.,

Williams. William M.. 7068A.

Devine. John E. 7069A.
Stone, Francis M., 7070A.
Schonka, Joe M . 7071A.
Johnson, Andrew E, 7072A. '
Raley. James A.. 7074A.
Bourgault, Samuel P.. 7075A.
Malersperger. Walter P., 7076A.
Belcher. Delbert R.. 7077A.
Battallo, Samuel T., 7079A.
McMillan. Shubal K., Jr., 7080A.
Pitts. Arthur S.. II. 7083A.
Dumont. Harold J., 7085A.
Lack, Wendell D., 7086A.
Blood Keneth E. 7087A.
Jacobson Alden D., 7088A.
Ward. George P., 7089A.
etiefel. Max A., 7090 A.
Stroud. Conley B.. Jr.. 7093A.
Jones, William D., 7094A.
Heino. Alfred V.. 7096A.
Panko. Albert R.. 7097A.
Buford. William M., 7098A,
Nelson, John A.. 7099A.
Craig. Warren Q.. 7100A.
Rogers, Carleton W.. 7101A.
Miller. Hubert K., 7102A.
Brolch. Lee A.. 7103A.
Montgomery. David P., 7105A.
Seab. Malcolm W.. 7107A.
Bradford, Oscar A.. Jr., 7100A.
Savage, Rollin R.. 7110A.
Goddard. Guy H.. 7111 A.
Baker. Frederick J., 19991 A.
SUinback, Prank P., Jr., 71iaA.
Crow. Duward L, 18061A.
Winfree, Isaac O., 7113A.
Anderson. Windsor T., 7n4A.
Gilbert, Wlllard R., 7116A.
Perkln. Irving R.. 7118A.
Cochran, Wharton C., 7iaOA.
Avery. Hamilton K., 7121A.
Weidner, Joaeph J.. 7122A.
Roeenbaum, Bert 8., 7123A.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8623

7067A.

Woodruff, Roscoe B., Jr., 7125A.

Doerr. George R.. 7 129 A.

Punderburk, William C, 7131A.

Miller, Carl L.,7132A.

McElroy, Mansell B., 7133A.

Flummer, George A.. 7134A.

Symes, Isaac M. B., 7138A.

Schultze, David R., 7139A.

Oss, Louis H.. 7141A.

McCleary, George C, 7144A.

Reid. Robert J.. Jr.. 7145A.

Hause, Milton M., 7148A.

Gramm, Raymond N., 7149A.

Dunkelberger, Vance E.,7150A.

Smith. Woodrow W., 7152A.

Schofield. Charles 8.. 7153A.

Heydon. Thomas A.. 7154A.

Stroud, Walter C. 7155A.

Bamett, Clyde H., Jr., 7156A.

Howell, John R., 7158A.

Wiener, Murray A., 7159A.

Edenbo, John W., 7161A.

Mitchell. Harry L., 7163A.

Machosek, John J.. 7164A.

Glllesby, Fred G.. 7165A.

Leetch. Donald G., 7166A.

Jenkins, Robert M.. Jr., 7169A.

Jablecki, Leon 8.. 7170A.

Kursar, August, 7172A.

Bouknecht. Roliert W., 7173A.

Dobbs. Ross E.. 7174A.

Bellman, Arthur B.. 7175A.
Parley, James V., 7179A.
Paskvan, Paul R.. Jr., 7181A.
Martin. Clyde J.. 7182A.
Parker, Stanley E., 7185A.
Bussey, Carver T.. 7187A.
Zins. William E., 7190A.
Hassemer. David W., 7191A.
Fogg, Lewis W.. III. 18069A.
Crosby, James E., Jr., 7192A.
Gaines. Robert U.. Jr.. 7193A,
Cunnlff, Paul J., 7194A.
Avriett, Giles C. 7 195 A.
Cumlskey. William T., 7196A.
Young, Franklin P., 7199A.
Hahn. Albert P.. Jr., 7200A.
Miller, Verlin A., 7202A.
Hanzel, Thomas C. 7204 A.
Button, Ervine J., 7205A.
McDanlel, Armour G., 7207A.
Webb, Rudelle B., 7208A.
Smith, Gerald T., 72 11 A.
Mather, William A.. 7212A.
Coverley, Edwin D., 7217A.
Scheible, Wilbur B., 7218A.
Humphres, Earl C, 7219A.
Childress, Peter M.. 7221A.
Anderson, Rex V., 7223A.
Flint, Raymond L., 7224A.
Little, Edward L.. 7225A.
Trearse, Albert, 7226A.
Maurel, Anthony J., 7228A.
Rivers. William J., 7230A.
Walker, Donald J., 7231 A,
Phillips, Lewis T., 7232A.
Hutchison, Leroy C, 7233A.
Davis. Thomas M., 7234A.
Ooodnelsch, Don M.. 7237A.
WUson, Walter J., 7238A.
RenXro, WUllam G., 7239A.
Gentry, Ralph P., 7240A.
Hunsaker, Ben W.. 7a41A.
Dodd, Aulevlan M., Jr., 7242A.
Atterholt, Charles W.. 7243 A.
Perry. Robert R., 7244A.
Hallmark, John M., 7245A.
McKenzle, Harry C. 7246A.
McOovern, Marshall, 7247A.
Robinson, Leo H.. 7248A.
Schott, Murry M., 7250A.
Saylor, Henry 8., 7a51A.
Burdlck, James R., 7252A.
Bruno, Sam, 7253A.
Ross, James 8., Jr., 7254A.
Daniel. Heston C, 7256A.
Tankersley, Carl R., 7266A.
Shelton, Lee M., 7258A.
Hensler, Jolin A., 7260 A.
Work, Robert K., 7361A.
Parry, Albert B., 726aA.

Tomes. Howard, 7263A.

Heck, Joseph D., Jr., 7266A.

Gushing, Arthur L., 7266A.

WlUiams, John G., 7267A.

Reed, Jack L., 7268A.

Wall, Edward M., 7270A.

Alexander, Lawrence E., Jr., 7271 A.

Oakley, Harry R.. 7273A.

Beth, Elman J., 7274R.

Meranda, Mark D.. 7275A.

Biddle, Maurice P., 7276A.

Bowers, Donald M., 7277 A.

Gueydan, James E., 727aA.

Wolf, Charles 8., 7280A.

Runyan, Samuel H., 7281A.

Barnett. Wendell H., 7282A.

Parr. Hugh M., 7283A.

Hill, Robert J., 7284A.

Hamilton, George B., 7286A.

Paplk, Conxnn J., 7287A.

Padgett, Cadman V., 7288 A.

McWhirter, Dareln A., Jr., 728QA

Harrell, Hunter H., 7290A.

Thompson, Glen W., 7291A.

Hasson, Albrt N., 7292A.

Cowdery, Burnham W.. 7293A.

Early, Charles L., 7294A.

Jensen, Dale H., 7295A.

Stevens, William P.. 7296A.

Hatten, Frank, 729aA.

Smith, John M.. 7299A.

Black, Shirley N.. 7300A.

Crowell, Dick M., 7301A.

Shelton, William M., 7303A.
Howard, Homer B., 7304A.

Myers, Lansing H.. 7305A.
Poland, Marvin E., 7306A.
Kelly, Dennis J., Jr., 7308A.
Stephens, Allen W., 7309A,
Kimtz. Chester H.. 7310A.
Wells, John P., 7311A.
Yancey, Gordon A., Jr., 7312A.
Gault, Charles E., 73 13 A.
Fleming. George T., 7314A.
Labarre, Louis J., 7315A.
Perry, Lucius A., Jr., 7317A.
Roache, Clarence E.. Jr., 7318A.
Hughes, Robert B., 7819A.
Bergmann, Charles H., Jr., 7320A.
Hereford, Joseph P., 7321A.
Martin, Rawley W., 7322A.
Worthman, Paul E., 7324A.
Campbell, Paul W., 7325 A.
Cobb, Phillip G., 7326A.
Brown, Elwln O.. 7327A.
Partridge, Lewis J., 7328A.
Locher, James R., Jr.. 7329A.
Jordan, Wallace R., 7330A.
Grierson, Walter H., 7331 A.
Towne, Raymond L., 7332A.
Andrews, George B., 73S3A.
Sommers, Norval I., Jr., 7335A.
Jackson, Loren E., 7336A.
Baker, Merlin W., 9698A.
Hyder, Ralph C, 7337A.
Baker, Roger N., 7338A.
Chadwlck, Roscoe L., 7S39A.
Angler, Prank B., 7340A.
Wagner, Harry A., 7343A.
Peeley, John M., Jr., 7344A.
Gleed, Edward C, 7S45A.
Jella, Leonard L., 7346A.
Grlfflths, Vincent E., 8r.. 7348A.
Schrack, Pred R.. 734gA.
Hergert, Thomas M.. 7S50A.
Roberts, David L.. 7351A.
Alton, Carol W.. Jr., TSSSA.
Lazenby, James E.. 7354A.
Mulloney. Daniel C. 7366A.
Cherota. Prederick W., 7867 A.
Washburn. Walter R., Jr.. 73S8A.
Svodoba, MUton J., 7369A.
Buckman, Thomas M., 7380A.
Lucia, Raymond W., 7361 A.
Brown, Raymond S., 7362A.
Davis. Thomas J., 7363A.
Morris, Wesley D., 7364A.
Nu«ent, Paul R., 7365A.
Abrams. James 8., 7S66A.
Heck, Prederick B., 7367A.
Ham, Stephen P., 7368A.

\\

8624

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

Dell. John W. 7368 A.
Sblelda, Benjamin B.. 737IA.
Rice. Carl E., 7372A.
Gillespie. Calvin E., 737SA.
Bonebrake. Robert R.. 7374A.
Harshbarger, Elmer T.. 7375A.
Blitch. Harry A.. 7S7aA.
Mehallto, George T.. 73T7A.
Sedr. William W.. 19588A.
Streeton, Jack W., 7378A.
Daughton. Glenn B.. 7379A.
Wetzel. Albert J.. 7380A.
Calhoun. Philip C, 7381A.
Blaslngame, Benjamin P^ 7382A.
Stebelton, Samuel P.. 7383A.
Plshbum. Thomaa W., 73a4A.
Jones. Russell P.. 7385A.
Legg. Oliver M.. 738flA.
Williams. William A.. 73a8A.
McKee, James T.. 73a9A.
Steerc. Samuel A.. Jr., 73flOA.
Karsokas. Benj&mls A.. 7391 A.
Ha-es, William D.. Jr.. 7392A.
Jones. Thomas Q.. Jr^ 7394A.
Desper. Dale D.. 7396A.
Koehne. George H.. Jr., 7397A.
CullUm. Felder W.. 730eA.
Plnney. William L.. 7399A.
Allen. Franklin S.. Jr, 7400A.
Johnson. Leland W.. 7401A.
Wright. Ellis W.. Jr., 7403A.
Fitzgerald. John E.. Jr.. 7404A.
Rowe. Everett C . 7407A.
Wilcox, Frank H.. Jr.. 740aA.
Lane. James R.. 7409A.
Ricks. Carlyle, 7410A.
Eakes. Raymond T.. 7412A.
Cool. Paul E., 7413A.
Baldwin. Robert P^ 7415A.
Wilcox. Roland M.. 7415A.
Jaynes. Roy A , 7417A.
Stambaugh, CUude K.. 7419A.
Talmage, Henry G . 7420A.
Irby. Juhn J.. 7422A.
Roberts. Frederick C. Jr.. 7423A.
Perran. Charles G.. 7425A.
Dedrlcka6n, Lorln R.. 7427A.
Swanke. Edwin A . 7428A.
Suddeth, David A.. 74J9A.
Jamison, Donald C, 7430A.
Conrad, John H., 7432A.
Packard. Peter L. If . 7434A.
Rohr. Louis W , 7-UeA.
Howenstlne, Kenneth K.. 7437A.
Fletcher, Arthur A , Jr , 743aA.
Munsey, Charles W.. 7439A.
PuvUck. Charles R.. 7440A.
Gillespie. John P , 7441A.
Sullivan, Edward D. S . 7442A.
Saunders. Robert S.. 18062A.
Stewart. George B.. 7443A.
Olney. Richard B.. 7444A,
Tyler, Robert A., 7445A.
Herring, Wllber G . 7446 A.
Velde. Robert L.. 7447A.
Curtis. Gilbert L.. 7448A.
Eddy. Ernest C. 7449A.
Baumgardner. Bruce K., 7451A.
Foley. Robert L. 7452A.
Sawyer. Charles W., 7453A
Moley. Charles A , 745SA.
Miles. Frederick E . 7466A.
Eck. Anthony I.. 74o7A.
Wyman, Frank M , Jr 745aA.
Snipes, Gilmer L.. 74eiA.
Call, George W , 74a3A.
Nelson. Raymond E.. 7464A.
Hubbard, Edwin W , 7465A.
Spielan. Richard, 74MA
Vanden Heuvel, George R.. 7409A.
Roesch. John K.. 7470A.
Olsson. John S , 7471A.
Crane, Vincent M., 7472A.
Denson, Harvey T., 747&A.
LlUard. James W.. Jr.. 747flA.
Hale. Richard E.. 7477A.
Smith, Leslie A.. 747aA.
Perslnger, Thomas E.. 7479A.
Edney, James S., 7480A.
Goddard. Lowell W , 74«2A.
Leahy, Edward D , 7483A.

Dem. Arthur W, 7485A.
Paige, Ronald A , 74SflA.
Payne, Jamea O, 74a(IA.
Hudson, Roland L., 74aaA.
Hovlk. Clifford 3.. 7490A.
Woody, Robert E.. 7491 A-
Fitch, Charles R., 74e2A.
Wray, Robert A . Jr., 7493A.
Brown. Harvey N . 749oA.
Hall, James N.. 7497A.
Beery, Harold F . 7498A.
Powers, Robert B , 7490A.
Boswell, Irving W.. 750QA.
Gonzalez. Horace R.. 7501A.
Richens. Kent J.. 7502A.
West, Howard B.. 7508A.
Smith. Raymond U.. 7504A.
Bailey, James E.. Jr.. 7500A.
Koser. Jack D , 7508A.
Goss. Ralph R . 7510A.
WUmot. Allan E., 751 lA.
Slpes. Richard R , 7512A.
Fellows, Walter S., Jr.. 7513A.
Booth. Robert E.. 7514A.
Wells. George L.. 7516A.
Karlln, Francis J., 7517A.
Cogswell. James S.. 7519A.
Swann, Franklin W.. 7520A.
Clary. Lawson. Jr , 7521A.
Hansen. Robert M . 7522A.
Augustine, John A , 3d, 7523A.
ElUs. Robert G.. 7324A.
Swofford. John F . 7526A.
Holmes, Capers A.. 7527A.
Stant^)n, Carroll L., 7630A.
Moon. Leo C . 7j31A.
Kendrlck, James B . 7532A.
Aiken, Albert S , 7533A.
Sisler. Orland O., 7539A.
Smiley. Bert N , 7540A.
Griffin. Loyd D , 7541 A.
Hoffman. Thev^)dore C , 7542A.
Beam, James C. 75V4A.
Rowe. Wllilam M.. 7546A.
Jarrftan. James T, 7547A.
U^luw. Ray D . Jr., 7548A.
Grass, William E., 7549A.
Wdlker. Joe. 7.t50A.
Gay, Alex H , Jr , 7553A.
O'Donnell. John C, 7554A.
Martin. John L.. Jr . 7566A.
Curtis, Robert D . 7557A.
Whitlow. Floyd B , Jr . 7558A.
MiHire, William H . 7559A^
Patch, Horace W , 7560 A.
Dunken, Allen G.. 7561A,
Duncan. R. y R . 75d3A.
Bailey. Dm W , 7564A.
Befry. Frederick D. Jr. 7565A.
Terzlaii, Rokjer H , 7567A
Humphries. Donald H.. 7569A.
Ruettgers, Juhn J . 7570A.
McLaiurhlln. William C . 7572A.
MUledge, Henry L . 7573.\.
Berg. Walter W . 7674A.
Martin, James T, 7575A.
Poncik, Victor J.. 7576A.
Victor. Henry G , 7577A
Ludwlg. Ge<T-e H . 7,579A.
McFarland, Hugh, 7580A.
White, Thomas D., 75«1.\.
Seward. Wayne J, 7583A.
R'bb, Stewart W, 75d4A.
Betts. Russell W., Jr.. 75a5A.
Rasmussen, Philip M . 7587 A.
Christie, C Phil p, 75a8A.
Elvin, Malcolm 1^,. 75a9A.
Ledr ord. Otto C , 7500.^..
Wagnnn, Manfcjid K., 7591A.
Stlnson. Lloyd H , 7592A.
Thompson. Kenneth D. 75©3A.
Lancaster. James W.. 7594A.
Andrews. Robert L., 759.SA.
Hlnchee. Robert L , 759aA.
Ehllnger, Joseph T., 7597A.
Schneider, Albert H.. 759aA.
Cottrm. Jesse F . Jr., 7599A.
Beckelman, Jack D , 7a00A.
CcK)Ke, Guy, Jr , 7601A.
Jlndrlch. Leonard J.. 7B02A.
Cook Thomas R , Jr.. 7603 A.

Jones, Pellx H . Jr., TtOLA .
Dula. Mason A., 7606A.
Wlentjes, Gerard F., 70(MA.
Wooten, Clyde C, 7«07A.
Legg, Paul A . 7608A.
Whitley, Charlea G.. 1600A.
Otten. Leonard J.. Jr., 7610A.
Engle, Robert T. 761 lA.
Jones, Lyle M . 76I2A.
Rhodes, Hugh E , 761SA.
Davis, William O , 7615A.
Mays, Ivan K., 7617A.
Classen, Thomas J., 76iaA.
Martin. Wallace S.. Jr.. 7619A.
Armstrong, George H , Jr , 7621A.
Sampson. Victor J , 7823A.
Smith. CarroU C. 76a4A.
Barnum. Robert A , 7625A.
Balkum. Earl T. 7638A.
Welch, James E . 78»A.
Board man, Robert L.. 7630A.
Best. Jack R , 7631A.
Campbell, Chester U . Jr , 7632A.
Hoffmann, Carl D., 7633A.
Hutton. Leonard J . 7634A.
Russell. Roy D.. 7636A.
Toole, Richard A . 7637A.
Ford. Louis W . 7038A.
Van de Car. Howard T . 7639A.
Parwell, Robert H.. 7640A.
Catlngton, James D., 7641A.
Ivey, William G., 7643A
Flahburne, Paul L.. 7645A.
Burcky, Max C, 7646A.
Thompson. Harry M.. 7648A.
Shackelford, Walter S . Jr.. 764flA.
Lemme, William P.. 7650A.
White, Joe R , 7e51A.
Peaslee, Jesse C . 7652A.
Vail, Hugh B . 7854A.
Bledsoe, Joseph V . 7665
Watts, Georije J , 7666A.
Robinson, William C, 7557A.
Kolander. Conrad C. Jr.. 766aA.
Otto, R(;bert C . 7658A
Bachmann, Frederick C . 7660A.
Graham. John K , 7661A.
Hijsman, Richard S , 7662A.
Kincannon. Francis C.. 7563A.
Jordan. Samuel P.. 7e64A.
Lyon, Arthur B . Jr . 7665A.
Welch. Rupert C.. 7666A.
Fryer, Milton, 7B68A.
M;irshall. Tom L., 7669A.
Lanirford, Robert L. 7670A.
Clarke, Clarence J , 7e71A.
Swanstjn. Ralph W . 7672A.
Turnbull, Juhn F , 7673A
Mansell. Morris B, Jr . 7B74A.
Marshall, Prevost. 767,'iA.
Jones, William O . 787flA.
Harmon, David N . 7677A.
Holmes, Francis S , Jr . 7878A,
Shaver, Dale A . 7680A.
Hankin. Abraham L. 7881A.
TUley, George F . Jr . 7r,82A.
Brown. Mark J . Jr . 7683A.
Oder. Frederic C E . 7684A.
Dunn. Raymond B . 7686A.
Deans, Edwin G , 7690A
Carpenter, Herrey B , 7691A
Williams, Augustus F . Jr . 7692A.
Reynolds, Andrew J , 7693A.
Duncan. Charles H , 7995A.
Tomllnsnn, Franklin B . 7«8eA.
Howie, Loren D , 7699A.
Adams. Ben M . 7701A.
Marks, Mortimer D.. 7702A.
Eigeiimann. John C , 7703A.
Porter, Clarence W.. 7704A.
Riley, Earl V , 7706A.
Harrlger, Robert L.. 7707A.
Lewis, Charlee D.. 770aA.
Cavanagh, John T.. 7709A.
Wine. Chester B . 7710A.
Munsey, Ned O., 771 lA.
Davis. Dale D . 7713A.
Ol.son, Royce G , 7714A.
McConnell. WUUam 8.. Jr.. 7716A.
Wood, Griffin H . 77ieA.
Thome. Walter B., 7717A.
OUmore, Byron a, 77iaA.

1957

Shaw, Charles a, 7719A.
Blcknell, June E., Jr, 7T20A.
Deck. H. A.. 7721A.
Bather, Harler. mSA.
Teberg. Daniel K.. 77a3A-
Mead. Henry L.. 7724 A.
Service. Robert H., 7735A.
Carhart. Thomaa M.. 77r7A.
Hammer, Elmer H.. Jr., 772flA.
Prouty. Leroy F., Jr^ 7730A.
Minor, Marlon E.. Jr.. 7731A.
Huffman, Roy B., 77S2A.
Williama. George V.. 77S3A.
Brantley. Joeeph R.. 7784A.
Whitney. William J., TZSSA.
Brundrett, Warner M^ 7737A.

Paschall, Benjamin F.. HI. 7758A.

Edwards. Allen. 7739A.

Gwynn. Philip S., 7740A.

Merten. Donald H.. 7741A.

Ricks, Thomas J., Jr.. 7742A.

Williams, Jack W.. 774aA.

Cole. Frederick J.. 7744A.

Wilkinson. Richard Q, 7745A.

Moody. David B.. 7747A.

Slmpron. Robert T.. <«i. 7740A.

Kronauer. Clifford J., Jr.. 7750A.

Phlllipa. Robert B.. 775LA.

Wheeler, Joe D.. 7754A.

Bhahan, Michael E.. 779ffA.

Zwelfel. Everett E., 7758A.

Gattls, Robert H., 7759A.

Stealy, Edward J., 77«J0A.

Graham. Gordon M.., 7781A.

Abbotts. LToyd F^ 7T82A.

McClellan. Howard W., 7783A.

Cooper. Talmadge D, Jr.. 77B4A.

Busby. Douglaa R., 7767A.

Hurt, Wilbur W.. 7768A.

Eberta, Major D., 77e9A.

Sapp. James F., 7770A.

Mehaffey, Nathan G.. T7T1A.

Fowler, Thomas R.. 7772A.

Salzarulo, Robert L., 7773A.

Harbour. David F., 7775A.

Nelander, Frederick J., 7778A.

Todd, Robert F.. 7777A.

Colaon, William B^ 777tA.

Cox. Luclen K.. 77T9A.

Wilde. Linn E.. Jr.. 7780A.

Redman. Russell L.. 7781A.

Langdale. Robert H.. 7782A.

Powers. Kenneth H., 7783A.

Kelley. Wendell J.. 7784A.

Lewis, Glen. Jr.. 7785A.

Nelson. Conrad W., 778eA.

Ponder. Paul H.. Jr., 7787A.

McClellan, John B., 7788A.

Burnatedt. Lloyd «.. 7780A.

Land. Wllllani U^ Jr.. 7700A.

Wegenhoft. Victor C. 779LA.

Nance. Nlchotes H^ 77B2A.

Broome. William B.. Jr.. 779aA.

Wellborn. Jeffery O.. 7795A.

Newton, George L.. Jr.. 77WA.
VanPatten, laaac T.. ni. 7797 A.

RomsUd. Rolf N, 7798A.

Scarbrough. Ben A.. 7799 A.
Hood. John R., Jr.. 780QA.
Jacobsen. Otto F.. 7801A.
Price. WlUUm G., III. 7802A.
Ledbctter. Henry F.. Jr, 7804A.
Nichols. Edward If.. Jr.. 78Q6A.
Bryant. Perry K, 7804A.
Nielsen, Melvln J.. 7808A.
Spawn. Douglas W., 7S09A.
Hutchinson. Leonard H., 7810A.
Dodge. John A., 7811 A.
Ferguson. Clay V. D, 181SA.
Witters. Arthur O., 7814A.
Williams. Walter P. TBISA.
V.'IiJte. Jack C. 7816A.
Murphy. Maurice E.. 7817A.
Oppy. Paul F., 78iaA.
Waslenko, Michael. Jr„ 7819A.
Brocklehurst, Robert L.. 7«aiA,
Baron, Oakley W, 7822A.
Ingram. James W., 78a3A.
ONell, George K.. 78a4A.
Bausser, William J.. 78a6A.
Flndley. Harry W, 78aeA.
Deer, Howard S.. 7837A.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8625

cni-

-543

Curtla, Ferd J.. 7828A.
Gaff, John W, Jr., 78a9A.
Bjorlng, Robert O., TBSIA.
Dlltz. Thee R.. 7»aA.
Wright, Frank K, 78S3A.
Peck, Douglas M., 7834A.
Ralston, Wilson, 7838A.
Berkow, Joseph J., 78S9A.
Hagln, William V.. 7S40A.
Underwood, Herba>t A.. 7841A.
Buckey, OeOTg* R.. 784aA.
Abel, George L.. 7a4fiA.
Lennox, Weston If.. 7a46A.
Atkinson, William J, 7847A.
Slocumb, Clyde B.. Jr.. 7848A.
Martin. Gene I., 7849A.
Robinson, John 8., 7850A.
Keefe, Thomas W.. Jr., 7851A.
Vanpelt. James H., 785aA.
Davidson, Wllilam H, TSSSA.
Rhees, Gilbert N, TSSeA.
Walsh. Howard B., 7857 A.
Slier, Fred L., 785aA.
Gilmore, James D, 7859A.
Couser, Walter J.. Jr., 78tt>A.
Miller, William C. 7a61A.
Kyer, Fred E., 786aA.
Nesmlth, Joseph P., 7864A.
Kinney, George W., 786&A.
Demal. Nlchoiaa, Jr., 786fiA.
Farnell, Leland B.. Jr., 7867 A.
Hook, Leo. 7868A.
McGinn, John L^ 786aA.
Fisher, Carl B., 7871A.
Brown. Harold R., 7872A.
Knepper. Frank B., Jr., 7876A.
Player, George C, Jr.. 7878A.
Scepansky, Joe T, 7879A.
Erlenbusch, William C, 7860A.
Hill, John M., 7881A.
Hawkins, Harry L.. 7S83A.
Furchner. Fred T.. 7884A.
Morgan. Roy, 7887A.
Metcalfe, Lee E.. T88QA.
Hotte, Eugene T, TaBQA.
Smith, Raleigh IX. 788LA.
Bird. Charles H., 788aA.
McKlnnis, Burdette J.. 788aA.
Willey, Carl R., 78B5A.
Dawson, Peter P., 789flA. -
Grubaugh, Boyd L.. 7897A.
McCord, Etobert R.. 7899A.
' Lollar, Clarence L., 790QA.
Price, Jack C, 790LA.
Smith, B. J, 7908A.
Keppler, Charles ».. 7906A.
NefBnger, George Q., 7906A.
Kelley, Gordan M., 7»07A.
Fergtison, Robert 1., 7908A.
Thompson, John A., 7909A.
Malone, Frank C, 7910A.
Hall, Robert W., 7911A.
Hanlng. William P.. Jr.. 7912A.
Hlghley, John N.. 791SA.
Carmody. Richard J, 7914A.
Luehrlng, Verl D, 7915A.
OUara, Richard K., 7918A.
Hench. Ralph ▼.. 7917A.
Welch. George C. 79iaA.
Crtstadoro. Mairlca A, Jr„ 793QA.
Freund, Albert J, 7a21A.
Sandman, Qeatge K., T92UL.
Tyler, Morgan fi, Jr., 79a3A.
Bodine, Francia 8., 7BQ4A.
Summerfleld. LcsUe F.. IdMA.
Beale, William H., Jr., 792&A.
Milch, Lawrence J., 7929A.
Royalty. WUDam a. Jr.. TMIA.
Snow. David J., 799aA.
Watklns, Loy E., TSSSA.
Welch, Dan-ell O.. 79S4A.
Snyder, Vincent L, 7fla5A.
Larrabee, Vance H., 7936A.
Cappellettl. PtancU H., T987A.
Pearsall, David W, 7938A.
Kenwirtby, OmtIm C, Jr^ 7M9A.
Houston, WUllam M., 7940A.
Anzelon, George J., 7942A.
Sharp, WUUaa X^ 7MSA.
KeUey, Keith P.. 7M4A.
SlanU. Pete C. ISMOA.
Carney, Arthur W., 7B4AA.

McKean. Harold L., 7f47A.
Williams, Lawrence D., 7S5aA.
Bell. Charles A., 796X4.
Parrls, Howard L., 795SA.
Telzrow, Thomas »., 79MA.
Tyler, John T., 7966A.
Brlggs, Arthur R, II, 7»6«A.
Hall, Mark B.. 7957A.
Elwell, Robert L.. 796BA.
Cavender. John P. K., 790OA.
Trail, Charles D., 79eiA.
Fuller. Herbert K., 796aA.
Remaklus, John P., Jr.. 7964A.
Klrby, Robert L., 7965A.
Tlsdale, Paul A.. 79«7A.
Home. John E.. 79e8A.
Turner, Lewis M.. 7M9A.
Shirley, Fred A., 7971A.
Poster, WllUam W., Jr., 7972A.
Johnson, Prank E., 7974A.
Walrath, Richard D., 7975 A.
Prodgers, John D., 797eA.
Conner, Hal C, 7977A.
Jollssalnt. John M.. 7807 A.
Toler, Rlcmu^ O.. 7978A.
Claytor. Roy P., 7979A.
Avery. LyndaU J.. 7984A.
Harrison, Morgan R.. 798SA.
Westbrook. Jasper A., 7987A.
Sherman. Lensnf. 7988A.
Wilder, Harlan C. 7989A.
Spencer, Gordon A.. 7991A.
Jensen. Ralph A, 7992A.
Stltt, Austin W.. Jr.. 7994A.
Nelson, Marshall E., 7996A.
Smith, John R., 7999A.
Newman. Ralph A.. 8Q0IA.
Cook, Emery A., 8004A.
Fitter, Philip A., 8005A.
Schuknecht, Lowell A-. SOOeA.
Meyer. Charles &., 8008A.
Deegan, Leo P., 800SA.
Evans, Calvin E., 8010A.
Reardon, John C. 8011A.
Bloom. Edmimd S, 80I2A.
Walker, George T., 80I3A.
Chrlstman. Harry W., Jr, 80I4A.
Frlsbee. John L., 8015A.
Smith. Alan B.. Jr, 80I6A.
Sowers, Gordon T., 80I7A.
Thompson, Francia N., 8018A.
Tauscher. Robert E, 8019A.
Freeman. David L.. 8Q2aA.
Ferguson. John J, SOaiA.
Shivers, Julitis D.. Jr., 8022A.
Dregne, IrwTn H., 80e23A.
Franz, Fred J., 80a4A.
Krause, Lester L.. Jr., SOOSA.
Bland, John W.. 80a6A.
Burke, Sylvester V, SOaSA.
Snyder, Edgar E., Jr.. 80a9A.
Webb. Allen S.. 8030A.
Parrar, John W., 8031A.
Blair, Samuel V., SOSaA.
Peterson. Harry O, 8033A.
Howell. Wlnf red D., 8034A.
Anderson. Delynn B.. 803SA.
Geary. Leo P.. 8087 A.
McClure. John C, aoatA.
Carter. Roger IL. Jr, SOSdA.
Sherwood, Joseph H, Jr.. 80404.
Ryan. John L., 8041A.
Fuhrmelster, Ralph 8.. Jr, 80424.
McComb. William J, SMSA.
Kendall. Paul C. 8044A.
Strlckler, Marshall H, 8M7A.
Moffitt. Pranklyn X.. 80484.
Tllley, Thomas M, 80494.
Lathan. Allan 4., 80604.
Bird. Clement W, 80614.
Small, 4rthur. 80624.
Reed. Henry a. 00634.
Sullivan, Woodruff T, Jr., 80644.
Radetsky. Harold 4, 80654.
Blum. Edward P.. 80604.
Omohundro. Thomas T, 80674.
Hagreen, Robert J.. 80064.
Harris, William B.. 00694.
KeUy, Converse B., 00004.
Rlva, Daniel P, 80614.
Ratbbun. Edward L, 80824.

8626

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

tThrlch. 0«or^ A.. 8064A.
Jonea. Davtd B.. 8065A.
Roth. John T C . 80«eA.
Talnch. Alexander 8.. 8088 A.
ParaonB, Jame« W.. 8069 A.
Roberton. Eddie J.. Jr . 8070A.
Brooking. George B.. 8071A.
Bauer. Bobert R.. 807aA.
EXjuglaa. Paul P.. Jr.. 8073A.
Slocum. Paul J., 8074A.
Ritchie. William D.. 8076A.
Roddy. Edward F., 8077A.
Durbeck. Arthur O.. 8079A.
Mitchell. Mack A., 8080A.
Renwlck. Donald D.. 8081A.
Morse, Donald M.. 8082A.
Klein. Raymond P.. 8084A.
Walah. Martin R.. Jr.. 8085A.
Amann. John R.. 8086A.
QulUen. Monroe C. 8087A.
WUletts. David L., 8088A.
Ramsey. Glyn W , 8089A.
Calhoun. William R . Jr.. 8090A.
Carey. John A.. 8091A.
Short. William W.. Jr.. A8092A.
Cole. George P . 8093A.
Elliott. William W.. 8094A.
Ellington. Edward H . 8095A.
Marks. Leonard P.. 8096A.
Dunham, William D.. 8097A.
Cook. Walter V . 8098A.
Little. James W . 8099A.
Ryden, Donald A.. 8101A.
PhllllpB. Herbert L.. 8102A.
Stellenwerf , WUUam A.. 8 104 A.
Johnson. Charles W . 8105A.
Holcombe. Richard E.. 8106A.
Cruikshank, Arthur W.. Jr . 8107A.
McClatchy. Howard L.. 8109A
Hawkins. WUUam B.. Jr . BllOA.
Price, Robert F.. 8111A
Ogleaby, Sam R.. Jr.. 8112A.
Sylvester. Joseph J.. 8113A.
Whlttaker, Roy E.. 8115A.
Stanabury. Jay W.. 8116A.
Roby, Albert W., Jr. 8117A.
Napier. John O.. 81 18A.
Gregory. James M. Jr . 8119A.
Jose. Elmer H.. Jr . 8122A.

Halloran. Robert P.. 8036A.

Yundt. Robert W . 8124A.

Nye. Robert M C . 8125A

Williams. Charles C . 8126A.

Aenchbacher. Arthur E.. 8127A.

Brown. William P . 8128A.

Robinson. Edgar A . 8129A.

Fahey. James M . 8131A.

Thorne. James H . 8132A.

Carlton. Robert N . 8133A.

Carpenter. David E , 8134A.

Bahn. Gilbert F.. 8135A.

Hetzel. Robert^.. 8136A.

Gardiner. ?•«! E . 8137A.

Foley, Robert P , 8139A.

Moore. William P . 8140A.

Hutchison. Jacob A.. 8141A.

Conklln. Howard E.. 8142A.

Wilson. James A.. 8143A

Teubner. Harold C , 8145A.

Wallace, Eugene D.. 8148A.

Heece, Richard D.. Jr . 8147A.

Joyal. PhlUp B . 8149A.

Shook. Harold O . 8151A.

CranflU. Nlven K.. 8152A.

Ghram. Elmer P.. 8153A.

Booker. Brooks W . Jr , 8155A.

Rfjgers. Robert C. 8156A.

Bones. James C.. 8157A.

Maher. WUUam L.. 8158A

Robertson, Raynor E. 8160A.

Candy. HUUard L., 8161A.

Lewis, Richard C. 8162A.

Fulcher. Stanley A.. 8164A.

Neal. Philip A.. 8165A.

Jefferson. Harold D,, 816flA.
Crosland. Roy T . 8167A.
Ard. Roswell W., 8168A.
Beahan. Kermlt K.. 8169A.
Lewis. William C . 8170A.
Martin. Fred A., 8171A.
McAbee. William H.. 8172A.
Couway, Victor C. 8174A.

Lee. Carl C. 8 175 A.
Lanford. William A.. 8176A-
Oliver. Ralph L., 8177A.
Frlley. Kenneth O . 8178A.
Larson. Harold J.. 8180A.
Cook. James R . 8182A.
Parsons. Irvin M . 8183A.
Hodge, Dexter L.. 8183A.
Jcmigari. William L.. 8186A.
Weltzin. Richard F . 8187A
Huntley. William H . Jr.. 8188A.
Stell. Glenn A . 8189A
Pickett. Lawrence J . 8190A.
Greene. James B . 8192A.
Dale. James R. Jr. 8193A.
Zeigler. Jack S . 8194A
Hey. Winston S. 8195A.
Jolly. David C . 8198A.
Dieffenderfer. James C , 8197A.
Parsons. Samuel P . 8198A.

Desportes, John A . 8199A.

Coleman, Kenneth D , 8200A.

Estes, Chandler B , 8202 A.

Brown, Harold L . 8203A.

Merrill. Charles T, 8204A.

Glaser, Leonard T . 8205A.

Knox. George L.. 8206A

Dillon. Stephen P . 8209A.

Hester. Thomas J . 8210A.

Hardin. Ernest C. Jr. 8211 A.

Oglesby Stuart R , 3d. 8212A.

Blckford, Jack C. 8213A.

Oreathouse. Harry S. 8214A.

Davis. Glendon V. 8215A.

Butler. Earl H . 8217A.

Mvers. Henry V , 8219A.

Meeker. Everett R . 8220A.

HoweU. Henry R , Jr . 8221A.

Long. Joseph E , 8222 A.

Medical Corps

Oden. Lewis H., Jr . 19950A.
Espey, James G . Jr . 21757A.
WaUace, Henry G. 21838A.
Flxott. Richard S. 21837A.
Lechausse. Ralph M. 20818A.
Hederick. Rogers. 19952A.
Ayars, Laurence S, 21840A.
Norcross. John A , 21759A
McKaig. Malcolm C . 19953A.
Quashnock, Joseph M.. 25487A.
Arm-strong. WUUam R . 21839A.
Fredlanl, Alexander W , 19236A.
MlUer. Edward S , 19576A
Rhoades, Gordon H , 22.393A.
Townsend. PYank M , 20819A.
Dorris, Henry C . 19282A. r

Mann, Joseph L . 2O820A.
White, Fletcher H . 26e90A.

Katzberg, Arthur J . 22394A.

NuttaU. James B. 19239A.

Davis. David W , 26729A.

Mears, Claud M, 2 1841 A.

Hardy James T . 26731A.

Velt, John P. A , 27973A.

Burnett. Jack F. 24107A.

Strub, GUes J . 19241A

Rothe. Courand N . 18251 A.

Webb. HamUton B.. 19307A.

Keeley, WUUam T , 20821A.

Alexander, Charles P., 19303A.

Patterson. Robert A., 19250A.

Chapman. Jules B . 22981 A.

Eggellng, Ian N J. 19311A.

Defrles, WiUlam A.. 19254A.

Jernlgan, James P.. 21722A.

Smith. WUlard H.. 27974A.

L'nderwood, Edgar H . Jr . 19262A.

Grelder. Lester S , 25459A.

Park. Oakley K , 20823A

Larson, Thurman A., 19314A.

Stuart. l.awrence D. 26692A.

Collins. Thomas A.. 27483A.

Stelnkamp. George R . 24108A.

Andrew, Samuel E . 27485A.

Martin, Archibald G M., III. 22543A.

Lett. James E , 19258A.

Schlechter, John F , 1930OA.

Karmany. WUUam H. 21724A,

Turner. Edwin W., 24646A.

Graham. Wlstar L.. 24185A.

Wledeman, Goeffrey P., 19264A.

Davis. James M , 193C9A.
Cox, PhUlp A , 19315A.
GoM. Frank A , 19259A.
Ellingson. Harold V.. 19235A.

Dental Corps
Monaco. Salvatore L.. 20005Aj
Osbom. Ewalt M.. 18909A.
Long, George A.. 18905A.
Zieger, Karl O., 18906A.
Jones. Thomaa K.. 19744A.
Avenell. Rollln C . 18940A.
Johnston. Leonard 8. Jr. 19743A.
Elwell. Kenneth R . 18903A.
Llghtner. Lee M . 18923A.
Hester. Warren R.. 18919A.
Smith, Lloyd S , 189a9A.
Gordon, George D. 19627A.
Clifford. WUUam B.. 18920A.
Senn. WUUam W . 18941A.
Ltnig. James E . 18934A.
Mohnac. Alex M. 18921A-
R.xiney, John E, 18927A.
McEVoy. John R., 18907A.
Rock, George W , 18953A.
Johnson. Franklin A.. 18917A.
Kane, John P, 18931 A
Harris, Norman O. 18937A
Coombs, Robert L , 18908A.
Kariman. Jules D. 18918A
Benhart, Sherwood F , 18926A.
Briiokreson. Kendrlck. 18932A.
Reese. Wallace K . Jr.. 18942A
Thornberry. Wayne W., 18957A.
Harley. WUUam M.. Jr.. 19816A.
Kephart, Norbert C. 18914A.
Crofut, Vincent E . 1892ZA.
Massey. John T . 18959A
Armstrong. Russell H. 19911A.
Gibson. Jeweph R . 18912A.
Schulte, George N . 18913A.
MlUer. Ernest L.. 18915A
Pugnler, Vincent A . 18928A.
Butler, James M.. 18935A.
Myers. Warren C. 18958A.
Leonard. Leo J.. 18954A.

Veterinary Corps
Gorman, Lester J , 18999A.

Medical Service Corps
Nielsen, George L.. 19438A.
Payne, Robert B , 19439A.
Crowell. Gene W., 19440A.
Thomas. Frederick W.. 195«4A.
Mclnernev, James J., 19441A.
Haines, Charles C . 19442A.
Streeter. Russell E, 19443A.
Waters, John J . 19444A.

Surse Corps
Daniel. Margaret E, 21919W.
Evans. Clarrtta, 20918W
Bryant, Frances L.. a0945W.
Slattery. Lucile C, 21965W.

Medical Specialist Corps
Lawrence, Dorothea M.. 21184W.

Chaplain
Rogers. Vernon A.. 18770A.
EUenbogen, Edward. 18771A.
Oelgel. Francis G . 18772A
Montcalm. Rnsarlo L. U . 18773A.
Sullivan. Jeremiah E.. 18775A.
Baumgnertner. Martin W . 18778A.
McCandless. Paul C. 18780A.
Partln, Delbert C . 18781A.
Duhan, Henry. 18782A.

CAPTAIN TO MAJOB

Line of the Atr Force
Hammond, Fred B . Jr . 19774A.
Blrnbaum. Myron L . aOOISA.
Higglns, Fred J , 20019A.
Dick.wn, Donald C , Jr . 21430A.
Green. John O , 24260A.
Berry Cooley C . J0020A.
Yandala, Oust J . 19775A.
Mlchels. Robert W . 19783A.
Vague, Harold R . 22991A.
Elchner, Leonard. 19776A.
Murray, Francis P.. 21437A.
Rowland, Dwight R . 20023A.
Horllck. Walter I.. 23180A.

n

1957

CONGA£SSIONAL RECORD — ^NATE

8627

Eberhart, PrancU C^ 191tOA.
Portrum, Peter. IB77EA.
Bandy, George R., aOOSLA.
ThomassoD, Samuel M.. Jr., 3002SA.
Gold. Morton J^ 20034A.
Ooodwyn. Marrln W^ SOOSQA.
Ensley John J.. 2I778A.
OT>onnelI, wmiam J.. a0574A.
Shawhan. Zac O, a057fiA.
Pulling. Barton 8.. 22S0OA.
Donahue, John J^ 30038A.
Hogan. Raphael J,, I9784A.
Delaneld. Deen X^ 3002eA.
Schulte, George A.. aOOMA.
Wilson. George iL, IITTIA.
Pettltt. Bert E. Jr, I7B88A.
Llneham. Thomas U.. Jt, 181 I2A.
McGowan, Samtiel B^ 20573A.
Price, Robert H^ 205T1A.
Slade William A.. 30S7SA.
Taylor. Charles K.. Jr.. I8II3A.
OuUfoyle. William A., 20029A.
GUnes. Carroll V . Jr.. 20STBA.
Taylor. Jay J.. 20980A.
McAnally. Paul B. SOSOIA.
Woolf Simpson M.. 20909A.
Yuslevlcz, John J., 2098XA.
Kuehl. Albert R , 2143CA.
Avise. Herbert J.. 18114A.
Eagle. Comly J.. 181! 5 A.
Smith. Donald H.. 19782A.
Yeager. Paul M.. 181ICA.
Holland. BlJ!y 8 , 21781A,
Fowler. Oecar F.. 209e3A.
Pierce. Russell K. Jr.. 181 18A.
Nole. Jack D.. aOSSflA.
Buchta Joseph. 2009eA.
Frizzle. Bernard B., ai442A.
Gruber. Kenneth W.. 20fl28A.
Hill. Marcus L.. Jr.. aOOaSA.
Gallagher Rial F.. XOtmA.
Brown. Jack R., 2069tA.
Stewart. Walter C, Jr., 30099A.
Simpson. Rmeell R., 19985A.
Dotaon Herbert P., Jt.. a0667A.
Myers. Andrew J.. Jr., 3070BA.
BrlnaoD. William L, 181 I7A.
Ecklund Eufene. aOOOOA.
Melucas. Paul J.. aOMOA.
Hurlburt. Dana P., 18119A.
Kemerling. William E.. 314«0A.
Johnson. Arthur H.. a3«tMA.
Urqubart. Charles T., Jr., aO504A.
DeaauBsure. Hamilton, 15486A.
Jewell. Malcolm B.. 205e8A.
Johnson, George A., 30i73A.
Schmidt. Howsrd R., 18193A.
Staples, Johnston R.. a0678A.
Wilson, WiUlsm W,. 33671A.
Kelley, Carroll W., aaOMA.
Mlnow, James W.. 23661A.
Wilson. Richard 8.. ISiaiA.
Jensen, Lloyd K., aO(B4A.
Harmon, William A., ai498A.
Davis. Bruce, ISiaOA.
Case, Richard D., 30040A.
Talbot. George X., 18ia«A.
Luber, Vernon K., 18137A.
Peterson. Howard W., a4307A.
Lane. Joe V.. 25454A.
Jones, William M., ao041A.
Adcock. James K., a0689A.
Tates, John H. a0O41A.
White. Boyd B., aOCaOA.
Wendt. WilUrd A^ a06a&A.
Light, Herbert M.. Jr. ISiaBA.
Joyce, Daniel O. a5«05A.
Perry, Jaoiaa W., a0673A.
Blanck, Eugene L., ai433A.
Boutwell. Bufus C^ Jr^ aoOSSA.
Sandvlg. Kenneth L.. aOfiOSA.
Frazier, Max E., 2146«A.
Vogler, Alfred P^ ao«70A.
Montour, OUbert K., L9790A.
Mitchell, CollUw P.. SSSTOA.
Wine, Joseph B.. Jr., 187atA.
Morton. Walter P.. A.. 1813BA.
Prince, Robert A, air7aA,
Kelly, Charles K^ 2aB95A.
Locklear, Jamss Q.. 1&1S3.A.
Rutherford, Richard T^ 18134A.
Burnett, Elvln E., aO0OlA.

Kohrman. KLwood M.. a0602A.
Llttlewood. TbfMdore P^ 206CZA.
Pa^rell. Thomas D, leaoOA.
Rapbun. Leland R.. IffiaOA.
Sllliman. Jansea CL. 338MA.
Dolron. Claude J.. Jr.. aOS98A.
Greenspun, liocrls J^ 2K32A.
Moehle. Charles F., ISiaiA.
Petkiis, Walter JL, 236iaA.
Smith. Gayle L., 20683A.
Syphers, Victor K^ a4318A.
Greene, Sidney, a0658A.
Peters, Prancla D.. Jr., 18137 A.
Bray. Leslie W.. Jr, 1S136A.
Bush. Frederick K^ 30643A.
Hand, P. Ned. ISTSgA.
Splro, Bexiuud. 20627A.
Rath. Leland J., a0620A.
Mandlna, Sidney R., 18I25A.
Gilpin, Harry IV. 18ia4A.
Allen, Nelson. ail^lA.
Weddle. Walter M^ 30034A.
Henry, Mervln L^ aOAMA.
Monaco, Anthony W^ Jt'^ 20605A.
Huke, Theodore C. 20027A.
Moore, Jack K., 18I3&A.
Hanton, John T.. ISISSA.
Gaertner, Adolph, Jt^ aoOOSA.
Wler, Charlie Y, 21785A.
VanHoy, Leslie B, 22645A.
Smith, Bennle C, I8I4IA.
Busha, George P.. a0628A.
Williams, Wnson B.. 30888A.
Long. Bobert P, I814ZA.
Glover, Jerry C, aoeSBA.
Latella, John J^ 30032A.
Alexander, Ernest L.. 18143A.
Steves, Walter T.. 22581A.
Craft, William C^ 30M3A.
Bobbltt. Aubrey IC. 206MA.
Clay. Richard L^ 22847A.
Warren, Josepb B^ 33586 A.
Lunsford, George IC. 22(H6A.
Baleskl, John J., Jt^ 25490A.
Willianu, Paul E., 35501 A.
Bridges, John L, 22643A.
Egender, Herbert P., 34317A.
Nlemczyk, Julian hL. 30671A.
Sharp. Stuart M^ 30639 A.
Gaslewicz. Sigmund L, 23994A.
Blanton, Franklin D.. 2I458A.
Bohannon. James R., Jr^ I8I46A. ,
Cllsham, Winston H., 33618A..
PhilUps. Lowen C 18050A.
Hall, Harvey P., 30674A.
Bams, William P.. 20630A.
Holt, Garland E., 30607A.
Mills, Clarence H.. 33e5aA.
Ezell, William O., 3264gA.
Degennaro, Carlo N^ aoSTOA.
Krysakowskl, Joseph B., 1S791A.
Henry, David W. Jr.. 30590A.
Kahn, Leroy, ai787A.
Becker, Robert H., a4S18A.
Delbeccaro, Vincent J.. I9778A.
Williams, Lawrence. I8IS3A.
Murray, John K.. 33656A.
Blount, Buford C, 17699A.
Doe, Irving C, 18155A.
Mathews, James E., 20Q21A.
Smoak, Andrew W^ 33853A.
Muldoon. James E^ Jr.. 33651A.
Pitts. Morris B., 355Q3A.
Leavick, Franklin M.. I3396A.
Jones. Ralph P.. 33734A.
Hale. Morris A., ai79SA.
Borders, Charles W, I814SA.
Casale, Richard S.. 28159A.
Trabb, Ralph, I9T93A.
Jones, Donald A.. I8157A.
Aust. Abner M.. Jr.. 30e31A.
Parker. Jack, 26430A.
Hutchinson. Paul E^ 18158A.
Schrelber, Edward A.. 13401A.
Porter, Fletclisr S^ aaOTSA.
Chapman, John M.. Jr.. 17700A.
Herrera, Alfred C, 20a0ftA.
Mandros, WUUhb J, 206904.
Chew, JdhM C, 25411A.
Gibson. Charles A., Jf^ 1S47QA.
Hawes, Warren B.. IffieOsA.

Reedo-, William D^ 181S1A.
Kelly. James W^ ZtMOA.
Bush, Russell Zi., 23654A.

Kohl, Don R., 33g85A.

Sims. William M, Jr.. VtSKK.
Segura, Wiltz P^ 2388IA.
Collins. Perry T, I8I68A.
Parr, John W, 200S0A.
Gehrl, Donald H., 37717A.
Davies, Jotm V.. 21780A.
Hamilton, Calvin L, t81S9A.
Vohs. Lester J, aseTOA.
CHara, David B^ 3019A.
Snyder, Earl A, 21446A.
Reiss. Leonard. 2I439A.
Kester, Clifford D, I8163A.
Taylor, Joseph T.. 2081 lA.
Uen, Arthur M.. 22574A.
Hoban, Richard M^ 23858A.
Schuerlng. Alvin O.. 18ieeA.
Traylor. Horace C, Jr., 18I6SA.
Btroff. Michael J, Jr.. 2QSttA.
Goppert, Jean Q., 18167A.
Reuteler. Bruce K, ISISaA.
Dill, Glenn B, Jt.. a26I&A.
Davidson. B. H., 2257SA.
Dunn, Buel A., 23701A.
Taylor, Jinunie, 22572A.
GlUesple, Keith L.. 33S7eA.
Barter. John W.. I8208A.
Miller, Sumner S, 20037 A.
McDonald, WITllam T, 22673 A.
Kouglas, George C, 23882A.
Shaddiz, Winans C. IS804A.
Dtmiontier. Louis D.. 18171A.
Montgomery, Joe S, 30633A.
Bass, Robert A.. 20632A.
Neal, Arthur M.. 22617A.
Gilllngham. Rowley E, 22616A.
Hubbard, Thomas P, 22SgOA.
Ayres, Prank L, 18173A.
Hagemann, Joseph A., 2265rA.
Adams, Charles J^ 22656A.
Botvldson. Charles C 13155A.
Ollphant, Stephen A, 12383A.
Romaniw, Walter, I3736A.
Olson, Howard A.. 12764 A.
Ross, Vance L., 130S0A.
Hill, Cowan S., Jt, 1S957A.
Hanna, Russell J., 1S872A.
Nanney, James T^ 181 77 A.
Boyd, Henry L.. 3365aA.
Wolfe. Charles S.. I8176A.
Harris, Elsey, Jr., 2<3tl9A.
Wiley. John C. 3I782A.
Werber, Wnilam A, 18178A.
Miller. Sidney H.. 21459A.
Nice, Albert T., 28182A.
Wilson. Elbert, Jr.. 18283A.
Craig. Robert P., 20649A.
Eubank. Graydon SL. 181S2A.
Gourley. Edwin P., 18181A.
Mills. Arthur J.. I8I80A.
Welsh, Stephen J.. 206S4A.
Gopher, Paul D.. 23fll9A.
McAllister, Warren W., 23672A.
Crosby, Samuel E., Jr.. 206I2A.
Abraham, Bruce H.. Jr.. 325914.
Lewis, Henry S,, Jr.. 19T94A.
Ernst, William J.. 20609A.
Daniel, Farias P.. 23S80A.
Craun, Leonard D.. 25491A.
Canning, Douglas 8., 20577A.
Jacobson, Richard K., 20689 A.
Halgler, Claude 8.. 24908A.
Cleary, John K. 19793A.
Baker, Marshall T., 2067SA.
Wbltenlght, Harry W., 14I82A.
King, Edwin T., 20S85A.
West, Fielding P., 2-614A.
Jones, DavM B.. 18188A.
Rood. Eric W., 22630A.
Gaenzle, Jay S., 35733A.
Gore, Granville L. 23791A.
Bandorsky. StejAen M.. 142434.
Hicks, Malcolm G., 18186A.
Anderson, George O., I8181A.
McKay, Allen P., 90818A.
Long. Paul H., a0685A.
Miller, Edgar C. a0614A.
Paul, Charles T. A., 238224.

*—

8628

Myera. George B.. 22621A.
Horey. Raymond 8.. 22593A.
Cecil. ThomM J., 238MA.
Cude. Willis A.. Jr.. 21463A.
Klordan. Daniel W.. 24327A.
Banna. Prancla P.. 18148A.
Hansen, Robert P., 18159A.
lioman. William T.. Jr.. 20669A.
Cummins. Harry T.. Jr.. 22594A.
Woodyf^Rufufl, Jr., 23655A.
Lange. Roy A.. 20690A.
Vtnc^t, Robert W.. 20575A.
Humphries. Buforri M., 18175A.
Poberson, Harvey B.. 22587A.
Alkens. Edwin C, 20035A.
Sbewan. Clifford W., 18150A.
Key. Oran R., Jr . 22589A.
WlnXree. Douglas W.. Jr.. 18278A.
Sever, James E., 20592A.
Dufault, William P.. 20680 A.
Rlstau. Siegfried E.. 18169A.
WUUs. Richard B , 14572A.
Riley. Eldon S.. 17703A.
■Veeks. Roy P . Jr., 18189A.
Eberhardt. Donald E.. 18182A.
Melton. Carl M., 18190A.
Wood, William A.. 22595A.
Fish, Bruce B., 22623A.
TYemblav. Armand L., 22624A,
Smith, Edgar H , 23684A.^
Perry WUUam E., Jr , 23673A.
Schmidt, David J . 24320A.
Sunderland. Uoyd E., 26395A.
Bennett. Henry W . 24695A.
Kells, Walter A.. 22.599A.
Johnson. Fon E . 22598A.
Catts, William G.. 23189A.
Neville. Harry W , 17704A.
Fahrney. Richard L., 18191A.
Preller. Gordon C. 18144A.
Marshall. Gerald R.. 22596A.
Nozlglla. Robert E., 23675A.
dowry. John P. 23687A.
Chamberlain, Clarence N , 23686A.
Parrar. Aubrey O.. 24702A.
Parrott. John H.. Jr . 25504A.
Matte. Joseph Z., 20615A.
Van Bloom. Jay C. 18174A.
Peagin. Luther W., 22687A.
WUborn, William T., 18194A.
Kipping. J'lseph H., 22582A.
Mulvey. Gordon E.. 24697.\.
Zwlnger. Herman H.. 26437A.
Mahoney. Daniel C. 23006A.
Birdsong. Samuel E., Jr . 21791A.
Kovach. Michael M.. 22683A.
Melvln. Robert E. 18193A.
Byrn. John S., 18196A.
Knight, Jack, 20039A.
Escue. Walter H.. 17702A,
Keeler. WUUam J.. 21783A.
Miller. John W., 18198A
Schmidt. George A.. 18202A.
Baumann. Robert P . Jr , 18203A.
Mertely. Frank. 18201A,
Beno. WUUam O., 1B20.5A.
EUzey, J Murray. 18204A.
Ralev. Theodore M.. 18200A.
Hopkins. Robert W.. 22660A.
White. Raymond E., 22661 A.
Ramisdell, George R., 23661A.
Samuelson. Dale L., 24310A.
Mattlnulv. Edwin J., 25492A.
Marshall. Sidney C, 18206A.
Cleaves. Donald H., 19282A.
Turner. Howard D . 25799A.
Green. Jack C 15015A
Adams, Gordon S.. 18186A.
Leech. Richard G . 243 12A.
McFadden, Kenneth L.. 20746A.
LouKhnan. Victor J.. 22573A.
DUiibblo. Paul, 15047A.
Daffern. Troey, 15048A
Mattlck, Stephen, 15049A.
Scruton. Albert M., 21786A.
Borbe, Alfred T., 15050A.
Graham. Nell J.. 15052A.
Upton, Thomas J.. 15053A.
Hurley. Raymond L.. 15054A.
Thomas, Richard R., 26423A.
Bales. Glenn E , 15055A.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June IC

t*

Barnes. Clarence E., Jr., 16 189 A.
Hartman. Richard J.. 15056A.
peters, Marvin L. W.. 15057A.
Fox. Bob D.. 150MA.
Falrbank, Charles E., 15059A.
Hlnkle, Arthur L , 15061A.
Colllngton, Frederick, 20663A.
Grovert, Robert E.. 22577A.
Mabrey, Thomas F , 15063A.
Upton, Julian B., 15064A.
Lozlto, Francis C , 15065A.
Blunk. John R.. 150«6A.
Mulllns. George H , 15067A.
Cox, Harold D.. 15068A.
Hardy. Nathan C , 15069A.
Campbell, Glenn V.. 15070A
Svlmonofr. Constantlne, 15072A
Jensen, Lloyd E.. 15074A.
Robinson. Lester W., 15075A.
Preston. WUUam N . 15076.\.
Chmura, Edward. 15077A.
Maloney, R<ibert A . 15078A.
Thorne. Richard E . 15079A.
Glasgow Thurman A , 15080A.
Corbln. Zane E , 15082A.
Falkenberg. Harold 3 . ISOfiSA.
Wise. Henry G . Jr . 1.S084A.
White, Alan R . 1,5085A
Melton, Ramon R , 15086A.
Plummer, John A . 15087A.
Englebretson. Robert E , 15088 A.
Heller. Richard F . Jr . 15<)89A.
Rattle, Joseph J . 15090A.
Madsen. Lawrence E , 15092A.
Morrow Craig O . 1.5094A
WUhelml. WUUam H . 15095A.
Lane, Harry W . 15096A.
Popham, Jack E . 15097A
Carlstrom, Robert D . 15098A.
Swlgler, Adam W . Jr., 15099A.
Johnson, Haddnn, Jr . 15100.\.
lannacltti, George J . 15101A.
• Leone. Joseph M.. 15102A
Andrews, Georee A , 15103A.
Waterhouse, WUUam C . 15104A.
McDap.lel. Hes'.ry B . Jr . 15105A.
Clsmowskl. Aloyslu.s M . 15106A.
Tnrgesen Klmer, 15107.^
MArtln, Walter D . 15108A.
Brvan, Warren L., 15109A.
Dix, Roy A.. 151 11 A.
Smith. Bernard C . 15n2A.
Chaftn. J,imP8 T . Jr.. 15113A.
N nine, Robert B . 151 14A.
Tench, WUUam C , 15115A-
Tiiylor Robert G . 151 16A.
Rohr, Charles E . 151 17A
D<>erlnk;. Edward W . 151 18A.
Coleman Fred. 151 19A.
Riigers. Michael R , 15120A.
Thomas. Lyle 3, 15121 A.
Gibson. John R . 15122A.
Stewart. WUllam H , 15123A.
Conwav, Jack M , 15124A.
Stuempfle. R.jbert A . l5r25A.
Mojre. Robert E . 15126A.
Memtsma, Seward M . 15127A.
Miller, Francis L , 15128A.
Voss. Robert H , 15129A.
Sewell. Jack K . 15130A.
Matthews. Albert M,, 15131A.
S<iren.sen, Glenn K,. 15132A.
Hunt. HolUs H.. 15133A.
Stringer. Thomas H . 15135A.
Young, Herbert L., 15137A.
Hurrle. Robert P , 15138A.
Haryls, Horrace P.. 15139A.
Maser Fred A,. Jr,, 15141A.
Butler, Ralph J . 15142A,
WUson. Thomas L,. 15143A.
Jones, Paul D . 15146A.
Thomas. Richard J.. 15147A.
Fisher, Harrison L . 15148A.
Frost. Jack J . 15150A.
McCuUoch. Donald E.. 15151A.
Barrh. John C. 15152A.
Hoyl. Basil L.. 15154A.
Van Camp, Lawrence P . 16155A.
WlUoughby. Albert M.. Jr.. 1515flA.
Winn. Earl H., 15157A.
Keppler. Elmer C , 15158A.
Rayner. Clyde F., 15159A.

Walker. George T . ISieiA.
NevlU. RexF.. 15ie2A.
Hall, Marvin R., 18183A.
OOrady, Joe M., 15184A.
Sparkman. Donald H . 15165A.
Fisher, Robert J , 15166A.
Penslnger, Wilbur C. 15187A.
Morrow. Russell E., 15168A.
Eggleston. John W.. 15169A.
Hurst, Eugene E , 15170A.
Montgomery. BUI A , 17705A.
Rea. Thomas S , 17707A.
Lauterbach. Harris Y., 1825flA.
Pedersen, Stanley C . 20617A.
Tomchak. Howard M., 22601A.
Dankof, Karl E,, 15171A.
McKee. WUllam V . 15172A.
Brock, Arthur W , 15173A.
Cioldblum. Theodore. 15174A.
Pacharzlna, Carl A . Jr . 2431 lA.
McGlll. Allen K,. 15175A.
Mitchell, Frank G . Jr , 15177A.
Sutler. Lloyd W . 15178A.
Garrison. Keith M , 15180A.
Burke, John T. 15181A.
Neuharth. Richard E., 15182A.
Graham. Harold B , 15183A.
ScheUler Rube F . Jr . 15185A. /

Bmlth. Douglas R . 1518flA.
Elnxl. J<ihn H , 15187A.
Nacey, Edward R . 25495A
Downey. Richard F,, 15190A.
Smith, Robert R,. 15181A.
Frost, Dougla* H.. 15194A.
Hanlen. John W , 151B5A.
Anlosz. Leo J,, 15197A.
Anderson, Robert S. 15199A.
Cavanaugh. Charles B. Jr . 1530C'A.
Randall. Richard C , 18212A.
Page. Waldo M , 22602A,
Madara, George L . Jr , 15202A.
Swalm. Thomas S . 15203A.
Harvey. Theixlore R . 16204A.
Poindexter. Walter E., 15205A.
Stevens. Wendelle C . 18195A.
Hnbbs. R.ibert A . 15206A
Wallace, Jamie W , Jr , 15a07A.
Savage. Thomas P . 15208A.
Eden-i*. Billy G . 15208A.
Martin. Warren H . 15210A.
Bartek. Joe J , 16211A.
Mvers, Naaman L . 23740A.
Parks. Joseph W , Jr , 15212A.
HUburn, John E., 15213A,
Brazelton. Leslie F. 15214A.
Erlckson. Arnold T,. 15215A.
Wilson, Edward S,. 15217A.
Chauret. Colin J. N,. 15218A.
Drake. W.lUam H, 15219A.
Wlenberg. Harold P. 16220A.
SU)Ut, Carl E . 15221A.
Wright. Tandy A., 15222A.
Regis, Edward R . 15223A.
Rose. Franklin. Jr , 15224A.
Brown. Henry W., 15225A,
Douglas. Logfln A , 15227A.
Thompson. Lyle W., 15228A.
Cooney. Jack B . 20667A.
Ochs. Robert G . 1522SA.
Anderson. George R.. 23663 A.
Smith, Chester A. A. 1523CA.
Kunkel. WUllam R.. 16231A.
Mlkell, Emory A.. 16232A
Donohue. WUUam R.. 15233A.
Hunt. Robert L., 15234A.
Sanders. James B,. 15235A
Tomllnson. WUUam W., 15236^1.
Sawyer, Clyde L., Jr.. 15238A.
Swindell, Charles W.. 15240A.
Johnson. Mllo C. 15241A.
George. Rex H . 15242A.
Abbott. Charles W., 16243A.
McCarthy, Peter J., Jr . 15244A.
Kinder, Richard O.. 15245A.
Brown. Albert J.. 15246A.
Shelton, WlUlam E.. 15247A.
Montone. Nell A.. 15248A.
Benham, Harold N.. 15249A.
Lathrop. Robert Y.. 15250A.
Rleker, Thomas H.. 16251A.
Vlncenzl. August, 16252A.
Packer, WUllam H.. 21788A.

1957

Roberts. Howard G., 23603A.
Workman. John R., 15268A.
Braeunlg. Bward C. 2afi07A.
Kocher. John W., 152MA.
Bird, Raymond C, 162MA.
Cardln, Philip G., 16267A.
Dacus, Rector C, 152S8A.
Ward, Walter E.. 15269A.
Townsend, James G., 15360A.
Baker, WUllam H., 15261A.
Dlnglvan, Edward A.. 15202A.
Scott. Samuel W.. 15264A.
Duckett. Wayne G.. 152e6A.
Hughes, Lloyd C. 15267 A.
Hoza. Paul P., 1526aA.
Cundlff, Jack B.. 152«59A,
Relnert, Robert A., 16270A.
George. Harry H.. 16271A.
Sawyer. Russell. 15272A.
Hybkl. Caslmlr F.. Jr.. 15273A,
Sanderson. Edward J.. 16274A.
Poll yea, Albert, 15276 A.
Ruehle, John R., 16276A.
Croyts. Harold 8.. 15277A.
Harris, Paul E , 15a78A.
Leonard. William C. Jr , 15279A.
Roberts, John W,. 15280A.
Dallman. Howard M.. 15281 A.
Roe, David A.. 1&282A.
Stearns, Richard C. 15283A.
WlUon. Joseph O., 15284A.
Brady. Jamea W., 15285A.
Nelll, John C, 15286A.
Stormo, Virgil M., 18287A.
Stratton. Edward E.. 15289A.
Blizzard. Alpheua W.. Jr., 15390A.
Klelgass, Earl L.. 15282A.
Beasley. Roland C. 1S293A.
Sales. Robert N.. IsaMA.
Boyd. Raymond A.. 15295A.
Wengel, Emll J., 15206A.
Gammons, David B.. 15297A.
Shafer. Jonathan K.. 15288A.
Ostrye, Norbert B.. 15290A.
Newmeyer, Howard W.. 15300A.
Baxter, James M.. 1S301A.
SUnun. Eugene C, Jr., 15302A.
Blake. Earl O., 15303A.
Spurrier. Paul U.. 15305A.
Carlisle, Paul L., 15306A.
Butler, John B.. 15308A.
Barthelmess, Robert P.. 153O0A.
Raymer, John C, Jr.. 15310A.
Hesse, George A.. Jr., 15311A.
Bennett, Robert A., 16312A.
LoUU, Clyde W., Jr., 15314A.
Knight, Lyle P., 16316A.
Klrschbaum, Everett J., 153 17A.
Scheller, Donald R., 15318A.
Holman, Albert H , 15319A.
Miller, Homer B.. 153a2A.
Danlelson, James B.. 15323A.
Myers. George H., 15324A.
Hlght, James R.. 15325A.
Prlchard. Artist H., Jr., 153a6A
Koplt, Alfred L., 15337 A.
Orobe, Joe B., 16328A.
Atkinson, Berkeley. 15329A.
Bosworth. Richard A.. 15330A.
Webber. John W., 15331A.
Wheless. EUls J., 16332A.
Keegan, George J., Jr.. 15333A.
Cahtll, Robert J., 15334A.
Queen. Thomas W.. Jr.. 15335A.
Tipton. Jack R.. 15336A.
Evans. George O.. 16337A.
Lester. Clajvnce D.. 15338A.
Ooodson, John 8., Jr., 15339A.
Steere. Lowell B., 15340A.
Kenyon, Benjamin C. Jr., 18215A.
Bell. Robert M.. 18145A.
Haynes. Clarence G., 206&3A.
MaglU, Francis W., 30652A.
Miller. OrviUe E., 226a9A.
Watklns. Audrey H., 22<J63A.
Gates. Talbert If., 23688A.
McCaflerty. Francis G., 25788A.
Rodgers. John R., 15341A.
KUbbe. Frank W.. 15S4aA.
Dewberry. Rajrmond K., 1S344A.
Frazier, John R.. 33188A.
Kalln, Byron R., 22626A.

CCWGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8629

Howze. Stuart A., Jr., 15345A.
Butt. Oscar A., 1534«A.
Rhodehamel, Wesley R., 15347A.
Oberg, John J. W.. 15S48A.
Tlghe. Leo J., 20707 A.
Carroll. Norman P., 21447A.
Lesacz, Joseph P., 25776A.
McDonald, William A., 15350A.
Hart. Frederick P.. 15351A.
Beveridge, Richard P., 15352A.
Evans. Ivor P., 15353A.
Parrar, George B., 15354A.
Chance, James H., 15355A.
Peterson. John F., 15356A.
McDonald. Bill. 15358A.
Schroeder, Norman C, 15359A. -
Jones, John P., 15360A.
Snoden, Charles A., 15361A.
Angelakis, Charles, 15362A.
Carter, Richard B., 15368A.
Dunlap. Carl K., 15S64A.
McKnight. Douglas K.. 15365A.
Joseph. Edward B., 15366A.
Amundson, Ray K., 15367A.
Latlmore, Henry J., Jr.. 1S368A.
Lawrence, WUlard J., 15369A.
Fernbeugh, Richard M., 15370A.
Thome. Joseph E.. 15371A.
Alexander. James C. 15372A.
Slmeone. Harold M., 15373A.
Collins. Fred A.. Jr., 15374A.
Mims. Hayden P.. 15375A.
Goetz. Paul A.. 15378A.
Crowley, John M., 18217A.
Tannenbaum. Leon M.. 20687 A.
Shusta. Chester J., 21461A.
Taylor. Prank R.. 15377A.
Terry, Charles M., 15378A.
Galligar, Newton R.. 15379A.
Collins. Richard V., 15380A.
Driskell. Claude T.. 15381A.
Cook, Harvey A., Jr., 15382A.
Provancha, Earl D., 153S3A.
Hlnerman, Maurice E., 18218A. c
Poote. Richard H.. 18219A.
Howes, Lewis L.. 18220A.
Carington. Richard T., Jr.. 15384A.
White. MUler G.. Jr., 15385A.
Martin, Gene S., 21444A.
Smith, Robert P., 15386A.
Thompson, Raymond F.. 15387A. -^.
Ruggles. Bertram L., 15388A.
Nelson, Ralph E., 20748A.
AUen, Wallace B., 15390A.
McKenna, William W., 15391A.
St. Clair, Eugene C. 20697A.
Mlchels, WUUam N., 15392A.
Marxen. Edward H.. Jr.. 15393A.
Erbc, Robert P., 15394A.
Plckron, WUllam H., Jr., 15395A.
Alden, WllUam A., 22658A.
Brady. WendeU D., 15396A.
Garner. Lynn E.. 15397A.
Johnson, WendeU A.. 24333A.
Holley, HazU L., 15398A.
Yurclna. Thomas, 15399A.
Keeffe, James H., Jr., 15401A.
Hickman, Robert G., 15403A.
Bates, Thomas L., 15404A.
Rodgers. WUllam A., 15405A.
Keal, Thomas L., 15406A.
Nixon. Floyd G.. 15407A.
Spencer, Glen H.. 15408A.
Hanson, Junior O., 15409A.
Hlckcox. Harold J., 15410A.
Cairns, OUver W., 15411 A.
Scott, Leon L., 15412A.
Ross. Marvin T.. 15413A.
Nicely, Gelvin 8., 15414A.
Dlenst, William L.. 16415A,
Deem, Ray H., Jr.. 154ieA.
Nelon, Claude R., 15417A.
Campbell, Warren P., 15418A.
Spencer, Allan M., Jr., 16419A.
Wright, Lawrence C, 15420A.
Hutchins. Raymond H., Jr., 15421A.
Kerr, Frank R.. 15423A.
IdarshaU, WUUam E.. 15424A.
Clark. Lester X.. 15425A.
Biles, Howard K., 1S426A.
Curfman, Arden B., 15427A.

VanDyke, Wallace P., 15428A.
Frost, Murl, 16429A.
Smith. John C, 15430A.
Lake, Gordon W., 16431A.
Jureka. John P.. 15432A.
Krieger, Andrew W.. 15433A.
Bond, Byron P., 15434A.
McCIeUand, Robert C, 1543SA.
Spencer, Earl W., 15436A.
McElroy, Sam M., 15437A.
Hicks, William, 15438A.
Marlow, Robert D., 15439A,
Grlssom. V. P., Jr.. 15440A.
Henshaw, Daniel 8., 15441A.
Bule, James C, 15442A.
Jacobsen, Raymond O., 15444A.
8c. tt. Gordon H.. 15445A.
Harnly. Merlin W.. 15446A.
White. Gerald H., Jr.. 15447A.
Partin, George G., 15449A.
Wolfe. Donald J.. 15450A.
Salter, George M., Jr., 15451A.
Juhn, Kenneth P.. 15452A.
Bolen, George O., Jr., 15453A.
George, Amin. Jr., 15454A.
Sampley, Troy A.. 15455 A.
Peterson. Carl H., 15456A.
Hallas. Gerald E., 15458A.
Flenxlng, Lawrence J., 15459 A.
Uiehl. Alfred J.. 15461A.
Christian. Harold W., Jr., 15462A.
Klmberlln, John I., 15463A.
Canant. Orion P. D.. 15464A.
Gardner. Alfred J., 15465A.
Baggaley, Thaddeus S.. 15468A. <
Prow, Emmett M., 15467A.
Baker, EUls C. Jr., 15468A.
QuaU, Donald E., 15469 A.
Hennessy, Thomas B., 15471 A.
Swan, Algernon G.. 154.72A.
Curtis, Jack P., 15473A.
Trautweln. Donald P.. 15474A.
Holdsambeck. Herbert 8., 15476A.
Berry. Robert E., 15478A.
Bemler, Norman W., 15480A.
Pritts. Robert E., 15482A.
Cron. Rodney L., 15483A.
Davenport, Ernest E., Jr.. 15484A.-
Stevenson. Robin, 15485A.
Barnhart, Harley E., 15488A.
Davis, Burton A., 15^0A.
Boone. Warren W.. 17708A.
Crowther, Frederick E.. 18221A.
Hanigan. Edward L.. Jr.. 18222 A.
Elliott. Donald A.. 20636A.
Vollmer. Charles D., 22630A.
Williams, Morris P., 22632A.
Caylor, WlUlam R.. 23665 A.
Alger. Robert A.. 23666A.
Hector. Arnold E., 2A325A.
Albright. John 8.. 247e3A.
H Kllnginsmith. Russell E.. 25497A.
Currie, Donald A.. Jr.. 16491 A.
Hochstetler, George E., 182 16 A.
Cummins. Jamea D., Jr., 20618A.
Trowbridge, Lee M., 20l02A.
GrlfBth, William W., 15492A.
Orrlson, Charles D., 15493A.
King, Stephen J., a4330A.
Meyler, Walter P.. 15494A.
Pedracine. Patrick C. 16495A.
Jackson, Ralph P.. Jr., 15496A.
Ewards, Dewey P., 16497A.
Bice, John W., 15498A.
McKay, Robert B.. 15499A.
Spears, Slmms M., 15501A.
Hoffman, Wesley K., 15502A.
Sberrard, James L.. 15504A.
Keegan, Robert E., 15505A.
Smith, George K., 15506A.
Howard, Waldon A., 15507A.
Glover, Henry A.. 15508A.
Cox, Prank L., Jr., 155CrA.
Schroeder, Howard R., 15510A.
Hart, Bernard D., 15511 A.
KlinUcowski, Walter P., 15612A.
Hinman, Richani H., 1954A.
Hatton, Sam J.. 16513A.
Snyder. George P.. 18163A.
Brownfield, Paul W.. 30597A.
Shepherd, Olen D.. 206 19 A.

/■

1 »

i\

8630

Thornell. John F.. Jr.. a437A.
Berryman. Delbert Q., 15614A.
Buckwalter, Charles Q.. 15515A.
Davis, Harold B., 16616A.
SelBle. Frederic D., Jr.. 18225A.
Hatch. John T, 15517A.
Wilson, Clarence E.. 15518A-
Campbell, James M.. 15619A.
Rogers. Dan T.. 20665A.
Porter, Philip B.. 15520A.
Venable. Calvin H., 15621A.
Llbell. Robert W.. 15522A.
Orilllon, Arthur J., Jr., 20693A.
Anthony, WUllam H.. 23993A.
Corrigan, Joseph P.. 26671A.
Phillips. Wendell. 24322A.
Murfield. Junior D.. 25489A.
Elliott, Merle M., 15525A.
Schaffner, Donald R.. 15526A.
Childress, James B.. 15527A.
Mitchell, Vance F.. 15528A.
Plame. Samuel, Jr., 15529A.
Roswurm. Richard C. 15530A.
Robertson, Leslie C. 15531A.
Lloyd. Glenn H.. 18226A.
Wlckes, Edward G.. Jr.. 15534A.
Duffleld. Albert V.. 15535A.
Jenlcinson, Frank P., 15536A.
Kotter, Marvin A., 15537A.
Breslln. Francis J., 15538A.
Collins, Alvin J.. 15539A.
Sutton. James G., 15540A.
Denning. Kemp H.. Jr.. 15541A.
Spencer. Paul N.. 15542A.
Moody, Reuben B., 15543A.
Flske. 3^rilUam E., 15544A.
DeGrothy, Cornell, 21784A.
McDermott. Chauncey L.. 22633A.
Gross, Fred A., Jr.. 15545A.
Taylor, Samuel G.. Jr., 15546A,
Steffes. Sylvester P.. 15547A.
Dean, Cecil O.. 15548A.
Oleary, Daniel, 21451A.
Bassett, Charles A., 15549 A.
Jeffrev, Rayford W.. 15550 A.
Irvin, David W.. Jr.. 15551A.
Johnson. George W., 15552A.
Houghten. Richard A., 15553A.
Moore, Max L.. 15554A.
Hasek, Francis J . 15555A.
Wilson, Robert B., 15556A.
Keetiey, John G.. 15557A.
Gstreln,, Francis J , 15558A.
Derrick, Irvln H., 22605A. _^^_^
Nlcklas, George R., Jr . 25777 A.
Gross. Ruben A., 155.59A.
Watts. WlUlam C. 26394A.
Romans, Basil W., 15561A
Henderson. Paul B., 25455A.
Smiley, Frederick ? . 15562A.
Johnson. Karl R.. 15563A.
Frazee, Malcolm C, 15564A.
Hicks, John E.. 15565A.
Trammell. William H., 15566A.
De Longa. Peter R.. 15567A.
Prager. John W.. 20586A.
Cole. Ray M.. 15568A.
Arnold. Gene G . 15569A.
Marsh. Robert E . 15570A.
Struble. Rex D , 15571A
Webb, Hardle a.. 15572A.
Bailey. Robert A . 15574A.
Wells, Jack A.. 15577A.
Perry. Donald H . 15578A.
Ellis. Dale E . 15579A.
Patchen. Clifton A., 15580A.
Burleson. Aaron C. 15581 A.
Heard. Edward C. Jr . 15582A.
Hall. Charles R . 15583A.
Smith. James S.. Jr.. 15584A.
Richards, Hllburn P , 15585A.
Stone, Addison W., 15586A.
Meyer, Edwin P.. Jr , 15588A.
Barrett, Burton S . 1558eA.
Tliomas. John L.. 15590A.
John, Frank B.. 15593A.
Smith, Landgrave T.. Jr.. 15594A.
Grlsham, Leon M., 15595A.
Mannen. Daniel J . 15596A.
Chell. Paul L.. 15597A.
Savage, Gene T., 15598A.
Donnelly, George C, 13509A.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

Saubers, Jerome I.. ISdOOA.
Englerth, Joseph R.. 15«01A.
Seadler, Walter S., 15603A.
McKay, William L.. 15604A.
Covey. Frank S., 15606A.
Geyer. William E., 15607A.
Leroy. Maiden J., 15«08A.
Stumpe, Albert P., 1560eA.
Flanders. Charles W., 15610A.
Broe, Thomas P. 15613A.
Johnson. Lewis T.. 15614A.
Hlggins. Jack L., 16615A.
McHargue, Manson W.. Jr., 15618A.
Lane. Roland E., Jr., 15617A.
Russell. Claude E . Jr., 15618A.
Pyle, Lowell D., 15619A.
Cox. Hannibal M , 15621A.
Fodermaler. Frederic C, 15622A.
Reilly. Maurice E., 15624A.
Nickels. Albert B., 15625A.
Borodkin, Marvin. 15626A.
Barry, Learned W., 15627 A.
Brothers. Herbert H., 15628A.
F'eblg. Julius W.. 15630A.
Franklin, Truman L.. 15631A.
Echeverrla. James V . 15a32A.
S-hiflerer. John S . 15633 A.
Raffertv. Charles D.. 15634A.
Boyd. Clifton L., 15635A.
Demont. John V.. 15636A.
Heran. Donald P., 15637A.
Grimm. Alfred R., 16638A. _^
Lamb. Forrest Y., 15576A.
Hunnlcutt, Samuel Z., 15639A.
G Keag-.in, Jack, 15641A.
Hmk, Harry D, 17710A
Perry, Ronald A , 18231A.
Payaiit, Peter. 18232A.
Burkhart James M., 18230A.
J jhnscn. Clarence L.. 18213A.
Babb, James W., 22606A.
Colettl, Victor P., 22609A.
Fenley. Relf A . 22608A.
Herrcwlg. Alvin P.. 22634A.
Brunson. Lloyd E.. 22669A.
Ryan. George M . 26432 A.
Hornbarger, William H., Jr., 15643A.
Kane. Richard W., 17711 A.
M;>ore, James C . Jr., 20664A.
Mimler. Arthur M . 15644A.
King, William B . 15645A.
Hardy Robert B . 20750A.
Laird. Robert W.. 15646A.
Jackson. Charles W . 15647A.
Parker, John B . 15648A.
Hill. James H . 15650A.
Garerl, Dan J , 1565 lA.
Emming, Lawrence J , 15652A.
iLf.an, Edwin J , 15653A
Brown. Richard A.. 20713A.
Holliday, Ben L., 15665A.
C.carelll. James R., 15656A.
Windsor. David W., 15657A
MrFadden, Kirk L., 15658A.
Neel. Edwin E , 15659A.
Gornall, John L., 20721 A.
Povalskl. James A., 15660A.
Maret. Paul L.. 15661 A.
Carrlngton. Louis H , Jr , 15662A.
Sharp, David M., 18293A.
Gonge. John F . 22600A.
McKee. George H., 15663A.
OBarr, William C, 15664A.
Ragsdale. Herbert L.. 1.5665A.
Hansen. Harley L , 15666A.
Heimstead, Douglas A . 15667 A.
Nelson, James A., 1566aA.
Wagoner. Robert C. 15670A.
Hopkins, Hubert V., Jr.. 15672A.
Schultes, William A.. 15673A.
Tliornton, Lee R., 15674A.
Kaiser, Dmald L.. 15677A.
Clifford. Paul V.. 15678A.
Cormier. Joseph R. A.. 15679A.
Dewitt. Charles W.. 15680A.
Caton, Edward T. 15681A.
Dickey, Fjirl R . 15682A
Parmer, Owen P . Jr . 15684A.
Camblln, Row W.. Jr., 15e8«A.
Coloney, William G.. 15687A.
Hoi?on, Dudley W.. Jr.. 15690A.
Nix, Robert C, 15092A.

Oullnson. Jo«ph L.. 22671A.
Cameron. George E.. 16693A.
Uhlman, William P.. UI. 156»4A.
Thompson, Marvin P.. Jr.. 15695A.
Davis, Hubert R.. 16696A.
Meredith, Jim T.. mO€A.
Metzlnger. Dale J.. 15698A.
McConnell, Glenn A.. 15700A.
Rosenberg. Leslie B., 18210A.
Clements. Ben H.. 17733A.
McCollum. Ernest L., 17883.^.
Vickers, Robert L.. 21790A.
Terry, WendeU B.. 15701A.
Goldschlager, Carl, 21794A.
Parker. George W., 15702A.
Rhynehart, Phllo H., 15703A.
Hudson, Jack L.. 24261A.
Hutchinson, William G.. 16704A.
Brlnley. John J., 15706A.
Bowers, James B., 16707A.
Shelton. WUllam E., 23659A.
Pope. Charles E.. 15708A.
Jordan. Clyde 3.. 26421 A.
Jones, Robert W.. 15709A.
Turner, Edward M.. Jr.. 15710A.
Merino. Robert P., 18224A.
Logan. James W.. 22997A.
Beitman, Jesse H., 15711A.
Knlss. Floyd W . 15712A.
Folk. Drue W.. 15713A.
Evans. James W., Jr.. 15714A.
Thomas. William L.. 15715A.
Btroman. Christopher P.. 15716A.
Walsh. Edward P.. Jr., 157 17A.
Ratchford. William M., 15718A
Weathcrwax. Dwaine L.. 15719A.
Dearlen. James N , 15720A.
Coleman, Jack W.. 157aiA.
Lunos, Austin E., 20645A.
Hamblen. J Fred. 21789A.
Deflebach. Harry W.. 23804A.
Wlntersole. Tom J.. 15722A.
Benkoskl. Stanley J.. 15723A.
Ourand. James R.. a0754A.
Littig. Goodwin G.. 15726A.
Smith, r>5nald R.. 15726A.
Ray. Robert L., 15727A. c.
Olson, Ordean T . 15728A.
Barnett. Wlllard, 15729A.
Harris. Roy E . Jr., 15730A.
Robertson. James P., 15731 A.
SweKle, Wayne P , 15732A.
Thompson, Bill E.. 15733A.
Bradshaw. Harry C , Jr., 15734A.
Johnson. Jules O.. Jr.. 15735A.
Buehler. Roger G., 1573eA.
Coleman. Kenneth, 15737A.
Burch. John J.. 15738A.
Lamolne. Don C. 15739A.
Boothe. Marvin R.. 15741A.
Ransbottom, Richard O., 15742A.
Young, Lee R., 15743A.
Spaur. Melvln J., 15744A.
MemphlU. William A.. 15745A.
Hampton. Luther P.. Jr., 15746A.
Leavltt. Pierce R., 1S747A.
Riddling. William P.. 15748A.
Johnson, Richard L, 15749A.
Sherwood, John R . 15750A.
Neuburg, Gerald E., 15751A.
Borgen. Dale E . 13752A
Hughes. Emmett W.. 15753A.
Dye. L A Jr . 15754A.
Harris. Paul H., 15755A.
HUl. Otis R . 15758A.
Davidson. David T.. 15759A.
Flynn. John P., 15760A.
Pliimmer. John 8 , Jr.. 15781A.
Turner. Marlon R., Jr..,15782A.
Woodstock. Raymond E.. 15763A.
Sweatt, Fred J . 15764A.
Fills. George V., I5765A.
Rackley. David H.. 16766A.
Wilson. Ralph W.. 15767A.
Stairs. Robert E.. 1576GA.
Hedlund. Donald C, 16772A.
Mosley. Alexander T.. 15773A.
Stevens. Leonard J.. 15774A.
Halls. Robert E , 15775A.
Williams, Jay H., 15T76A.
Wagner, Elwood M.. 16778A.
Pulbeck. Charles E.. 15779A.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8631

Quidottl, Alexander P., 15781A.
Smith, Joseph W.. 16782A.
Rasmussen, Kenneth W., 15783A.
Sebrlng. Stanley R.. 16785A.
Stephenson, Wayne L.. 18238A.
Martin. Eugeiie, Jr.. 18233A.
Maxwell. Oren V., 32637A.
Booton. Glen E., 24326A.
Green. Alfred L., 1S786A.
Pierce. Locke H.. Jr.. 15787A.
Cllne. Leo E., 16788A.
Zimmerman. John W., 15790A.
Burton. Charles R.. 23184A.
Baker. Kemper W., 15781A.
Fall. Gerald G. Jr., 15794 A.
Sellen, Alan H.. 15705A.
Dixon. Claude M., 15796A.
Smyth, Delbert R., 15797A.
Becker. Marvin J., 15798A.
' Vblet. Leonard, 18174A.
Ounn, Thomas H., 15799A.
Johnson, Charles W., 15800A.
Ireland. Alfred B.. Jr., 15801A.
VanMeter, William L.. 26774A.
Moseley, James C. Jr.. 28160A.
Curto. Domenlco A.. 15803A.
Buchanan. Jack. 15804A.
SbefBeld, Sam E.. 21501A.
Gregor. John R.. 15805A.
Berry, George R., 15800 A.
tfewgarden. George J.. III. 20S91A.
Morgan. John D.. 23766A.
Darr. Wayne L.. 16809A.
Rogers. Roland. 15810A.
Brouns, Robert C. 15811 A.
Kane. Robert L.. 15812A.
Alexander. William G.. 16813A.
Grlbsby. Howard B.. 15814A.
Molr. James P.. 17712A.'
Roberts. Gall D . 15815A.
Connolly. John W.. I5816A.
O'Bryen. Kenny D., 15817A.
Stonebraker, £>onald M., 15818A.
Simmons, James N.. 15819A.
Jones. James B.. 15820A.
Green. James W.. 15821A.
Boetlck. Arthur W.. 18339A.
Hale. Prancls J.. 15822A.
Waterman, Joseph R.,vJ56a3A.
Olnsburgh. Robert N.. 18108A.
IngersoU. George L., 16824A.
Austin. Noel D.. ISSaSA.
Reeves, Owen T.. 15820A.
PorthhoCrer. Franklin O. 18810A
Sellers. Robert C. Jr.. 15628A.
Cheadle. Geoffrey. 158S0A.
Steger. William E., 15833A.
Tladale. Plerrce A., 16834A.
Calhoun. John D., 15886A.
Dennen. Richard L., 15e37A.
Sampson, Charles W., 15839A.
Henderson, Prank D.. Jr., 15840A.
Mahoney, Thomas E., Jr., 15841A.
Henderson, William J., 15842A.
McCoy. MarUn E., Jr., 15843A.
Brundln, Robert H., 15844A.
Moore, John T., Jr., 15845A.
AlgermlBsen. Robert L.. 15848A.
Anderson, Winston P., 15848A.
Gamble, Louis G.. 16850A.
Hempleman, Glen R., 158fi2A.
PullUove. WlUlam C, 15853A.
Armstrong, Luther E.. Jr., 15854A.
Nelson, James R.. 158S5A.
Sullivan. William R., 15854A.
Morrison. Robert E., 15857A.
Oeyer, John R., 15868A.
Gerhard, Frederick W.. Jr.. ISSSOA.
Jones, Paul, Jr.. 15860A.
Mllnor. William H., 15861A.
Czapar, Charles H., 16B6SA.
Robinson, John N., Jr.. 16864A.
Walters. William H., 15805A.
Hammond, WlUlam R.. 15867A.
Glick, Gregg P.. 15809A.
Williams, John G.. Jr.. 15870A.
Callan. Robert B.. 15871A.
Barnett, Lloyd, Jr.. 15873A.
Bandy, James R.. Jr., 18874A.
Edmunds, Alan C, 15875A.
Cumberpatch, James R., 15876A.
McLean. Arthur J.. 16a77A.

Bahls, Roy A., 15878A.
Hennessy, Prancls B., li880A.
Rhodes, Ralph L., 15881A.
Smith, Foster L., 15882 A.
Symons, Howard H., 158a4A.
Steffes, Eugene Q., Jr.. 15885A.
Geltz, Theodore H., 16886A.
Baker, William A.. 15e87A.
Reagan, Robert P., 15888A.
Lamp. John O., 15890A.
Burrell, Gordon E.. 158giA.
Brown. George A.. 15892A.
Bottomly. Heath, 15893A.
Farrls, Stephen A.. Jr.. 15894A.
Norman, Lewis S., Jr., 15895A.
Porter, Frederick B., Jr., 15896A.
Royem, Robert L., Jr., 15897 A.
Armstrong, Robert H., 15899A.
Whiting, Carlyle P.. 16900A.
Cowee, James O.. 15901A.
Pugh, Uoyd R.. Jr.. 15902 A.
Coble, Clifford D.. 15903A.
Salzer, Lester L., 15904A.
Lynn, Thomas J., 15905A.
Moore, John P., 15906A.
GrcenhlU, Noble P., Jr., 15907A.
Cupper. Andrew J.. 15908A.
Brotherton. Robert G., 15909 A.
Maxon. George E., Jr., 15910A.
Weir. John G.. 16911 A.
Deakln. Bruce K.. 15913A.
Bingham, WlUlam L., 15914A.
Ehinn, Ray A., Jr., 15915A.
Mire, Evarlce C. Jr.. 15916A.
Murphy, Edward C, 16917A.
Susott, John L., 15918A.
Hlnkey, Leo, 15919A.
Shoemaker, Robert M., 15920A.
Palmer, Duncan, 15921 A.
Blake. David, 15922A.
Werner, John M., Jr.. 15923A.
King, John C, 15925A.
Pltton. David E., Jr.. 1592tf A.
McOlothlin, WlUlam C, Jr.. 15928A.
Mlckelwait. Malcolm P.. 15929A.
Buckley. WlUlam R., Jr., 15930A.
Hoxle, Thomas B., 15931A.
Charlson, WUliam E., 15932A.
Fowler, Richard B.. 15933A.
MysUnskl, Casimlr J., 15934A.
Tanner. Howard N., Jr., 15936A.
Hendrickson. Leslie H.. Jr., 15936A.
Moore, WaUace D., 15937A.
Hamm, Paul J., 15938 A.
Creed, Richard L.. Jr^ 15939A.
Almqulst, Peter W.. 18073A.
Klncaid. John P. 15941A.
de la Mater, LyaU D., Jr., 15943A.
Hoffman. George E.. Jr.. 15943 A.
Oervals, Frederick B., 15945 A.
Courtney, WlUlam T., 15948A.
McElvey, John O.. 15949A.
Callaghan, Eugene P., 15950A.
Stahl, Edward 8., 15961A.
Clayton, Lawrence L., Jr., 15952A.
Emerson, Harold R.. 15953A.
Johnson. John N.. Ill, 159&4A.
Boning, John, 15956A.
Chandler, WlUlam S.. 1595CA.
Boutwell, Harold K., 15958A.
MuUer, HoUls L., Jr.. 16900A.
Pairbrother, WlUlam H.. 15961A.
Merrltt, Francis £., 16962A.
Banders, John, 16963A. .
Hanley, John W.. 159e4A.
Ingalls. Robert D., Jr., 16966A.
Bright. Robert P., 1696<JA.
Rivers, Robert 8., 15967A.
Fleming, Dale R.. 16968A.
Earley. Leonard E.. 15971 A.
Humberd, Donald A., 15972A.
Llotls, George J.. 38766A.
Slagle. Warren L.. 28768A.
Holdra. George, ISOTSA.
PUson, Robert L.. 15974A.
Hemmlg, Ralph B., 1697SA.
WUllams, Thomas O., 15978A.
Mouth, James H.. 10e77A.
Trumbo, WaUer F^ 15078A.
Polak, Richard E^ 15879A.
FerrU, Donald J.. 15980A.

Allison, Thomas I., 17713A.
Blake, John E.. 23671 A.
Malone, Paul B., 24S29A.
Yeoman, David C, 25619A.
Webb. Jones F., 20732A.
Allen, Roy L., 15981A.
Barrett, Joseph E.. 15982A.
Allman, Conrad S., 15984A.
Warren. Kenneth E., 15985 A.
Cogglns, David R., 15987A.
Schwaner, Charles F., 17714A.
Keough, James J., 21792A.
McNeU, Loyd J., 15988A.
Fowler, Horace G., 15989A.
Southwlck, WlUlam E., 15990A.
Halvorsen, GaU S., 15991A.
Keever, Bernard V., 15992A.
Johnson, Robert E.. 15993A.
Crane, Stephen, 15994A.
Merrltt, Charles W., 15996 A.
Holme, Brant, Jr., 15997A.
Hament, Carrol, 20045A.
Murray, Donald H., 15999A.
Flelschman. George W., Jr., 16000A.
Lang, Albert S., 16001A.
Bryson, John W., 26425A.
Klosson, Kenneth A. M., 18107A.
Hubbard, George M., 21457A.
Badger, WlUlam D., Jr., 16004A.
Trapold, Augustine C, m, 16005A.
Scott. Arthur A., 16006A.
Eglin. Frederick I., Jr., 16007 A.
Auger, Gerald P., 16009 A.
Mclntlre, Jesse C, 16010A.
Critchlow, David M., 1601 lA.
Helton, Oscar U., 16012A.
Wykoff, Gerald K., 16015A.
Llvermore, Ross E., 16016A.
Griffith, Ray M., 16017A.
Owens, Thomas R., 16018A.
Cerasale, Anthony G., 1601&A.
Archbold, WUUam E.. 16020A.
Chrlstenson, John M., 16021A.
NasBoly, Edward P., 16022A.
Connor, George W., 16023A.
Gray, Bert, 16025A.
Anding, Marvin E., 16026A.
March, Christian L., Jr., 16027A.
Watters, Burr S.. Jr., 16028A.
Benshoff, James J., 16029A.
Oafford, GradKD-. 16030A.
Bingham, Melvln E., 160S1A.
Winter, Ferdinand J., 16047A.
Henderson, Landla D.. 16032A.
Reeves, James. 1603SA.
Mclntyre, Angus J., 16035A.
Garrison. James S., 16037A.
Troupe. John T.. 16038A.
Coons. Richard L.. 16039A.
Prultt. Victor C. 16040A.
Horvath, Frederick, 16041A.
Duke, Daniel P., Jr., 16043A.
Beam, Walter J., 16044A.
Bierman, Clarence E., 16045A.
Linbof, Eric, 16046A.
Bolton, Robert Y., 16048A.
Bowers, Bernice O., 16049A.
Urban, Robert S., 16051 A.
Jones, Prank R., 16062A.
OUlen, Frederick R., 16063A.
Bevacqua. Eugene A., 16064A.
Erersole, Delbert E., 1605SA.
Potter, Edward M., Jr., 17716A.
Houghtby, James K., 18240A.
Coe, Dewey E., 2S784A.
Roberts, Robert B., 25792A.
SUver, Martin. 16056A.
Richards, John P.. 16057A.
Swofford, Ralph J.. 227SSA.
Brockman. Robert O., 26760A.
TruesdeU. WlUlam I., 16060A.
Martin, John W., 16061A.
Knight, Freddie C. 16062A.
Prank, Reuben J., 16063A.
Adams, Howard R., 16066A.
Hopkins. Curtis E., ie066A.
VoUett, Donald W., 139d9A.
Worrad. Edward G., 14014A.
ColUns. Preston B., 140e9A.
Young, Charles W., 141 11 A.
GlllUm, Claude W.. 14a41A.

8632

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

Peterson, Max D . 1435aA.
Netherland. Brooksle B.. ai298W.
Roberts, John P.. 14477A.
Hearn, Lura B., 14483A.
Flkes. Maurice O., 14517A.
Campbell, Bill B., 14e23A.
Flack, Jack O., 14895A.
Roderick. David W.. 14731A.
Howell. Robert O.. 14775A.
Bradshaw. TUnothy H.. 14985A.
Schultz. Robert N , 15288A
Butscher. Frederick W . 15304A.
Lindsay. Jobn C. 154C0A.
Smith, Baacoin P.. 15523 A.
Blevlns, Mack A.. 15533A.
Martin, William J.. Jr., 15«11A.
Flore, Patrick J., 158C9A.
Martin, James M., 15fl91A.
Hall, Paul L., Jr., 15771A.
Nolan. Marshall E.. 15831 A.
Wlghtman. William E.. 15957A.
HlUebrand. Mahlon A . 15970A.
Sturdevant, Philip A . 16008A.
Stanhope, James H , Jr , 16068A.
Long, William E.. 18069A
Lehman. Eugene A.. Jr , 18070A.
Williams. Wayland ^ ' . 16072A.
Hill. Harry M.. 16073A.
Eckmann. Frederick C . 17718A.
Wood, Thomas B , 22686A.
Page. Donald O . 23683A
Fitzgerald. Francis P . 26765A.
IngUs, James, 16074A.
Brush, Dtmald J , 247(X)A.
Paige, Carl A . I8241A.
Doyle. William A.. 16075A.
Yeager. Charles E., 16076A.
Gray. Rex M . 16079A
Hobart. Charles P . 20706A.
DeCamp, Donald F . 16080A.
Johnson. Richard L.. 16081A.
St. Claire. Chester J . 16082A.
Reynolds. Garth L.. 16083A.
Jenks, Harford P., 18299A.
Rand, Phillip A., 16085A.
Weed, Edward R . 16086A.
Scherer. Donald O . 16087A.
Pope. Jack L . 16088A
Dvberg, Robert R . 16088A.
King. Joseph C. 16090A.

Good. Ronald C . 16092 A.
Slentz. George L.. 16094A.
Lopez. Donald S.. 18164A.

Kuhn. Joseph A., 24321A.

Stedman, Robert S.. 16095 A.

Blomberg. Julian M . 16096A.

Mullan. Alfred W , Jr . 17709A.

Green. Nnrman M.. 18237A.

Thomas, Alan B., 177-21A.

Gordon, Ray C . Jr., 18097A.

Graham. Carroll R.. 18098A.

McKennon. Sandy J . 16099A.

Persons. Frank. 16101A

Grelder. Billy G.. 16102A.

Worslev. Joseph N , 16103A.

Lette. Le Roy L.. 16104A

Whlteley. Floyd L.. 16105A.

Krueger. Rudy, 16106A.

Storey. Henry J . 16107A.

Hatcher. Chester L.. 16108A.

HofTman. Charles A.. Jr . 18244A.

Peters, Earl W , 20634A.

Myers, Harold A.. 16109A.

Welllngs. Donald J.. 161 lOA.

Jackson. Charles W.. 18284A.

Fromm. Robert A , 23679A.

Cross. Jim M.. 16U1A.

Marclnko. Steve A,. 16112 A.

A.sh, R<»lph K , 16113A.

Mulcalre. Patrick B. 161 14A.

Farrls, Garland O., 16115A.

Patterson. David A.. 16116A.

Usee. Victor. 16118A.

Hatlpv. Hubert M.. 161 19A.

Sturm, WUmer R., a0676A.

Smith. Eben D., 16120A.

Jackson. Robert A.. 16121A.

Fish. Howard M.. a3704A.

Johnston. Edward R.. 16122A.

Klelndlen.st. Louis B., 16123A.

Aguew, Robert R.. 16124A.

Dechalne, Wallace P . 16126A.
Hamrlck. James Q . 16126A.
Allran, Braxton E.. 16138A.
Boley, Maurice C , 16129A.
Campbell. John P., 16130A.
Tipton, William J . 16131A,
Kaposta, Louis J . Jr , 16132A
Cusworth, Maynard C , 16133A.
Nixon. Benjamin O., 16134A.
Howard. Terry D , 16135A.
Talley. John W , 16136A.
Anderson. Julian P . 16137 A.
Starnes. Harry. 16138A.
McLaln. Jack W , 16139A.
Murray, John J , 16140A.
Webb. Arthur P . 16142A.
Beard. Ch irles B . Jr , 16143A.
Adams. Marvin L., 16144A.
Morg:\n. Howard D . 18145A.
Warne. Chui'.es L, 16146A
Larkin. Clayton E . 16147A
Parnell. Claude E . Jr . 16148A.
Ravey. Bill J . 16149A
Moore. William W , 16150A.
Barker, Dorsey G . 16151A
WiH)d, Bran.'on L . Jr . 16152A.
Shepard. Earl. 16153A.
Lang. Walter G . 16154A.
Carr, James A . ISl.'S.'iA
WemhufT. Howard E. 16156A.
B'.K-kiev. L.IU1S B. 18157A
Uhlm.inn. Rui»sel R , 16159A
Bclsner Gerald J . 18251A.
Hurst. Guy. Jr 18243A.
Smiih. J B . 20e38A
H.-xnsen. Leroy B , 22578A

Heidelberg. James M . 24264A.
Baum. S.i.muel I . 16160A.
Slane. Ribert M . 16181A.
HoUey, Jimes B . 16162A.
Brooks. R.)bert O . 16163A.

Guldera. Albert L . 16164A.

Gordon, James H . 16165A.

Novitk. Alfred R . 25303A.

CLirk. Roy E. 16166A.

U vmg. George G . Jr . 16167 A.
*Ie!gard. Robert B . iei68A.

MorK-in. D P . Jr . 22688A.

Muse. Kindred H . 16170A.

Kuttle. Harry M . Jr . 16171A

Hannaford, Gordon C . 16173A

LyndPs. Harry E Jr . 23706A

Hamilton. Mavnard G . 16172A.

Pagels. Rot?er E . 16174A

Aihby. Charles B , 16175A.

McGarvey, BUlie J . 16176.^.

Felts. Marlon C . 16177A

Roswurm. Robert U . 16178A.

Dudman. Garry A . 16179.\.

Conder, V, Ullam T . 16180A.

Lien. All.-in S . 16181A

Lewis. Oliver W . 18227A.

Rankin. John M .21801A

Williamson. WlHle O . 22692A.

Rodders. Felix A . 16183A

Ford. James L .'Jr . 16184A.

Ballentir.e, Wilbur A . 16185A.

MiUikln. Paul H . 16186A.

Thomas. Edward D . 16187 A.

Merntt. James V . 25505A.

Kent. Bernard B . 16188A.

Decourcey. Paul B , iei89A.

Jacobs. Jesse P . Jr . 16190A.

Flook. Harry E.. Jr . 16192A.

Golder. Roy H , 16194A

Coleman, James E.. 16195A.

Kcarpe.'o. William J . 20677A.

Tavlor. Donald L, 1819fl.\.

Bales. William B , 18197A.

Stout. Donald E . 18198A.

Sicklesteel. Milton E.. 3d, 16199 A.

Dunn. Melvln E . 16201A.

Schlansker. Forrest W . 16202A.

Doyle. Richard M . 16203A.

Hanley. Claude W . Jr . 16304A.

Simons, John W, 1S205A.

Wright, Marvin, 16207A.

Johnson. Harold R., 16:208 A.

Vogeley. Charle* B.. 16209A.

Tazak. Dean D . leSlOA.

Doom, Richard C. 225 79 A.

Johnson Lawrence H . 16212A
Grace. Harold W . Jr . 22694A.
Reed. Charles S . 24328A
Flusche. Max P.. Jr . 28023\.

Moore. Wallace E . 1821 5A.
Anderson. Arthur, 18216A.
McAtee. Martin R . 16ai7A.
Bennett. John J , ie218A
Williams, Terry B , 16219A.
Heath. Robert. ie220A
Malloy, William J., 18197A.
Dvi-ycr. John J . Jr , 16221A.
Godwin. Claude H , 16222A.
Kirkbrlde. James W . Jr . 16223A.
Koch. William L . 197aiA.
Chapman. Roy M . Jr . 16225.V
Summerlln. Clarence O . 2579tA
BuUer. Wesley P . Jr.. 1622flA.
Lutener. William 1 . 16227A.
Phillips. Carthon P.. 16228A.
Cofx-h. Robert L . 16229A
Foster. Donald E . 16230A
Eckert. Raymond H.. 18231 A.
Fish. William E.. 18232A.
See Harold W . 16234A
Whltmire. Warren T.. 1823flA.
Rice C N . Jr 16236A.
Goad. James R . ie237A.
Kline, GiTdon P . 16238A
Sexton. Charles D.. 16239 A.
Jameson. R^inald A.. 16240A.
Prank. William L . 16241A.
Nations. James O . 1S242A
Randolph. Robert R., 1C243A.
SUjne, James S . 18247A.
Johanson, AJvln L A.. 18248A.
C.xik Archie L.. 22685A.
Whitley. Albeit O . 23707A.
Goeken. William F , 26397A.
Frese. Gregory C. Jr . 16244A.
Lee. F^ank C . 16245A.
Paden. Don*ld R . 16247A.
Carr. Herbert M.. Jr . 16248A.
Rltchey. Andrew J.. leasoA.
McKlnney. Robert M., 16251A.
Suttle. James. 20646A.
Thompson. Clair G., 16253A.
Yarbrou^h. Lavern A , 18255A,
Lynn. Arthur O . 16256A.
Lyons. Leslie E , 16257A.
Seaver. James T . Jr., 18309A.
Kale, Delbert R . 162S8A.
Warfle. Elwyn J., 16259A.
Provance. Leonard W . 25794A.
Maillot. George E . IflUdOA.
Horton. Wallace D.. 16281A.
Berllne Henry L.. Jr.. leacOA.
Warner. Walter E . 20610A.
Daher. Anthony J . 16264A.
Fuller Grady B . 18265A.
Rosenbaum. John D . 16368A.
Goff William S . Jr.. 18267A.
Sherman. Laurence F . 16268A.
Camp'oell. John F.. Jr.. ie269A.
Klnkead, Joseph C. 22677 A.
Harvey. Hubert E.. 18270A.
Peterson. Leo T.. 16271A.
Smith. James E., 16272A.
Petermann. Melvln F.. 26781A.
YearwtxKl. John C. 1627SA.
McCarthy. Donald J., 16274A.
OlUan. Bobert W.. Jr.. 18275A.
B(X5sembark. Franklin K.. 1627flA.
Norrls. George W.. 16277 A.
Gregory, Willie P.. 18238A.
Es{Kislt^). Alfred L . 16378A.
Davis. William C. 16279A.
Alder. Louis O , 16280A.
Chllds. Charles W.. 16281A.
Morris. Harry B . 1«282A.
Lewis. John C, 16283A.
Farnum. Mark, Jr., 23687 A.
Collins. Burt H . 16284A.
G.-aham. Oscar D , 16285A.
Dillon. Robert W.. 16286A.
Grant. Alexander W J . 30703A,
Clancy. John W.. a6445A.
FUgor, Robert D . 16287A.
Dodds. John E . 16289A.
Borders. John E.. 18290A.,
Ohrt. Robert T.. 16291A.

19ST

OaNGRESSKIKAL RECXmD — SENATE

8633

Smith. Harry E., Jr,
Bailey, James W., 163flSA,
McCall. Bruce D..
Sazton. DaattlW.,
Logan, Harvey B., :
Smith. MarslMSL., ISMSA.
Olraudo. John C^, MSWAw
Vines. John H., liMMiA.
Crowder. Charte*!., Jt., 1(
Rotstan. Robert, ITTOTA.
Rementer. WlllMnv J., laSMtk.
Bartholomew, OabrtetP., ZMMA.
Gray. Donaltf-U.. Jr., ItOMA.
Von Romberg, llob«M P., 19MIA.
Luke. Miles K.. M800A.
Fong. George H.. Jr., 14MIIA.
Johnson, Robert C, I3646A.
Emmons, Rlcbartf A.. a6§19A.
Catlln. BenJatirtB ».. 9rf. M8(?tA.
Allen. Charles 8.. MJBWJA.
Wenrlch, Oeorfre L., r76«A.
Hardin. Clarence C. l<J98eA.
Gordon, Earl H, W30TA.
Schmidt, Gordon A., 1«908A.
Jabara. Jamer. 19SWA.
Creech. William T.. IWIOA.
Reese. William H., IdBtlA.
TrommershauBiBC, JalHs> ISMOA.
Ely, John T. A.. Jr., 25506A.
Ketcherslde, RolMrt P.. 2K2^A.
Manning, Clark P.. 1<S12A.
Ross, Donald H , 16ai»A.
Levens, Thomas O.. iai5A>
Weber. Arthur ».. laSlttA.
Shaver, Dorwyn IX 1«317A.
VanVleet. Gerald B.. leSlftA^
Craig. WlUInn L^ IMiMI.
Dart.Melvln. 1632tA.
Courtney. Clyde W.. 16321 A.
Gessner. Louis F., 16372A.
Harklewlcz. Josvpb. }4Ba9A.
Obenshaln. Ray L.. Jr.. 1»2SA.
Nestle. Roger W.. XM0BA.
Whlsner, William T., Jr., W324A.
StAhl. Frederick W.. TfTt^A..
Naylor, HaroM L.. MfTTJA.
Fox. Arthur A.. 1632CA.
Stewart, James L.. 22091A.
Shepherd. William C, WSTTA.
Burdlck, Joseph B.. ISS2SA.
Hill, James A.. 2433<A.
Keen. Robert J.. rSS3tA.
Prater. Otis A..1BS32A.
Sautters. Clydte W.. T6SS3A-
Ulrlch. Robert J.. lfia34A.
Melchar. Charles E.. KTKA.
Anderson, E)e LaD£ K^ ZOOffSA.
Ferris, Paul V.. Jt., 18336A.
Barber, Edwin F^ IfiSSSA.
Stevenson. Charlea S^ 1S339A.
McCoUum. ClodlUA IL. JV, Z58ILA.
etaggs. Homer J.. 1834IA.
Haggard, Rlcbud L, 17725A.
Flndlay, Ralph F.. 2a83iA._
Broughton, Roy i. Jr.. 27BnA.
Jenkins, Woodrow W. ISaiaA.
Vincent, Donald W.. l«34aA_
AbendhoIT, Gerhard R., 2a«3aA.
Thompson. Georg« W, i77aiA.
Bryan. James T., 23009A.
Kr3movlch, Georg«, 9t8nA.
Bltton, Ray A. m€5JL
Carruthers, WarrMi X«, XSaOA.
Osborn, Arthur I.^. MB6«k.
Wilson, Ernest R., SMMA.
Springer, PMii IL. ITTISA.
Thompson, Jame» W.. fr.. SSMIA.
Dietrich. William A., ICMJA.
Ananla, August K., MBOBAk
Winters, Sterling P.. J*., 1M64A.
Snyder. John T., n092A.
Anderson, Charlew K., >0»MA. ^
Caller, Prank L., Jr., aa60IM.
Weems, MHamM Tk. 19SSBA.
Welsh, William P., VmUL
Edwards. Lloyd C. Jr.. »3I<A.
Baker, John C, ffWTA.
Sapp, Glenn E., IGaS&A.
Mateny, Henry, 10099'A.
Townshend, Jesse P., J*'.. SWSfA.
Irwin, Donald B., IflMM.

McKeever. WcntfeS E,
Merrill. mVBXmD. lu,
Franklin, BenJaKla K.^ KUBA.
Stanley, Richard B^ ICSOtA.
Herndon, Jaiat* E, 1BI6BJI.
Perreault. Luclen B., Jf., IWflga.
Laney, A. LMrito. tC3C7A.
Jones, Lois C, aiSBVW.
Clark. Kennetb B., aSSaSA.
Faulkner. Nonaim A., a9008A
Meeker, Thonas B., a9799A.
Rlslnger. Fred 9.. Jr., 19BMA.
McCarthy, Glteff J., S502OA.
Faulkner, Joseph, IDBTBA.
Miller, John J., I83T1A.
Eagle, Garlam! W.. I6372A.
Johnson, EdwartT J.. 1(S3T9A.
WUliamson, WHltam If.. 8r., IflTMA.
Brown. Raymomt, Jr., 183T5A.
Powell. BllUe W.. 16STffA.
Dick, Reay »., ireTTA.
Laatsch, Oliver P., l63fmA.
Pancake, Dale C. IWSQA.
Sheppard, William U, IfiSBlA.
Ross, S. L., Jr^ 163a2A.
Jarvls. Irby B., Jr^ 18M3A.
Green. KennetU J^ mfiAA.
Flnley, AUen A, ISSSSA.
Guler, William C^ 1C3«6A.
Weed, Willlan A^ ItOKA.
Menzle, William B^ IflSaBA.
Perry, Frank V., 16389A.
Johnson, Andrew. Jt^ 1C3SILA.
Milton, John. U. USa2A.
Hoag, James IL. Jf, leSMiA.
Mlddleton, Henzy M^ Jr.^ iaS04A,
McOaw, James E., MSSSA.

Myers. Earl E.. leSMA.

Campbell, LoUe J^ Jr., IflSVrA.
Catallo, Albert L.. I640OA.
Harrington, ChadcB M-, lOIOtA.
Denomy, Babert W^ aSUOUL
Luke. William B., lOUOA.
Norrls, JaooM lU 23T72A.
Hurley, James C, IM03A.
Stephens, Jbfan B.„ 33001A.
Argerslnger, JaoMs B^ IMMA.
Christopher, RIcluupd 8.. IM06A.
Galloway, Robot C. M407A.
Lyons. Ricbactf B.. I89MA.
Higglns, Leo A., 1M08A.
Moseley, Elwyn A.. 307MA.
Barrel!. Je«« R., Jr., kMOffA.
Holcomb. Thomas H., I6M«A.
Wallace, John N. Jr., iMlIA.
Montel. John P.. 104UA.
Matthews, Charles L., >m3A.
Hearn, Joseph B., 29000A.
Biggs. David H., aM09A.
Thumser. Louia P'.. Jt.. W4I4A.
Knight, Junta A., Jr., 164I5A.
Glass, DomM R.. tMlSA.
Ford. Milton R.. 164 17 A.
Aldrlch, Thomaa A., >«18A.
Polesoes. Stanley, SflTOBA.
Poynor. James E., 1641frA.
Mahl, Floyd Z>.. 254MA.
Robinson. Thomas M., lr6t29A.
Scott. George 8.. ie4»lA.
Hilton, Garland B.. Jr., a9729A.
Byrum, Gerald B.. I049S^A.
Barnes, Roy A., IS429A.
Dixon, Billy V.. I64S6A.
Routh, WlUlanB !?.. W4J6A.
Russell, Chartea C, U8t0A.
McCaulley. Roger A., I64fl7A.
Hobday. Henpy C. Jr., I64SaA.
Rossman, Russcfi J., IMaQA.
Usls, Felix M., Jr., M4MA.
Cloppas, WlUlam P. J., 10491A.
Johnston, James B., Jr., I6498A.
Kaltman. Semes B., f649<A.
Maybell, James L., 1«49SA.
Renlck, Ned W., 907VIA.
Kuhlmann, Daane A.. SSTffSA.
Shaffer, Robert L., UlttA.
O'clock. Robert, ITMinV.
Hammond. George R., M4VTA.
Halferty. Robert Ml. IMMA.
Kahley. Don F.. I918M.
Porter, Wayne C,

Avance, Donald K, xauXA,
May, Bedford D.,
Schmidt, Carvel M
Thurber, Georga P.,
Adams, John A^
Reynolds, Benoai Oi,
Brown. Melvin G^ IHAIA.
Clarke, Robert
Barman, Ratart V,
Walker,. Hacty O, Jr.. IMSaA.
Brown, Leslie A^ Jr.. IMSSA.
Bryan, Raymon<i J., 164MA.
McNeilly, Charles B., 1M64A.
Biagini, Arthur 7.. 1M6<!IA.
Leidemer, Henry M^ 164B1A.
Reese, Eugene K.. tMMA.
Campbell. Russell C. lt461A.
Popp, Vem B, 184A2A.
Blankensblp. Jack F„ 1M63A.
Bersanti. Norman P.. 1M6AA.
Cranford. Earl CX. U4«6A.
Hooten. Wllliaaa J., 16466A.
Wahl. Richard O.. M4r7A.
Larkins. James R., IMtSA.
Betterton. Robert A.. IMMA.
Davis, Charley L., aa7«L4.
Hall. Roland P.. 24a4aA.
Young. DonaM J.. 16470A.
Bodlnger. Norman B.. 23T15A.
Armstrong, WlUlam P.. IMllA.
Jones, Robert EL. M^ISA.
Kelley, Jack W.. 16474A.
League, Miles H^ U3MA.
Curtis, Curtis CU 1M75A.
DuUe, Albert B.. 1C4'Z6A.
Sherman, Robert P^ 164r77A.
Horanglc. Nicholaa P.. IAC78A.
Glover, Douglas C IMTSA.
Coleman, Walter V. ir.. 16480A.

MedicmS Corps

Bradley, William O^ 390624.
Yerg, Raymond A.,
Bell, Horace S., 24
Parish, Herman 8.,
Flaherty. Bernard
George. John H.,
Anderson, JasMS
Jernigan, George C, Jr.,
Sorensen, Charlaa C, 2Q84f4A.
Green, Harry C, Jr.,
DeLoach, James P.,
VanPelt, James P., Jr.. atia^A.
Austin, George N., nSSOA.
Reynolds, Gnvsa B., 22aUA.
Wright. Walter D.. TilCTA,
Kurth. liitiii. X, XMOAM.
SwlndeU, Herbert V.. aBB2SA.
Williams. Robert L.. ISItTA.
Fenno, Rlcbard H. 21
Crabtree, Sam F.,
Fllnn, X>on E., 23582A.
Levine, Robert. SSSMA.
Smith, Dasil C, 20542A.
Marriott, William R V.. a4MAA.
Alfred. Harry CX. aMO&A.
Ferris, Curzon C. Jr^ asrOQA.
Talley, Thomas P.. S3M2A.
Dewey, Walter V.. aaeSftA.
Freedman, Martin i^ aitBQA.
McCauley, Ralpk T.. XSQUk.
Azzato, Nicholas M., 23680^.
Shirley, Robert B.. 23M2A.
WbitseU, Wllber lU Jr.. 241A6^
Morgan. Robert P., a064aA.
Morese. Kenneth N., 2i6rtUk.
Roads. Wesley A.. 248674.
Goltra, Evan R., Jr..aMMA.
Leslie. James T.. Jr.. 1S7€8A.
Carls. Timothy N., 2\Wk%k
Furey, Joseph A., ai&aOA.
Collins. Frederick 0..2173TA.
Thompson. William W.. 24132^
Bittick. Paxil, Jr..a»»MA.
Reiner, Robert N.. '.
Coles, John E., 2412M.
Holcomb, Thomas.1
Bashore, Sidney M^ '.
Robison, Jack 1
Powers, Dou^faaF.. :
Wesp, Joseph E.,
Ballinger, Edwte R., 2ieKtA.

86^4

Warren. Donald J., 241 14A.
Hlnes. Henry L.. 34201A.
Preston. Rhea 3.. 19770A.
Dawson, Robert O.. 341 15A.
Rul-Lan. CarloB D., 2»fll3A.
Hasklna. Donald M.. 22942A.
Chandler. Frank W . 241 lOA.
Claiborne. Earl B.. 22549A.
Westerbeck. Charles W.. 24200A.
Youngblood. Robert W . Jr . 22943A.
Smith. J. Lewla. Jr.. 24194A.
Oathright. Alan J , 25649A.
Kern, Sidney B.. 19769A.
Lofton. Joseph E.. 19844A.
Burdlck. Kenneth H.. 24113A.
Welgel. Arthur E . 26353A.
Ford. Charles P.. 19568A.
Worthman, Robert H , 1996dA.
Coffey, Roy B , 23&48A.
Baiter, Claude D., 25463A
Rutledge, Guy L.. Jr , 22944A.
Oliver, George J , Jr., 23056A.
Berry. Charles A.. 22414A.
Nafls. Warren A , 23581A
Llvermore. David I , 19.533 A.
Bos, Norman C , 25488A.
NoU.Leland E . 26357A.
VanDuyne. Charles M . 241 16A.
Starrett. Jack R . 29273A.
Wheaton. Jerrold L.. 294 72A.
Marshall. Strother B . 29615A.
Ryan. Arthur E.. 2fl< 14A
Paul, Jesse W . Jr , 29620A
Flahertv. Robert A.. 231 18A.
Wrede. Henry F . Jr.. 25647A.
Splro. Frar klyn C, 22964 A.
McGrade. Hugh P.. 241'23A
Gabby, Samuel L . Jr . 22413A.
Baker. Benjamin R.. 241 12A.
Wolter. David F . 26363A.
Jones. Robert F.. 27584A.
George. John W.. 2255oA.
Martin. John T . 2(X)56A.
Pollock. Clifford R.. 21689A.
McClain. Roland E.. 21691A.
Douglas. William K.. 19967A.
Ferguson Richard H.. 21853A.
Cassldv. James E.. 24195A.
Cox. Charles L., Jr., 27493A.
MusKrave. Paul W , 263.55A.

Greene. Jihn R . 27608A

PugU-si. Anthony J . 19612A.

Gregory R D . Jr . 22956A

Donneil. Alonzo M . Jr . 22957A.

Rosewall. Charles R.. 24133A.

Schlattner. WUUam H , Jr . 24186A.

Neely, Samuel E.. 21767A.

Rountree. WUUam C . 20016A.

DeTrevllle. Robert T P . 22974A.

Logan. John B . 19608A.

Kohl. John M . 19965A.

Sturr. Robert P . Jr . 23171A.

Auld. David. 20540A

Beyer. David H.. 20846A.

Rudolph. Robert L.. 21597A.

Morrlssey, Robert W . 24193A.

Gulce, Charles E . 2563.5A.

McLin. Leonard D . 19835A.

Clark. Ernest J . 20059A.

Sanford. William G . 23107A.

Maas. Geniid I . 25462A.

Hennessen. John A.. Jr . 20013A.

Keegan. James M . 21731A.

Murphy. P.iul D . 22565A.

Baker. NeiU H . 19576A.

Meyers. John C . 19915A.

Tucker. Andrew L., 22970A.

Booth, Latimer H.. 27489A.

Hogan. Peter D . 20837A.

Roth. Charles W . 19929A.

Borman, James G . 20836A.

Good. Raphael S . 22969A.

Relvea. William V, 23121A.

WUklns. Paul C . 24191A.

Reuan. Thomas C . 24198A.

C'.aro. Jo.seph J.. 23593A. ,

Oibbs. Charles E.. 241 11 A.

McOettigan. Manus J.. 23060A.

A.nsworth. George E.. 23212A.
Murray. WUUam N . 25648A.
Berber. Waiter J., Jr.. 23168A.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

y

DeMlnlco. Charles P . 21598A
Ritzlnger. Frederick R . Jr . 25721 A.
Bryan. Richard S . 246«4A.
Cote, Richard H.. 19545A
Archdeacon. John R , 23658A.
Grant, Bowie L-, 29816A
McElvain, WUbert H , 24662A.
Pfrommer. John R , 29473A.
Langeller. Paul R . 20014A.
Adam.3. Robert H . 22960A.
Morltz. Henry C. Jr.. 24652A.
Stecher. WUUam N , 2y807A.
McKeen. Charles L.. 33591 A.
Cutler. Kav R., 26631A.
Robblns. Jack H . 27492A.
Hartman, Harold F . 24221A.
McCann. John P . 20528A.
Schwarting. Bland H . 22959A.
Flanagan. Brian P . 24649A.
Fitch. Ray F . 24655A
McKay. WUUam M . Jr., 25645A.
Dental Corps

Krause, Lyndon S . 20522A.
Jakob. Robert H . 20832A.
Ketcham, Frank H . 21685A.
B.iok. WUUam H. 22395A
Hew?!on. J- hn M. 21594A-
MUler. WU'.iam A C . Jr . 21845A.
Hase. Robert R . 23163A
Zukowskl. Alphon.se A . 21593A.
Poor. WUlard H . 21728A.
Weber. Car: E 214_'SA
MerrlU. Bch K . 23120A.
McMahon. Cahries A, 35731A.
Hosklns Sam W . Jr . 256')5A.
M-Tris. Charles C . 20834A.
Petty, George B . 23584A.
Manners. PhiUp. 21729A.
Wilson. Howard R . Jr . 189fl9A.
Havden Arthur L.. 341 19A
grown. Charles A . 2e634A
Burnet te Elmer W . Jr . 25666 A.
Dvbowskl, Euijene L . 18964A
Copeland. Henry L. Jr . 22396A.
Hartlev. Jack L . 18«72A
Zellers. Howard W . Jr . 24121A.
Punco. Joseph G. 25466A
Zellhoefer. Robert W . 27598A.
Bowman. Ri^bert G . 25465A
Stumpf Arthur J . Jr . 2:?058A.

Jones. Eut'enp H . 18962A

Morgan. Howard H , 20835A

Townsend Lewis F . Jr . 18960A.

Reilly. Rob'^rt L, Jr , 20833A.

Kreutzer. Joseph J , 242IHA

MUb<Jurn. Arthur L.. 21849A.

OLearv. Timothy J . 18966A.

Dunham. David R., 18970A,

McCuUv, Albert C , 20524A.

Jack.son, James T. 241 17A.

Thompson. Robert L.. Jr . 2052'^A.

Gillespie. CarriH C , Jr , 22984A.

Cox. John. 2.^664A.

Hannon. Harrison J , 26359A.

Jaslow. Charles, 20553A

Rollers, Joseph C. 18i)65A

WUUams. Marlon R . 21727A.

Avre.s. WUUam E. 23876A.

Baldwin. Kenneth H.. 24205A.

Chapman. John A . 19618A.

Turk. Rov S . 22988A

Reese. Robert T, 19629A.

Staerkel. Julius G . 26736A.

Jamleson. Glonn W . 18971A.

Hughes. Wilbur R., Jr . 2.5693A.

Kurth, I>inald E, 29276A.

Wyatt. James L. Jr . 19847A.

H>H)t. Norman G . 21847A.

Raab. Lester W . 26360A.

Weaver. Robert N. 24140A.

Hill. Robert E., 19971A.

Leonard. Ovlde R . 29650A.

Best. Robert N , 29729A,

Ambrose. James A., 19e22A.

Sohilb. Ensile L. Jr . 21732A.
Cole. James B , 29412A
Frltz^ackson W , 29413A.
Ayres/I^lmer V.. 19619A.
Potts, Henry R.. 25467A.
SrUlson. WUUam T,, 26696A.
Masters, WUUam Z., 19919A.

Knoll, Oliver J , 1»9«9A.
Fnink. Edward C . 27978A.
Barale. Philip A . 21600A.
McCall, Clarence M.. Jr . J3408A.
Sprague. WUUam O . 25667A.
Bergmann. Robert W . 21764A.
Malloy. Charles B., 24660A.
Davis. Edward E , 2929«A.
Kolodny. Stanley C . 27981A.
Tarsltano, John J , 27496A.
Grant. Ambrose O , 24675A.
Szmvd. Lucisn. 19261A.
Sundberg. Paul V.. Jr , 19846A.
Dickson, Edward E . iMl&A.
Welborn, Joseph F , 19766A.
Ryan, Robert L.. 20061 A.
Smith. Richard A.. 25666A.
Gosselin, Carlton F . 25730A.
Sherman. John R. Jr.. 19842A.

Jordan. David R . ai742A.

Baird. Errnesl M.. II, 22415A.

Mueller, Roy L , 21438A

Si>eu-er, Warren H , 27883A

Bateman. Herbert E . 25696A.

Detamore. Robert J , l»6a4A,

Louis. John D . 20O68A

Lojjan, Fran/. W . 25482A.

Veterinary Corps

Couch. J B . 21801A
Nichols. WUbert C . 19920A.
Kyner. Roy E . Jr . 21602A.
Well. Frederick. 21604A
Nettles. WUUam D . 19845A.
Hornlckel. Edward P . 21«06A.
Dalziel. George T , 21605A,
Armstrong. James, 21603A.
Havman. WUUam P , Jr , 21866A.
Greer, Ru*sell F , 21867A.

Medical SeTiice Corps
Smyth. Kenneth B , 21619A.
HoUhan. Francis L., 21607A.
Beck, WUUam S . 21612A.

Foley. Frank R . 21870A.
Marolf. Kenneth L. 21613A.

Deverlck. The<xlore R . 19513A.

Zellers, Billy B , 21614A.

Tayli^e. Leon T , 23076A.

Cot)k. Raymond J . 21610A.

Little. Herman I . 21616A.

Woolf. Henry M . 21615A.

Schult. Harold O . 21617A.

Johnson. John A . 21611A.

Swimmer. Adolph H , 24233A.

Saul. Lee I . 21871 A.

Weller, WUUam E , 21618A.

Herrin. Daniel M., Jr . 21620A.

Goings. Charles E , Jr . 19522A.

Dykstra, John J , 21634A.

Darling. Kenneth P., 19523A.

Kimball. Lorenzo K.. 21869A.

Connolly, Owen F , ai868A.

Ruftis, Robert J , ai623A

Edmonds, Clarence W , 19524A,

Smith, Frank K , 19525A

McDermald, Richard, 19575A.

Wmkelblech. Donald R . 21624A.

Hlnes. WUUam H . 19526A.

Weiss, Earl, 23222A.

Share. James M . 19527A.

Nurse Corps
OBrlen. Dominica B . ai917W.
Fleming, Pearl M.. 21943W.
Marquis, Jeanne R . 21936W,
Bell, Adeline T , 2196aW.
Thompson. Catherine M., 21(H8W.
Dorsev. Anna J . 20928W.
Ball. Adele M., 21091W.
Skinner. Alice L.. 20994W.
Pharrls. Edna L., 21168W.
Ho.sey, Margaret K , 20984W.
Slade. Eleanor M.. 21157W.
Rlchey. Margaret A., 21989W.
Jernlgan. Marguerite L., 219fllW.
Flder, Virginia M, 21169W,
ODonnell. Mary E,, 2199aW.
Klrkhoff, Kathryn M.. 20e59W.
Neese. Sara K . 21998W.
Fuller, Mildred L.. 2098flW.
Holmes. Sarah B., 20e64W.
Dehart, Dorothy M.. 21106W.

1957

OX^GaSSSiOtUL REOOftD — SENATE

Dltchneld, FVon. X., XlOBMi',
Hart. WUlle E^ IMOmn.
Smith. Carol V., axmw.

Medicat TpedaHkt Carpt

dieech, Katbleaa. B^ 2UQ1W.

CHmpimtn.

Still wagon. Gcorer F., SOBSIA.
Bennett, Johir B., Tt&SBA.
Sharbaugh. CotokIItzk JL. 188898^
Paulk, Ivan £>.. 208S1A.
Evans, John T.. Jt^ USmTA.
Brenner. Arthur K. K., 308S8A>
Barrlnger. JoBn D.. 208&T&.
Glalz«. ChATler IT., Z)85<A.
WakeffeM. Cllarles. W.. 20BS7A.
Terry. Roy IT.. 2K2BA.
Minor. Earl W.. a08S2A.
Larkln, Tlmotixy J^ 21855A.
Pullen. Oden VL. 2I850A.
Woodruff. James R.. 776S9A.
Mattheson. RaymsD<tf T., TOSdTk,
Trent. B C . 2flfl<fl « .
Shoemaker. ITaroia O.. Z766aV

riasT Liivrw*mmwt v> carum
Line of th9 AtrF^'CB

Cunningham. Robert V., 387ItIA.
Henschel. Harr^M C^VJSAA.
Taple. Henri L^ 2833S41.
WUUams. Henry B^ 2S19eA.
Howard. Pranda W., 2araSA.
Sykea. Edmond P., 2831LA.
Purdy. Channlng L^ 39tOIA.
Jones. Robert L.. 2ai97A.
Shlppey. EcLwlJi. T.. Jr.. aSSilA,
Falls. Joseph F!. 2S7ItA.
Jones. Herscher D.. 283DffA.
Murphy, Elmer E:. 28312A.
Klnard. Robert U. 287I9A.
Neuhauser. AlDert H, 38SVZA.
Marker, Mlctiaer M, ZSlflBA.
Damen. Robert C.^ 28215 A.
Myers. Pierce M.. Jt., 283I2A.
Heller, Gilbert L.. 283QSA.
Burns. Joseph. 2873YA.
RelEs, Donald A . 28333A.
Grayblll. Harold L.. 28222A.
Magnan. Mark W.. 2SZtKA.
Nadon, Norman C, 28Za7A.
Planlnac. John W.. 283 IgA.
Hudspelh. Edwin <J^ 2a323A.
Burns. John J. 28303^.
Daniels. Robert W., 238601.
Doll. George A. J., a832IA.
Nicholson. Grn>ert <X, 28205A.
Marker. Stanley N.. 28a2SLA.
Bonselgneur. Paul J.. Jr.. 3821fA,
Pallouras. Jamea I^ 230 lOA^
Cogburn. Charlu. S., Jr.. 281dQA.
Skaggs. Alvln D . 23S3IA^
Parr. Ralph S.. Jr, 2Sa06A.
Curtis, Andrew R.. Jr, 2&2ia&.
Algeo. John B.. 23aa5A.
Strand. John H.. Jr, 228aBA.
Rogers. Dow A.. Ji.. a8S14A.
Myers. WllUaim D., 28333A.
Skipper, Francis H.. 3afi4&A.
Kleman, John W.. a8212Ai.
Traendly. Eugene W., 2457aA.
Deegan. Thomas J.. 3aaaOA.
Neville, Thomas J.. 28336 A.
Llndberg. WUUAm E.. 2a308A.
Wood. James W.. 28afl3A.
Bergn-een. Cole J., 2304 lA.
Downhill. Jack E^ a^MIA.
Lane, Gerald R.. 23goaA,
Drumm. WUllana H.. Jr., 28aa4iL
Boyd, William C. 2aaifiA.
Dennis. Robert, 23aaiA.
Smlthwlck. Edward. 7., 23MQA.
Daniel. William J..2aiAiA.
Zettler, Vincent V., Ji^2tfeOA.
Stallcup. Edward K.2Bfti£A.
Frlss. RaymomA J^ Jr..2aaaiA.
Ebersole. HowaxAIL, 2A47ltA.
Stewart. Homer J,a48MA.
TUford. William A^:
Perrone, Mlchai
Lorenzo. DonalcL W., '.
Flnefrock, George H.,!

Kelckhaefer. Rob«« T., S4a«UC
Clark. Roy T.,Jk^:
Tlacboff, Toi
Murray, Jack O.. 244aaA,
Schneider. FranUta. ]
Ozenlck. PhlUlp M^i
Johnson, Charlw T% , :
Tyner, Gene T.,
Plttenger, RichaxAl
Probst, Gerald O.^IAMOA.
Gafley, John T-O^WRI^M.
Sharp, Bryant it, 3
Blaett, Vernon L., :
Sweet, Albert H.,
Roll, Frederick A, Jt.. ai4a«A.
Marsters, ThomaaCL. ',
Armstrong. ChjKBB»L^ :
Wolf, Earl J.. Jr.,
Evans, Robert C i
Bright, Charles IX, 2
Ramsey, Frank IX,'
Pederson, Herbort A, Jr.^'
Headberg. Ernest A^JL, 2aiflM,
Bchreceng08t.BBT W., ft.,3iaMJ
Kinney, Charles V., aOBTA.
Thompson, RlduzdL.. 23040^.
Watson, James E.. EH, 2ns>5A.
Thornton. James. H...39aa7A
Myers. Charlie CdiSMCA.
Tolle. FredeKlek V.^23«a8A.
Watkins. Eugene C. 24480A.
Declma, Eleo, 2aSMA.
Sadorf . RlchaMl J., 3aaeMA.
Garvey, Josepli jr.. MOTIA.
Palmer, WaUaoe J., 245aS*.
Feeney, Edward If., 39G34A.
Lua. Royal C. 245M4L
Mercer. C&MlasCacmSiA.
Winders. Voy K., tMBCA.
Woldt. Robert e. M641A.
Peartree, Joseph R.
Rew. Thomas P.
Bedford. James R., Jr., MS4AA.
Crossland, Rolwrt F., 24MCA.
McKeever, WIUImb L..a497CA.
Prior. James CX, JIDiA,
Hanjian, Jerry. 24013^
Black. Lloyd H.. Jr., aS397A.
Coleman. David B.. Jr., S89K)A.
Fippen. John W., MO^UL
Vaughan, JoscpIl A., Jr.. a8370A.
MuUen. Maurice L., 34636A.
Hagen, WilliaaiB.. 34507A.
Daniel, Walter F , TBOOntk.
Jeflers, Dale 0.. 3388BA.
Berg. Robert L., M697A.
Johnson. Norma* J., MSflSA.
Leonard, Thomas J., 3469TA.
CoUens. John W., m. SSaWA.
Miller, Donald E., 9Me8A.
Davis. Thoma»H.. 28929^.
Wood, tta/ffoona B., 33enA.
Hansen, Ricbtort B.. 33898A,
Parker, Alan L., M569A.
Gould, Carl D., MSMA.
Bo3me, Jbks J., a9944A.
Haaser, Walter F., 38ai>A.
Bartalsky, Stei>«B L., 24696A.
Hum, Richsrd F., SSezsiA.
Harr, mmto C, 14i80eA.
Hoster, Charles S.. 29939A.
Slayton, Donald K^.>23914A.
Nolan, James A.. 2t48tA.
Abbey, CharlevR, 23i¥TiL
Cobb, Tommy, 23OTSA.
Bcharling. StSBfej- V., 9ISB2A.
Buice. William R.. 2829(M.
Minette, Jamev W., 2<I542A.
Magdich, Joseph,. Jr. , SStlSA.
VarriBdr, FtBymoiu} H., 298MA,
Valenta, Louir E.. 2827SA.
Persons, Don A., 2818aA.
Baird, Ora J., Jr., TBTTSA.
Archer, Earl J., Jr.^ 282T2A.
Cotter, John K.^2*saxsA.
Maurer. Calvin K.,282eirA.
Oardina, Verne Z>., 3H227A.
Flood, Donald. L., 2820IA.
Drake, DoniAf It., S8092A.
Krause, William €7., a49tM.
Dougherty, ClwrlM W.. SSnffA,
Lamiell, James (X,

Mease, Harry V.,
Smith, Arthur C. Jr.. 24i86A.
Cottle, Joe I., 244NA.
Dunn, John C^
Pickett. DonaM
Oamm, ThooMB J., a<809A.
Kelly. Vietor C.
StanphiH. Jlwiin B.,
Fletcher, Bui*B» C, aOHSA.
Harris, John d. SnSBMk
Fleenor. ClMrlOT U., aSMSA.
Voselpka, Ocarg* K. a3»18MI.
Nunemaker, JotaB J.,
Mercer, Rogei H.,
Mielke, Robert F.,
HelUuimp, Willi ■!■
Bergerot, Paul A.,
Kiser, Jamcft B., aaOTSA.
Frederick, Calvin L^
Lamont, WilUii^ ML,
Jackson, Bobby W.,
Sayre, Robert H.,
Kennedy, Paul iL.. 382TIA,
King, Robert S.,
Roberts, WUliam
Price. Joseph L.. J^^ StUSOA.
Meahl, Starling, Jr^MfM7A.
Wagner, WUliam L.. ai6T4A.
Rickard, Ernest U.,. WWBA.
McVay, WflUna H, aSSMA.
Hunerwadel, Hagti P.,
Roberts. Llttlctoa S.. Jk.,
Wilson. ChartBB U.
Foster, Jack R.,
Patterson, Glenja A. Jr.,
Killion, Thomas J, Jlr., 2589GUk.
Byrne, Bernard P„'
Schutt, Carlton.]
Brown, Jack P.. 24M«A.
Heard, Richard ^ SMTZA.
Watson. WUltaa J. &. atSaOA.
McNamara. Francis J.. Jr., M566A.
DanyUw, Bohdan, dififiAA.
Hulsey. Lawience R.. 3«ftlAA.
Rayner, Robert V.. S48S6A.
Altman, Donald M^ asiaeA.
Dubose. Berated A., asiMA.
Johnson, George H, aSSMA.
Stodghill. Cliaor* A.. MiA\ 4
Moats, DonaU M^ 28a35A.
Watson. James U, Jr.. VU\%MK
Bruns. Wa3m* H^ 24a6aA.
Bennet. MortiOMi 7., 383a6A.
Babcock. Dan E.. aSSaiA.
Hallenborg, RalpL A.. a85«&A.
Biscone, Josaph. C^ Ox., 'tffltgaA.
Standish, Myles J., Jr, aB325A.
Campen, Alan D., 2BZ5BA.
Wilson, Carrol D., 2817aA-
Archibald, RuaaeUD.. 23943A.
Leith. Jack H.. aTTSAA.
Opfer, William C Jr.. aCSaA.
Rudiger, Leland L. 23a4BA.
Teachout. Gerald K.,. Z03BA.
Dickerson. Lewis H.. 73821 A.
Gahl. Edward C, 23S3TA.
Denton, Irving L.. 23&X8A„
Lewin, Melvin H.. 282.'£IA.
Brown. Richard S., acSOttA.
McNair. Ninu-od, Jt.. 23MTA.
RUey, Walter J.. Jt, aSgtfTA.
Hunt. Calvin T.. 2P17A.
Hoggatt, RalpH S., 209CIA.
Koons, Burt 3., 24tf6A.
Stevens. David B.. 24573A.
May. Hugh E., a4S§9A.
Eden, Douglas S., 24568A.
Orasher, Howartf K., 245eSA.
Rauchenstein. Henry D.. 2S58C&.
Adair. Robert E.. MSWA.
Hussey, Frank^ S.. Jr., 38B99A.
Yale. George E., J^.. 24(^1A.
Hall, Spencer. Jr., aOftOA.
Matsen, Ralph S., anSTA.
Ashmore, James W.. Jr., ajMXA.
Heth, Maynartf IT., a8a84A.
Outh, Joseph R.. 9MMA.
Brown, Gerald, 2678TA.
Martinet, Pierrs W., Jlr.,
Grimes, Charles BL,
Cbristman, Fred J., Jtr., ><eBtA>
Allen, Jesse M., :

\

f,

-

8636

Barnes. Elmer L.. 2ai69A.
Davis. Donald M., 28201A.
Quinn. John A.. 27731A.
Wright, Harold V.. a7738A.
Osborne. Wilbur L.. 28347A.
Leblsh. Nathaniel H.. 24860A.
Mlddleton, Ernest F.. Jr., 24599A.
Williams. Bernard R.. Jr.. 22467A.
Anderson. Richard L.. 28285 A.
Jabusch. Donald A., 28286A.
Johnson. James W.. Jr., 26923A.
Proctor. William P.. Jr.. 28349A.
Conner. Albert W., 28378A.
Kuras. Alexander C. 27716A.
Hall, Harold C , 25567A.
Miller. Alfred L.. Jr.. 24566A.
Glrard. Rov J . 26531A.
Shlpman. Prank W.. Jr., 24823A.
Brewer. Lee A.. 24502A.
Sandroclt. Vernon H . 26525A.
Wright, Lennon E.. 28251A.
Llbbv. Francis N.. 28287A.
. Watklns, William H.. 28187 A.
Stanley. James L., 28186A.
Brojer. Arth\'J J.. 28185A.
Savage. Robert L., 24511 A.
Black. Ronald E.. 28254A.
Colvln, Mare J . Jr . 245 16A.
Olnn. Robert J . 28189A.
Matthews. William H , Jr.. 26911A.
Maloy, Frederick L.. 23600A.
Home. Joseph A., Jr.. 24577A.
Morrison, Lawrence D . 24852A.
Omley, George E . 25572A.
DeUlnger. David C, 24595A.
Miller, Edward L.. 24855A.
Hughes, William V., 25571A.
Sutton. WlUiam K . 28244A.
Carson. Ross L.. 28271A.
Marshall. Lvle B.. 28292A.
Ohllnger. Orren H . 2d. 28293A.
Davis. Loren W . 28220A.
Bertie. Samuel L.. 25570A.
Erbschloe. Richard R.. 24851A.
Snyder. Robert L. M.. 28247A.
Burel, Louis P.. Jr . 28248A
McCrea, Joubert S.. Jr . 26402A.
Holy. George E., 24579A.
Andrews, Richard T , 24829A
Yeager, George G . Jr.. 25566A.
St. George. Maurice R.. 26927.A.
Deuschle, Raymond D , 28243A.
Woodford. Charles E., 28289A.
Little, Stanley R . 28288A.
Skews. Leslie K.. 26945A.
Moulton. Waldo J., Jr . 28242A.
Austin. Eugene C , 28362A.
Shlvely. Robert W., 24491A.
Poor, Arthur R., 20894A.
Jennings. Carl S . Jr . 24856A.
Barbee. Alfred C. 28253A.
Hlgglns. Edward D., 28294A.
Halloran, Patrick J.. 28296A.
Connor. Richard M.. 28295A.
Dunn. John T . 27725A.
Sweeney Leo E.. Jr . 24584A
Whltehouse. John F . 26532A.
Taber, Allison Y., 26574A.
Cunnings. John C 26564A.
Matthews, John W.. Jr . 26571A.
Hatten. John W.. 28249A.
Klosterman. Edward. 26924A.
Mclntlre. Robert H.. 25574A.
Mauterer. Oscar. 28327A
Elliott. Robert O , 25561A.
Forster. Francis X.. 24573A.
Wright. William J.. 28228A.
Spear. Herbert L,, 28316A.
Waters. Ralph R.. 24474A.
Eaton. James H.. Jr.. 28231 A.
Luther, Stanley R., 28297A.
Hardin. Richard C. 26689A.
Paquin. Gerald C . 28309A.
Crlchton. James W.. 26628A.
CahlU. Vincent S.. Jr.. 26416A.
Schftub. Lester J.. 28372A.
Nicola, Allen W.. 28198A.
Dietz, Frederick C . 25569A.
Powers. John K.. 28303A.
Cox. HLirold M., 24819A.
Dunn, Mathew T.. 24498A.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

Hupp. George O.. 28340A.
Smith. Wallace R.. 25898A.
Locklngton. Henry R.. 28176A.
Hall, John R . 24853A.
Clark. Wllllani J.. 25926A.
Ellis. Edward L.. 27718A.
Delmerlco, Frank, Jr., 2820flA.
Hulse, Merrill W., 28250A.
Owens, Wayne E., 24591A.
Llbbv, Barton C. 26939A.
White. Sumner. W.. 28291 A.
Murphy. Walter F . 28290A.
Hasert. Charles. 28298A.
Jordan. James E . 26527A.
Weiler, Jerome C , 24561A.
Kane, Ronald D , 26533A.
Kenfro. Charles R.. 22493A.
Purser. Henry W . 24503A.
White. Robert M.. 24589A.
Messmore. Jack W.. 24472A.
Jubber. George P.. 24471A.
JefTeris. Joseph D., 25558A.
Clark. Edward B . 25559A.
Zaroban. Richard H . 24475A.
Morrell. Bruce E . 24473A
Allred. John P . Jr , 2^^83A,
Barker, Lewis V. 25891 A.
Fisher. Victor G . 26906A.
Caudle, Ralph E . 27713A.
Bogle. Chester V . Jr . 26545A.
Jones. James L.. 26520A
Perm. Urban A . Jr . 24820A.
Twining. Richard G . 27714A.
Corrlgan. Robert C. 24821A.
Alexander. William T , 24477A.
Federle, Gordon I . 26521A.
Foster. Hugh B . 2a908A.
Lurhslnger. Vincent P, Jr.. 2I817A.
Raunikiir, Euuene. 21816A.
Webb, James A , Jr . 24822A.
Minor. Rov N . 25892A
Snarger. John R . 25893A.
Watts, Jack K , 26522A
Andrlchak. John J., 28299A.
Neimever. Alien C . 28300A.
Murley. Kenneth E. 21749A.
Cisco, Guy C . Jr,, 21747A
Lorenz, BeroHrd C , 21750A.
C(v-.ke. Gerald E., 25560A.
Field. William H , 26523A
Kalt)erer. William A., 27715A.
Pat ton, Dewey. Jr , 28348A.
BlaLsdell. Morton C , 26946A.
Porter. Elliott W , 26944A
Hamilton. Harold T , 26909A.
RUUng, Robert G , 25895A.
Allard, J iseph A , 25894A.
Karas. Norman, 28257A.
Shipley, George R, 28331A.
Miller. George R , 24483A
Gerdau. Richard V.. 24598A.
Brandom, Tliomas M. Jr. 24482A.
McDiiwell Dwight C , 24825A.
Lamb, Norman C, 26910A.
S<?verson, Eldon B , 28360A.
Bloomfleld. George A , Jr . 25896A,
Bensmg. Robert G., 24558A.
S'ewart, Gerald W.. 24826A.
Leverett. Sidney D , Jr . 24827A.
Muterspaw. Emmett E. Jr , 24485A.
Glenn. Sam D . 23240A.
Bialas, Howard S . 28256A.
Regan, Joseph P , 283 14A.
Hostetter. Henry G . 24604A.
Renz, Robert E , 24514A.
Kokoszka, Florlan T , 24828A.
Stlmson, James S . 26913A.
Gyulavics, Joseph J , 22437A.
Cole. Arthur S , 2o563A.
Haneman, Vincent S , Jr , 24597A.
Outlaw. Albert us B.. 28260A.
Gardner. Arthur J.. 28245A,
Cadwell, Harry B . 28365A
Babcock. Bernard R.. 244»6A.
Reilly. Lavern O . 26398A.
Hoffman, Robert D.. 26917A.
Tlmm. William M . 24832A.
Scovell. Rolf S. 21756A.
Williamson. Donald S . 24505A.
Custer, Gerald B.. 25578A.
Wa'erbury, David E . 24833A.
Bunt, Stuart E.. 26719A.

M.irtln. William H.. 2181BA.
Wasson. Glenn E.. 21904A.
Skillman. Tom M.. 22441A.
Davis, Philip C. Jr , 2a436A-
Sleep. Otis A.. 22442A.
Snixlgress. Paul E.. 22443A.
Adom. James R . Jr.. 22440A.
Bennett. Frank E.. 22435A.
Warren, William J.. 23444A.
Hallgren. John F . 24670A.
Joppa. Jacob A . Jr . 25457A.
Dwhl. Gerald R.. 25565A.
Anderson, Jesse J . a5564A.
Hemmer. Donald J., 26530A.
Palmer. Donald P.. 26529A.
Ainsworth. E^igene W . Jr., 26918A.
Augsburger. WlUlam E.. 26919A.
Box. George B , 28255A.
Allison. John V.. 28301A.
Truehtart. James L.. 24509A.
Johnson. Grant W.. 21772A.
Barnes. Warren S . 21773A.
Perham. Guv D. 21776A.
McLKmald, David R , 21771A.
Hicks, Stephen B , 6400A.
Blackmon. Leon A , 26920A.
Ctxldlng, Ray E . 28343A.
Davis. Cecil, 24513A
Williams, Reuben E . 24835A.
Swol, Thomas C , 28237A
Harrington, Roger D., 26921 A.
Hennnkus. George P.. Jr.. 28369 A.
Garner. Joseph S , 28344A.
Greene. Carl K., 22494A.
Welsh. Mark A . Jr.. 25568A.
Caruso, Charles P , 21822A
MacLaren. William G . Jr . 21823A.
VanDusen, John N , 21821A.
Carey. William E.. 24519A.
Beck. Edwin H ,27717A
Stringer, William L.. 24837A.
Stembrldge. Edward E , 2654ffA.
Brlley. James R , 24239A
McKenzle. Wallace J . 26534A.
Heyser, Richard S , 26536A.
Webb. Herbert G , 24525A.
Rule, John H , 21827A.
Hoke, Charles S , 21828A.
Drlessnack, Hans H. 21831 A.
Broussard. James H , 21826A.
Divall Robert H . 23915A.
CfHinev, Lloyd I .24531A.
Wallace. Neil W . 24530A.
Archuleta, Harry M , 25577 A.
Dishon. Donald C , 26537A.
Iiigraham, Ronald L.. 26925A.
Quann, John L , 26926A
Willems. Earl L . 26403A
Sorrelle. John W , Jr , 26549A.
Majoros. Theodore E . 28346A.
Brown, Floyd B , Jr , 24848A.
Brown, James L , 27554A
Wmgate, Clark L., 27720A.
Koehler, Frederick G., 2183.'5A.
Stanton. Richard R , 21833A.
Allison. Jack G , 24565A.
Jackson. Philip R . 26538A.
Robinson, Charles O , 26539A.
Jarrell. Vernon H.. 27721A.
Hutchison. Curtis R . 23129A.
Powell, James V., 23134A.
Myers. Ralph H . 23132A.
Olsen. William P.. 23133A.
Wurthmann. Henry S.. Jr.. 23l3flA.
Rleder. Henry R . 23135A.
Landon, Robert M.. 23130A.
Barwln. Richard O . 23126A.
Barnes. Jack L . 23125A.
Woods. David A., Jr.. 24540A,
Uirey. WUUs E . 24539A.
Appleby. Phillip E . 24842A.
Williams. Walter A.. 24844A.
Friedman. Arnold. 26404A.
Cook. Daniel E.. 26540A.
Haney. Donald A., 26928A.
Humphrey, Thomas R., 26929A.
Hinman, Joseph C, Jr , 28350A.
English, Robert B , 22466A.
Dlngwell, Cyril H., 22447A.
Anderson, Charles D.. 22445A.
Kottas, William M.. 22446A.
Enslen. Allen T.. 24845A.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8637i

Watson, Wilbur C, 25579A.
Davis. Charlie B.. Jr.. aS580A.
Butler, Paul A.. 2640SA.
Cloney, Laurence P., Jr., 26M3A.
Llngenfelter, Olen, 26Q30A.
Willis, Stephen N., 28361A.
James, Terrence C, 28S52A.
Johnson, WUUam T., Jr., 22423A.
Hooten, Donald H.. 24645A.
Prltchard, Everett K., Jr.. 26^7 A.
Convey. John P.. Jr., 26f 44A.
Gardner, Laurence P., 2e931A.
Garrison. Charles E., 24846A.
Snider. Henry G., 26933A.
Simon, Kalman D., 27722A.
Knowles. John 3., Jr., 21836A.
Halbert. Billy Q.. 25581A.
Vannatta, Robert A , 26560A.
Herrln, Lexle E.. 28934A.
Baltzell, Leonard E., 25682A.
Chllders, William L., 28935A.
Walters, George S., 24849A.
Plnkerton, David W., 26936A.
Pierce. Robert E., 28353A.
Smith, Sidney B.. 27723A.
Slllwagon. Edwin A.. 24850A.
HolUnden. Albert B., 27729A.
Hunter, Robert B., Jr., 22452A.
Graham. Bruce E.. 2244BA.
Grlssom. VlrgU I., 22450A.
Stephens, Dallas K., 22455A.
Meeker. James I., 22454A.
King, Robert P.. 22453A
Ward, Albert H., Jr., 22457A.
Fremont. John C, 22448A.
Schlfler. John T., 23092A.
Kasler, James H., 24551A.
Straub, Robert L.. 26548A.
Bennington. J T.. 26547A.
Wilkinson, Paul K., 26938A.
Carlson, Carl A.. 28354A.
Titus, Thomas L , 28355A.
Grubaugh. Kenneth W . 21906A.
Mlsgen. Darren J.. 26940A.
Simpson. George M., 26411 A.
Koenlnger. Charles E., 25583A.
Bennett, Donald W., 26412A.
Finney, Rajrmond M., 26550A.
Jensen, George W., 27726A.
Johnson. George W.. Jr . 26943A.
Johnson, John H.. 28357A.
Drain, Edgar L., 23024A.
Bushboom. Wendal L., 24567A.
Smith, Charles O. 26413A.
Castleman, Stanley A., 26551A.
Pemberton. Gene T., 26552A.
OLeary, William S.. 25584A.
Fox, Galen C, 26414A.
Brown, Julius W., Jr., 25885A.
Seehafer, Don. 27727A.
Loftls. George R.. 22087A.
Drake. Reynolds. 24867A.
Shattuck. Eugene J.. Jr., 26553A.
Evans, William L.. Jr.. 26415A.
Johnson. Keith B.. 26554A.
Markel, Richard K.. 26555A.
Orover, Arnold L., 28358A.
Stockdell, Victor B.. 26566A.
Snyder, Law»on E., 28359A.
Corbltt, GlUand W., 28361A.
Ferguson, Robert P., Jr.. 24586A,
DeLacy, Robert J.. 26418A.
Alexander, Shuford M., Jr.. 26419A.
Blume. George D., 26557A.
Guldlce, Daniel E.. 26420A.
Farrls, Harold D.. 25589A.
Starkel, Richard L., 28363A.
McParland. Walter J., 28364A.
Clement, Jack D.. 26948A.
Chatfleld, William E.. 27732A.
Miller, Ray E., 27730A.
Smith, Click D.. Jr.. 26949A.
IXival, James D.. Jr., 26953A.
Harmon. Orrln C. Jr.. 28366A.
Capers. William T.. HI, 22866A.
Lelffert, Donald E., 22870A.
Wicker, Eugene C, 22871 A.
Brown, Donald D.. 25590A.
McQuUlen. John R , 25591A.
Gray. Paul L., 25897A.
Toomey, Rol)ert L., 2e558A.
Keller, Prank Q., 26950A.

Evans, Clyde G., 26951A.
Patrick, Alexander. 28368A.
Kelgard, Philip K., 22927A.
Mining, Robert W., 28370Ar
Irvine. William G.. 26559A.
Johnson, Harlan W.. 22426A.
Holland, Anthony E.. 22425A.
Herron. Eldon L., 28371A.
Sampson. James B., 25899A.
Manners, Charles 8., 25929A.
Courtney, Clifford E.. 23599A.
Brown, Ogden. Jr., 26562A.
English, Webster C, Jr., 26563 A.
Allen, wniiam E., 28373A.
Danforth, Gordon E., 221 56A.
Aldrin, Edwin E., Jr., 22091A.
Johnston, Verle L.. 22230A.
Johnson, Boyd W., 22228A.
Umstead, Stanley M.. Jr., 22366A.
Griesmer. Donald R.. 22190A.
Morgan, Bernard 8., Jr., 22276A.
McMullen, Thomas H.. 22268A.
Norton. Alfred D., 22289A.
Brenkle, Joseph P., 22119A.
Ekeren. Halvor M., 22166A.
Clark, Edward P.. 22134A.
Hanaway, John P., 22198A.
Post, Leo P., Jr., 22304A.
Pahl. Philip M., 22295A.
Waespy, Charles M., 22370A.
White, James E., 22379A.
Chandler, Donn P.. 22131A.
Larsen, Larry J.. 22239A.
Sherman, Thomas W.. Jr., 22344A.
Jeans, Harley E., 22227A.
Jaffurs, Carl C, 22224A.
Jackson. Thomas L., 22221A.
Bacon, Walter J., 2d. 22096A.
Johnson. Loyd M., 22229A.
McCormlck, James E., 22261A.
Morettl, Winiam G., Jr., 22275A.
Cunningham. John W., 22153A.
Halstead. Frank C, 22196A.
Richardson, William L., Jr.. 22321A.
Guild. Samuel M.. Jr., 22192A.
Veurlnk. WUUam J.. 22369A.
Lerner, Robert, 22245A.
Brantley, Arnim L., 22117A.
Baulch, Henry L.. 22106A.
Headlee, Harold E., 22202A.
Ramey, Jack L.. 223 13A.
Zurawski. Donald D.. 22387A.
Allen, WUUam A.. 22093A.
Balrd. Weldon R.. 22098A.
Irwin, James B.. 22220A.
Smith, Paul A.. Jr.. 22351A.
Deslslets. John C. M., 22157A.
Skldmore, John G.. 22350A.
Huff. David W.. 22214A.
Haggren. Richard A., 22194A.
Trost. Frederick J., 22364A.
Cole. Donald C, 22136A.
Mullaney, David M.. 22279A. .
Reeve, Gerald S., 223 17A.
Barnes, Daniel S., 22103A.
Gaske, Marvin C. 22177A.
Kendrick, Jack L, 22233A.
Crocco. Joseph P.. 22151A.
Hunt. James C, Jr.. 22216A.
Hennev. Frederic A.. 22207A.
Schlatter, David M.. Jr.. 23337 A.
Wilson. WUUam B.. 22384A.
Christner. Wallace G.. 22132A.
Brame, Horace L., 22116A.
Stephens, Perry L., 22356A.
Harding. Robert C, 22190A.
Taylor, Everette, 22361A.
Dickens. Samuel T., 22 158 A.
Corrigan, Joseph P.. 3d. 22145A.
Hite. Kennitb P., 22211A.
Cole„Donald K., 22137A.
Ritchie. John. 22323A.
Mottemlth, Tipton P.. 22277 A.
Brown. Gerald A.. 2ai22A.
Balrd. WUlett J., Jr., a2099A.
Plynn, Edward D.. a2172A.
Hendricks. Gerald K., 22206A.
Ellis. BUly J.. 22167 A.
Berga. John O., 22110A.
Bretzke. Lou E., 22120A.
Cralgle. John H.. 22147A.
Sisson. Frank E., n, 22349A.

HUlock, Joseph P.. Jr., 32210A.
Giesen. Herman M., 22179A.
Stelzer, Prank A., 223S5A.
Jacobs, Robert L., 22222A.
Conlln. Thomas P., 22 139 A.
Boy, Robert W., 22332A.
Peckham, Howard L., Jr.. 23300A.
Conti, Julius R., Jr., 22141A.
James, David R.. 22225A.
Banks. WUUam O.. 22102A.
Eppley. Lawrence L.. Jr., 22168A.
Price, Jack L., 22307A.
Peake, Erwin C, 2229gA.
Quinn, WUUam M., 22311A.
Gorschboth, Frederick P., 22185A.
Wiles, Howard O., Jr.. 22381A.
Dingman, Richard O.. 22160A.
Ryan. WUUam J., 22333A.
Singer. Stewart M.. 22348A.
Sprague. Carleton K., 22353A.
Scruggs, Seth W., 22339A.
Brewer, Donald A., 22121A.
Reed, Irving B., 223 16A.
Johnson, Albert W.. 22226 A.
Rogers. David E., 22327 A.
WUliams, WUUam A.. Jr., 22383A.
Jacobs, Saul A., 22223A.
McCaffrey, John P., 22260A.
Ballard. John G., Jr.. 22101A.
Truesdell. Willard M.. 22365A.
Osbom. John R.. 22294A.
Rasmussen, Raun J., 2:2314A.
Buffington. Lewis C, Jr., 22126A.
Roloff, Donald H., 22329A.
PoweU, John C, 22S05A.
Dickson, Gerald E.. Jr.. 22159A.
Marlow, Louis Q.. 22253A.
Hampton. Frederick J., 22197 A.
Brown. Jack D., 22123A.
Young, James R., Jr., 22386A.
Lesslg, Raymond H., 22246A.
Martin, John P., 22256A.
Kalisch, Robert B., 2a231A.
Croan, John W., 22150A.
Hutson. John C, 22219A.
Perree. David P., 22170A.
Frasca, William H., 22174A.
Mcintosh, Robert H., 22267 A.
Anderson, Loren A., 22094A.
Giordano, Bruno A., 22181A.
Corrigan. Patrick J.. 22146A.
Baltz, Dickey L.. 22100A.
Duke. Charles B.. Jr., 22163A.
Vandenberg. Hoyt S.. Jr.. 22367A.
Murphy, James B.. 22280A.
Rook, Theodore C. 22330A.
Hurd. Calvin W.. 222 18A.
Dozier, Wayne M., 22161A.
Matson, Keith W., 22258A.
Gordon, John B., Jr., 22184A.
Bowden. Jackson H.. 22115 A.
Cuthbertson. WUUam H., 22154A,
Grady. James H.. 22188A.
Mllliman, Dain W., Jr.. 22274A.
Nelson, William B.. 22285A.
Brown, James R., 22124A.
Rehwaldt, Robert J.. 22318A.
Hechinger, Robert M.. 23203A.
McDonald. Robert P.. 22262A.
Mehelas, John N.. 22270A.
Kay. Donald J., 22232A.
Perky, James D.. 22302A.
Gould. Robert P.. 22187A.
Samotis, John A., 22335A.
Ortolivo, Basil A.. 22293A.
Crews, Alvan M., 22149A.
Guldroz. Richard P., 22191A.
BUUngslea, Clement D.. 221I3A.
Vemer, Edward W.. 22368A.
Ward. Clifford L.. 22374A.
Forrest, Prank R., 22173A.
Olson, Robert E., 22292A.
Lawton. William H.. Jr.. 2224aA.
Sheridan. PhUlp. 22340A.
Smith. WUUam M., Jr., 22352 A.
Murray. Daniel C, 22281A.
Miner. Paul R.. 22273A.
Stockman, David T., 22359A.
Rose. Ernest G.. 22331A.
ColUns. Mathews M., 22138A.
Starrett. John P., 22354A.
AUen, John E., 22092A.

i

^

8638

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

rischl. Frank R.. Jr.. 22niA.

OBrlen. Charles C 22291 A.
~ Drake. Walter M.. Jr.. 22162A.

Maler, Paul L . 22252A.
^' Melnhold. Robert L.. 22271A.

Nyquist, Charles W.. 22290A.

Thorne. Anthony S, 22383A.

B'njovsky. Victor C, 22109A.

Roberts. Robert M.. 22326A.

Pardee. WUUam J.. 22297A.

Kirby. KermU A.. 22234A.

Garofalo. Joseph T . Jr., 22176A.

Martin. Paul B . 22257A.

Whltener, Carr C. 22380A.

Stevens. Walter C. Jr . 2235a-^.

Birch. Paul R.. 221 14A.

Jfularz. Joseph J . 22278A.

Glenn. Leo. Jr . 22182A.

Rehberg. Dwlght P.. 26566A.

Conine. William B.. 25900A.

Brown. Larrv F . 24859A.

B»^)yle. James M.. 24861A.

Reschke. W.'.'.'.am G . Jr . 283"3.\.

Held. Jack W . 28376A.

Fav. James R . 28377A.

Carr. William B.. 22470 A.

Ferguson. Bruce H.. 22474.\.

Nichols. WiUiam L.. 2'J475A.

Domian. Henrv A . 22476A

Johnston Richard A.. 22483A.

Nutt. Wavmond C . 22484A.

Parlett. Henry W . 22489A

Petersen. Donald C. 22491A.

WethUiBitoii. Jerry D. '22+R(!A

Danielson W.ilter R . Jr . 22481A

White. Snnon S , Jr . 2L'482A

Frazler Frank D. 22487A

Brownine;. Howard J , 22473.A.

Love, Curtis C . 22469A

Caulfteid. Patrick H. 25(i01A

Wood. Stanley C . 289,S4A.

St Cm James W . 28;^79A.

Deese. Charles G 2245c>A
H()rton Lemuel D . 22418A.
Noah. Joseph W . 22420A
Burgess. George M . 22417.\
Dunn, Crel'ihton R . 26.567A
Reld R-b.^t L . 266PHA
Parks Robert L , 269i>«A
MacDermvr. Ge<-irge G . 'ITIX^K.
LoKSdoi;. H.irnld E, 22m;^.SA
Randall R. bert P. 28;m>A
JohiKs' t. Sidney F .Jr 259n.T \
SI.i'iKbter Norman E Jr 2,=>'30J.\
B )ver. Wallace R, 269oO.Ai
Willard Garrv A , Jr 2f)9.T8A.
Sticknev. Fra:;k A 269=).')A
Hegberu' VVillard W. 2;16'11A
Cr'o.v Prederi'-k A . Jr 26 69.^.
Kl.r", t;:.s'-av B. 2Ho7l)A.
Br inibelw*" James T 269*)!. \.
Wi.ii.uns Gene F , 27,'S.S5A
Hall. HoAvard D , 277J4A
O Brien Donald W , 2:904A.
Marshall. Jam.es H . 2-2.S.!:fA
Warner Eugere R R , 225<J4A.
Frvauf D. niJd F . 22.i22A.
Tlel. R.bert P . ■22.SJ.iA
White. B D . 2249JA
Thi:ma.s Rilph W. 22.S02A
WalL.ce. Cbar.es W . 225oOA
Huston. Evan B JJ.ilSA
T'.niu.s J-hn O , 22ol9A.
Muli.n.s ;;mniv W . 22626 A
VViiabl- W.l.iamP.Jr 22.-.29A.
Ward. K. oer' W , 22.='>.ilA
K >. litT I Ihomas J. 22534A.
Sii.iA liobert B . 22.''.33A.
Hart. J seph L . 2250.-=A
Shoulv^ H'uh W , 2249t;A.
J ;^..;^ riiini.i.s H . 22.511 A.
M.ir:.;. Ft-rr.arul F. 22dl3A.
Church. J(->e L.. 22524A
Connv.r. V'-r:. n L. 22o41A
Catlln. JoUn E., Jr . 22olUA.
H:ll \i:.' v. D . 225J0A
P'.v ke-' Ge. r^e K . 22,^21 A.
Maxleld. Daniel P. 22528A.
Th'-.mpson. James C. 32512.\.
Carter. R bert D . 22.52.=^ A
M-C 'tio.-l! J, hn P , 22 ,.U;A
M.ir-;, o D o. l. . 22537 A.

Fvan B W . 2250«A.

Staab. John M.. 22509A.

Babcock, Earl L.. 2253aA.

:.Ioniague, Ronald B . 26962A.

Thogersen. Alton J.. 25e05A.

Baker. Albert R.. 2590«A-

6imth. Von L.. 26573A.

Kanaap. Herman L.. 26963A.

Sifers. Samuel I.. Jr . 25907A.

Howiand. William A.. Jr.. 23607A.

Rot'crs. Biliy F , 23613A.

Bott James P.. 23603A.

Smith.son. Claud J . Jr . 23615A.

F r, Arthur E . 23605A.

Linrisav, Dean E.. 23608A.

Mms. Eaton K. IH . 23614A.

G'bson. William H . 23606A.

Thomp.son. Walter W , 23617A.

Phillips. Victor F. Jr. 23611 A.

M-M!lla!i. Lonnie C . 2361UA.

Sawver Mary A . 2ciJ96W

Revn Id.';, Herbert H . 25i93A.
F'., r: Philip Jr . 25594A
Healv Til n.^ts L.. 259 lOA.
Harnes.-. .^rmmta J . 2590yW.
Rjddoch, J l.n H . 25912A
Mellema, Robert J.. 25911 A.
Pr;h WlU'cm H . 26575A.
3.nith N rmaii L . 26964 A.
pet. v.. I'. Frrtlik H. 2b96dA.
Cox M.r II K 26965A.
NioF.i.'- V Ja:.e. 27736W
r.f. D. i.a\l. J.imfs n. 27735A
( reekman. David B . 28381A.
L.,it '. Ih ::. os E , 28:J82A
R;-.-!-ir- H- h.-r". E . 23O20A.
r VI. or W.lliam E . 230^ A
Of-^ru'- H.irry E. Jr . 2i04JA.
r .' F'-^-er A . 25597.A.

H.i;: H ;'^ o . 259:3a.

R...-t:e C.t-ne F . 2696aA.
H^*ard David F. 26967A
Caldwell Al nza L. 2a383A
MoNamwra. Donald I . 28:i84A.
F'lanatciii Siephen M. 22877.\.
PI.ii; aski Francis S. 22d85A.
Card. Alber' M 22aa7A.
Kr.a-.i^-h Francis M . 22888A.
!,,„.. <r>vv--^' P . Jr . 22K93A.
S-IU- James R-. 22899A
D'l.■^-a'l!^ R.rhard E. ■22902A.
H'l-o!! Davmond E. 22907A.
Mi/ak E Iwird P . Jr . 22«75A.
3;- Ao. Fdwi.'d A . 22909A.
Jot pi \Vx". i-d M . 22914A.
W dri M^e E iward J. 228 THA.
F X Hir A L . 2'28»0A
J ;,fs J.I.- b N.. Jr . 22874A
Karai;.- Fv,in«el:s. H. 228*>4A.
Taylor R; l.ard N . 2J876A.
Joel. N l•^a:l L. 22886A
Pranzrr'. M ir-. •.:; H . 22897A
Roblr..^^ o. Simuel M . 22898A.
S.-mm-T W;::m:t-. R , 229C3A.
F-r :.•.>;< [> o-ild M . 22908.V
S. ...irrr J i:r, s H.. 22'JlOA
Harri.^ W.lli.i.m E. Jr . 22yi2A.
Artz.R. •>■:-. F^ 229 18 A.
Wolf. Rober- K . 2292 1 A.
Cady. Rober- P . 22aaTA.
B-^rnett.Lee N . 2239fiA.
F>-'H';k T", J ^in A , 22901 A.

c ?r-f
b:.i-,

P;: .A

0-.-T-,

J :.^s

r>><ge

Gr.n.-

. F- lucU W , 22919A. «

W,; Mm E 2290UA.
FI ;'l'T- P . 22926A

K":.:>"h H 22889A.
B;r- :. I. 32881A
■,ard H bert G . 2J92,SA
.-■y ThomasC Jr 22924A.

:' N. rr.s W 2838oA.

f. u' f. M 26.'i76A

• K ,'i^T' li .i«97IA.
■•; R. oert A 2ffl8«A

Ge. i^f C 26.177A

I .imbrecht. I>3nald W . 2t;673.^.
M.iru :■. James !. , 3«969A
Hendr'. .<..-; D-mald G 27556A.
Hook, K. be." D . 2.-i.i.l9A
HllUard, Roy E . 28.1««A
Hamilton. Thi)mas M . 283 37 A.
Rivers. WUUam J . Jr 26.579A.
Hanto. Donald C , 26y7.\A.

Hansen Edward L . 26580A.
Kale, Gerald A.. 27737A.
Smith, WUUam F . a8581A.
Noe. Richard D., 26972A.
Bnily, Harold C. 27738A.
Oestrlke. Richard W., 23249A.
Allen. Gordon J., 25598A.
Adams, Vincent O . Jr . 2672CA.
Bvnum, Paul H., 28973A.
McMillan. James A.. 277 40A.
Pfelfer, Harold E.. 22929A
Wright, Howard 8.. 22833A.
J.IC )bs Delmar O . 22932A.
Baker, John W , 22930A.
Hallett, Edward D . 22928A.
Connor. Gerald B.. 22140A.
French. WUUam A.. 26721A.
McConnell Thomas G.. 27742A.
Eveland, WUUam A.. 28392A.
Biahop. Arthur F.. 25914A.
Levy. Eugene D . 26723A.
Morton, Ge or^-e J . 26722A.
Whlchcr, WlUlam C . 26tf74A.
Ames. Henry P Jr . 24249A.
GrlSln. Joseph M.. 28975A.
Kaehlert, Donald A.. 26&76A.
Blan.Kei.r.r.h W..2839)A.
Murdock Robert G . 265a2A.
Bittmk'er, Dale A , 26725A
Harding. Frai.k W , IIL •2e721A.
S.ii.ders. Eli.sha P . 26e77A
Th.imp.son, F.dwln E.. 26726A.
M.-Farlaiid. G»n rge A.. Z: . 27713A.
Ciiapman Harold W , 2H393.A.
Kruirpc, R< bert H ,a3016A.
S1-. ,.'t. V\.lllam K . 2774-;A
Andrus, Ri.hard C , 28394A.
Wri^h- Ed'Aard S . 27746A.
Gciger, Richard F . 27745A
Ei.bai.k, Richard A , 25fll6A.
Sheeklcy J. hn R . 26978A.
West Keith W . 26957 A
Gores. Vernon D . 22936 A.
Hlnz. Richard H , 27748A.
R ).se James E , Jr , 259 17 A.
Webster K»erett H 2fl973A.
Sh.iaf James E . 2774WA
Sclumberg Richard J . J5600A.
H.^d^es, Vernon W , 27752 A.
Bl .ck Robert L . 27751 A
Murphy Patrick J 27750A.
R.jig R>.l>ert W 26999A
Hiu'lies James B 26727A
Rea^.m, T'.iomHR J 28306A.
S<-. •• Alden A 22'.<39A.
Pr./fll D.^v.d P 2-2940A.
I . yd. R. berl J 259 18A
Cr.K-ker J hn C 26fl80A.
Frii.k. John P , 28397A
MaoAipine, Jamea G Jr , 26982A
Lon*: Patruk G 2«981A.
Abbi.tt Leslie W . 27754A
Hip*- Rnvmond L Jr . 28398A.
Ku:iU Darld T . 2H399A
Cnurad. Da\:d M , 25919A
.'^•evens Henry L , Jr , 26<J85A.
Sav .ye, Rl.hard O , 2«'J84A.
t>.bbs, Maurice T , 27755A.
M »)re. Billy J . 25920^
Short. R.bert P 27756A
Henry Frederick P . 27757 A
Cunneely, Eutjene P , 2840<'>A
Andreason R.>bert L , 2.5921A.
Kuchta J>*eph D A . 25922A.
Co*,in, Arls'a H in.28401A.
Knoth'' W.l.iam C , 25923A.
Hart, Har Id B , 25924A
Lewis, Gladstone S . Jr . 23018A.
FjTimert Merle W . 23017A.
Bowen Donald J . 26986A.
J hnson, Jav J . 28403A,
H.ili. John W ,2308<'A
Schultz. Paul O . 23091A
MoGee Patrick L , 23090A.
S:e7..ik Dcnald A.. 26988 A.
Zwl.i.her J .hn W , 27759A.
Wall.icp PTest..n A . 27760A.
DaiRle E<lw;ird A.. 28406.V
Hill KeTinr-h D 28402A.
Chart; f-r H-n V . 28404 A.
U'K-r-^. J !.:•. H . 20989 A.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD •— SENATE

8639

Glover. Allison O.. 23030A.
Zimmerman. Bryan E.. 23029A.
Main. Eugene L., 23027A.
Mendenball. Joseph H.. 23028A.
Brockmeyer. William D.. 26900A.
Fatluk. Michael, Jr., 24143A.
Coady. John 8.. Jr., 26991A.
Horvath, Joseph L.. 27761 A.
Howard. David R., 23032A.
Steger. James O.. 23031 A.
Kmlnek. John M.. 25925A.
Wratten. Joseph B.. Jr., 26728A
Southworth. Stanley G.. Jr., 23042A.
Danner, Bruce L.. 26927A.
McMulllan. AlUe E.. Jr.. 26993A.
Foster. Robert K., 26&94A.
Stauffer, Glenn F., 26995A.
Campbell. Charles R.. 23039A.
Rozsa, Allen C, 24606A.
Mlxon. Exley C, Jr.. 25928A.
Potter. Thomas D.. 277e3A.
Brown. John A., Jr., 23044A.
James. John H.. Jr., 22916A.
Welch. Robert E., 27764A.
Butts. Duncan R.. 28406A.
Fass. Franklin R., 27765A.
Love. James 8.. 28407A.
Baldwin. Robert C. 28408A.
Hamley. Eaile S.. 26997A.
George. Konrad. 25930A.
Undsay. John T., 23050A.
Collins, Earl J, 23061 A.
Starkey. Gerald E.. 23049A.
Bailey. Burt S.. 23048A.
Smith. Paul N. 25931A
Carclch, Marvin J . 28409 A.
Vechlk. Donald. 26998A
Watson. Charles P.. Jr.. 23110A
Bartollch. Eugene. 23inA
Anderson. James L , 23108A.
Shaffer. Glenn B . 23113A.
Charette. Franklin M.. 25601A.
Baker. Kenneth O., 25933A.
Reagon. Robert L . 25932A.
Chellman. Chester E. J., 27001A.
Covllle. Alan.270O0A.
Stull.Ned R..27766A.
Gavin. Frederick J., Jr.. 28410A
Peacock. Robert D., 23 137 A.
Wolfe. John L, 28411 A.
Beatle, BlUlngsley, 27003A.
Elmore. William E . 23094A.
Bergeron. Paul E., 28412A.
MUler, John.23097A.
T>-nan. George P , 23096A.
Harbison, Dona R., 25934W.
Hair. Thomas L , Jr.. 24145A.
Lambert, Robert E., 24146A.
RUezo, Harry F., 27004A.
Provance, WlUl&m J., 277e8A.
Chabbott. George H . 27767A.
Cahoon, Jack, Jr.. 27753A.
Walker. Thomas W.. 27769A.
Gallenberger, Darrell A., 28413A.
Harrison. Prank B.. 25935A.
Hamilton, Richard G . 24149A.
Rlpp. Mason L., 24161A.
McLoud. Harold J.. Jr., 27005A.
Hansen, Lester T.. 28414A.
Hunt, Charles L., 23n7A.
MUler, Richard O.. 2700«A.
Mitchell. Hershal, 3841&A.
Doss, Thornton T.. 27007 A.
Smith, Scott O., 27T70A.
Walters, Marvin L.. 23n6A.
Johnson. Samuel R., Jr., 25936A.
Johnson, Roy T., 27771A.
CMalley, Gene J., 25937A.
Hudklns. Walter W., 27008A.
Broderson. Robert E.. 28416A.
Rosker, Benjamin H., 28175A.
Bennett. John H . 23139A.
Gray, David L.. 2314aA.
Gustafaon. O«orge A., 33140A.
Yanecek, Earl E , 23144A.
Van Oorder. Francis C. 23145A.
Mayo, Jack B., 26938A.
Humphrey. Eugene C, a5939A.
Barnes. William C. a7009A.
Hagan, William J.. 37014A.
Btumpf , Charles J.. 27013A.
Putt, Mitchell A.. a7012A.

Malot. Richard C, 27010A.
Martlneau, Horace W., 27015A.
Paroby. Michael J., 3701 lA.
Toedt, Dell C, 27773A.
Patton. George B.. 27772A.
Reeves. James D., 27775A.
Areen. Prank M., 284 17 A.
Welch, Billy J., 23146A.
McCreary. Richard D., 27016A.
Mateer. Alan. a8426A.
Lawson. Richard L.. 25940A.
Campbell, Don L.. 28418A.
Miller. Walter H.. 27776A.
Walters. Wllmer C, Jr.. 27017A.
Lassetter. Jimmy S.. 27777A.
Donohue. WUliam J., Jr., 24173A.
Rowell. Claude R., 28419A.
Schlltz. Juanlta D., 27019W.
Bazley. Robert W., 27018A.
Paul. Norman L., 27778A.
Astrella. Ralph J.. 24609A.
Stelngasser. Joseph N.. 27020A.
Soapes. Thomas D., 28421A.
Moody. Eugene E., 27021A.
Bond, Jack D.. 26583A.
Blackbird, David P., 27779A.
Hollandsworth, Victor R.. 28422A.
Joachim, Frank M., 27022A.
Brown. William E.. Jr., 23193A.
LaRue. James E.. Jr.. 23191A.
Low, James F., 23194A.
Ingram, Benjamin F., Jr.. 23201A.
Parks. Roland W., 23197A.
Hayford. Robert L.. 25942A.
Kauttu. Paul A.. 25941A.
O'Connell. Donald R.. 26586A.
Tracy. Fred L.. 26587A.
Pate, William B.. 26584A.
Pratt, Carl E., Jr., 26585A.
Chapman, Kenry A., 26588A.
Keller, Walter R., 27023A.
Gllmore, Daniel C, 27025A,
Boluch, Theodore J., 2T781A.
Shaff, Maurice A., Jr., 27780A.
Spieldenner. Frank E., 23424A.
Thorson. Roland D., 28423A.
Milst«ad. Robert E., a4€I3A.
Mitchell. Robert J.. 24614A.
Wood. Richard J.. 24615A.
Winston, Marjory E., 25943W.
Tarver. William R., 26590A.
Brown. Norma E., 26589W.
Marks. Paul D.. 27026A.
Hlnes. John S.. 27030 A.
Gore. James E.. 27029A.
Cowne. Robert W.. 27028A.
Brlggs. James E.. 27027A.
Wilson, Clayton A., 3d. 27031A.
Crum, Suzanne. 27785W.
Bonnell. John H.. 27783A.
Roberts. Donald E.. 27786 A.
Cerny, Joseph P., 27784A.
Maxwell, Allen D.. 28425A.
Dellarlpa. James M.. 26591A.
Tone, Myron L., 27032A.
Aklns, George D., Jr., 27787A.
Davenport, David E., 37033A.

Medical Corps

Feezel. Richard A., 27506A.
Haycraft. Reiford G.. 27647A.
Harris. William B.. 27654A.
Stone. Frederic A., 27652A.
Falrrax, Walter A.. Jr.. 26745A.
Swan, Robert E., 27648A.
Smith, James R.. 27507A.
Kaufmann, Herbert H., 2813SA.
Oahagan. Lawrence O., 27518A.
Metcalf. Boyd H.. a7513A.
Van Hoek, Robert, 26746A,
Murney, Joseph A., 26748A.
Walker. Arthur L.. 27509A.
Whitcomb. Walter H., 27«J37A.
Holt. Clinton L., 27638A.
Jarvle, Thomas A.. 27641A.
Bowerman, Walter M.. 28153A.
Wolff. Richard C, 27508A,
Lash. Victor J.. 26747A.
Kownackl, Roman J.. 27519A.
Howland, Donald X., a7620A.
Evans, Thomas L^ 376 ISA.
Wing, Morgan E.. 29280A.
Edwards, Robert H., 39281 A.

Taylor, Irwin T., 29305A.
Harvln. James S., 29304A.
Stromlnger, Etonald B., 29308A.
Malone, Franklin J., Jr., 3764«A.
Purvis, John T.. 29306A.
Holderman, Wallace D., 27642A.
KUrl, Edward A.. 29813A.
Sawyer, Roy E., 28144A.
Hein, Walter R., 27651 A.
Lee, William L., Jr., 27639A.
Ford, George L., Jr., 27640A.
Lenyo, Ludimere, 27996A;
Duvolsin, Roger C. 27986A.
Graham. Jack M., 27985A.
Zlon, Thomas E., 27516A.
Bennett. Philip T.. 27643A.
Harper. John Y., Jr., 28 143 A.
Rogers, Bealer T., Jr., 27524A.
Taylor, Coleman, 2751 lA.
King, John T., Jr.. 28145A.
Roberts, Edwin R., Jr., 27522A.
Holland, Hal C. 27514A.
Gould, Kenneth G., Jr., 27521A-
Goldman. Leon, 27517A.
Krltzer, Herbert, 27987A.
Schwarz, Kuno C, 28149A.
Reardon. Robert M., 27996A.
Sheldon. Edward A., 27512A.
Beljan, John R., 27645A.
Dalzell, Wllbert G., 275 lOA.
Bottl, Robert E., 27644A.
Byrd, William G., 27994A.
Bozena, Andrew M., 27649A.
Springer, Roy A., 27523A.
Warner, Forrest S., 29309A.
McGlnnls, Lamar S., Jr., 29421 A.
Sabella. Joseph D., 294a4A.
Brierty. Charles T.. 29425A.
Bashaw, Jack D., 29420A.
Babcock. George C, 29426A.
Johnson. William C, 29427A.
Roy. John C. 29423A.
Clarke, John C, 29422A.
Bunstock, WUllam H., 29428A.
Acker, Donald W., 29307A.
Krivchenla, Gregory B.. 29282A.
KrlBteller, Adrian R., 29484A.
Cline, John F. X., Jr., 29483A.
Clark, William B.. 29487A.
Dooley, Byron N., 29486A.
Gorman. James A.. Jr.. 29629A.
Schubert. James J., 29485A.
Jackson, John L.. 29630A.
Croft. David W., 29631A.
Perezarzola, Miguel, 39775A.
LeCocq. Frank R., 29815A.
Wilson, Jack H., 29816A.
Robertson, James T., 27988A.
Mason, James W., 29489A.
Edwards, Cecil O., 28142A.
Alexander, Wallace R., 29776A.
Karnes, William E.. 28137A.
Milder, Emanuel, 28148A.
Hammon, William M., a8139A.
Conrad. Fred G., 28141A.
Peterson. Carl G., Jr., 28140A.
Ockner, Stephen A.. 28138A.
Woodmansee, Terrell R., 28152A.
Blelfer, Kenneth H.. 28146A.
Connelly, John P., 29429A.
Shoener, John A., 28147A.
Weston, Eugene L.. 28150A.
Butchko, Andrew W., 38161A.
Mitchell. William J., 29327A.
Minichan. David P., Jr., 29312A.
Lovett. Vernor P., 29314A.
Muller, Herbert A., Jr., 29328A.
Aaronson, Charles M., 293 ISA.
Chrlstensen, Don L., 29322A..
Froede, Richard C, 29318A.
EagletoD, John E., 29333A.
Hart. John T., 29311A.
Rlckenbach, Howard P., Jr., 29329A.
Hockenberry, James H., 39317A.
Butler, Thorne J.. 29330A.
Moore, Patrick J., 2g310A.
Manning, William K., I., 29325A.
Mills, Edward H.. 29288A.
Jensen, Kenneth M., 29324A.
Scott, John R., 29330A.
Sutlive, WUliam G., 29443A.

j^i

8640

Harkriess. Thomas T . 29439A.
Russell. Robert J . 29448A.
jHcobs, Theodore, 29457A.
Pearcy. M*rcen«. 29436A.
Newbern. David H- 21>437A.
Scalco. Anthony N . 2929aA.
Gary. GeorKe R . Jr., it)290A.
Men*. Ounter R., 292a5A.
Roman. James A.. 29a86A.
Carranza. William H.. r^WlA.
James. Vernon L.. Jr . Xi287A.
Schwarz, Richard H. 29291A.
Barnard, GeoTf^e W.. 29433A.
Nuernberger. Louis G . 29459A.
Sullivan. John B.. a»462A
Henry. Raymond W , 29440A.
Miller. Robert T.. 2932-8A.
McCloskey. John F, 29316A
Davidson, W Karley. 29432A.
Vlren. FYed K . 29284A.
CarllU. Aloert D . 29454A.
Daley. John O , 29435A.
Perlcins. David E.. 29453A.
Bunnell. David J., Jr.. 29451 A.
Crummett. John D . 29462A.
Dodson. Jerry G , 29456A
Hlgi^ins. L'oN-d M , 29441A.
Netlck, Jie, Jr. 29460A
Patterson. Lewis T. 29455A.
Prlebe. Cedrlc J . Jr.. 29442A.
Richardson. Howard D . 29461. \.
Todd John N., III. 2044flA.
Zlrbcl. Clyde C . Jr . 29434A.
Welch. Car'.os O . Jr . 29458A.
Walls. William L . 29450A.
WlUuims. J O . Jr . 29447A.
Dunaway James B., 29430A.
Solsson. Ferdinand L.. Jr , 293 13A.
Splcer. n.ibert P . 29438A.
Neft. Loviis a . 29431A.
Bor«la. Ch.\r!es A . 29444A.
Woolley. Galen S . 29505A.
Btory. William C. 29490A.
Rollins. Lawrence T . 29502A.
White. Lynn C . 29494A.
Penry. James K . 29501 A.
Fulton. Jrhn F., 2949'3A.
LeUh. John B. 29500A.
Markham. Charles W . 29507A.
Pteinman. Paul A. 29493A

Alexander. Thomaa H . 29492A.

Rabkin. Richard. 29509A.

Ross. Rudvilph J . 29503A.

Thomas. Franlc W., Jr.. 29504A.

Camp. Th.im.^ F. Jr , 29497A.

Allen. Sam T . 20495A.

Ben-cn. Jack O.. 29491A.

Dyer. Maurice E . 29498A.

Titus. Charles O . 29508A.

Carlson. Kenneth P.. 29632A.

Null. Francis C. Jr.. 20633A.

Rueve, William W.. 29641A.

Lon^enha^en. John B.. 29642A.

Radlet, Pml J . 29e34A.

BaiUy. Dewey J . Jr., 29643A.

McNealv. Donald E., 29647A.

Guin. Jere D , 29636A.

Snod^rass, W. T., 29639A.

Anderson. Albert S , 29640A.

Bowman, Edwin A.. 29845A.

Beahan. Laurence T, 29646A.

Cook. Elwyn C. 29637A.

Yamauchi. Hlroshl, 29506A.

Wea'.herall. Richard H . 29635 A.

Calverley. John R , 29446A.

Cross. James L.. 29780A.

Demetry. James P . 297T7A.

Broussard, Lawrence O.. Jr.. 297'

Dental Corps
Gar'bois, Norman C, 27527A.
Wright. William G., 27650A.
Hall. Gaylord L., 27526A.
Kj.hler. Gilbert L., 27655A.
Johnson. Carl E., 29293A.
Urata. Wallace T.. 29301A.
Bo.xwell, David O.. 28133A.
Kitchens. Jamea A.. 29302A.
Esierl, Norman L.. 29294A.
Logan. Thomas P., 29657A.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 10

•8A.

Hun^erford Richard W 29817A.
M.irrow Robert M. 29«58A.
t^mlth. J.imes R.. 39818A
Leitzel. Robert G . 298 19A.

Veterinary Corp^
Anders.. n, D' nald L., 29331A.
Rushin^'. Ernest B . Jr . 29332A
bhill. Otto 3 , Jr ,29333A.

.\{,-d:cal Srri'ice Corps
Colon Howard. 25337.^
Haas. Ravm.-nd O. 24241 A.
Delong. Merrill B . 29336A.
Metcalf. R.bert D., 25881A
H-.rper. Oliver F . Jr , 23237A.
B^rlow. Le' nard. 23239A
Griffith. Llewellyn B , 2423aA.
Archibald. Erwln R.. 25685A.
Seaqulst Maurice R . 25344 A
Kirkel. Hubert P . 2323PA
Murphv. James D . 25674A.
Jcnes. Bruce. 2424CA
KeerTe Loren J , 27537A.
Er:\den. Robert W , 25339A
Overtel' CUffcrd D . Jr . 25340A,
Pmith. Francis J., 29334A.
Hlrsch Jerome A.. :;5350A
Abies. William A.. Jr.. 25675A.
Richardson. Tcxle W . Jr . 24242A.
Mclntvre. Wal'er V . 242 t3A.
Williams, William L . 24244A.
Trlbble. William D . 25341A.

Freud Sheldm L . 24245A.

Orav. Pat B . 25676A.

Diedruh. Frederick J . Jr . 2424eA

Bell. Herbert E . 22542A.

Etter. Hal G . 24247A.

Loni? Ralph S . Jr . 24?4aA

Collins Harry R . 25342A

Traa;er Leonard W . Jr 25677A.

Pitts. Don.ild G.. 2425nA

Baber Winston D, 25678A.

Guerln. Michael D Jr . 27535A.

L.>Der. Lester R . 24251A.

Gibble. Thomas B., 21252A.

B'lrke. William E.. 25;H3A.

Truel ive James W., 25739A

Mi-AUen. Dan'.el L., Jr.. 25679.\.

Kkatlda.s. Gregory J . 25740A.

BMsch, Emery B , Jr . 24253A.

W.it.son. Robert A , 25680A.

H.irtm.an. J ihn L Jr . 27536A.

Allen. Gei rs;e F . 26718A.

Farmer Jack N . 2.:741A.

CardarelU. Alexander J , 24251A

Gabel. Rlch.ird J . 2o345A.

Isbell. Fr.mk M., 26751 A.

Parker Ger.e H . 24255A.

Bu-cher Bruce A., 25704A,

Moyer. James E . 2o68.?A

C.-rtner Robert H.. a5347A.

Nen^ebier. Robert A . 25742A.

Mixscn. M^iriun H.. Jr , 25349A.

Sune Corp.^

Rolwlni? Miriam D . 27546W,
Carlson. Mary S . 25764W.
L;\uderbaugh. Norma J., 25766W.
Shugart. Ernestine B.. 26656W
MledwlK. Ruth C. 27544W.
E.sele. Pauline A . 266:9W.
Wix.d. Edith. 266o7W.
Kellam. Agne« L.. 28012W.
Caddell. Joan M . 29343W.
Evans. Mary J . 29344W.
Marshall. Louise A . 26658W.
Grim, Patricia A., 27550W.
Bates. Modena L . 28013W.
R.xip. Mary E . 29343W
Mom.row. Esther M . 24258W.
Wikoff, Lois J . 29346W
Thomas. Patricia A . 25355W,
Wallace. Mary E , 26663W,
Welborn. Ella E., 26«84W.
Zlrkle, Robbie J.. 26662W.
Pelzer. Betty J . 26660W.
Veitch. Janet. 2e666W.
Nixon, Eva C. 26661W.
James. Phyllis U., 25354W.
Chamberlln. Mary A.. 28177W.
Dejesuscru:-. Maria. 2801 4W.
Betzold. NLxrgery E . 28015W.

C 'llavo. Laverne M , 242:9W,
Fritts. Dorla J , 37547W.

Mrdical Specialist Corps
H.iyton Marian J , 29352W.
Cuursey. Junle U . 27553W.

Chaplain
Connelly Georjte R , 28158A.

SK-OND LirTTTNANT TO FIRST Mtt-TTNANT

L:nr of the Air Force
Saxe, Char.e* L . Jr . 28940A.
C irney. Charles R . 28941 A.
J.;hns(>n. Richard D . 28942A.
Garczvnskl, Prank B., Jr., 28943A.
C.jurtanev. Dennis E.. 28944A.
Jackson. Richard H , 28945A.
Ec-k. Kevin F , 2894flA.
Dalton. William M , 2894BA.
Purkhlser Joe B. 28948A
Bouchard. Richard M , 28947A.
Blerlk. William V.. 28950A
Schmidt. George J , 28951A.
Touz. John J . 28952A.
Christian. Daniel R.. 28953A.
Nancarrow, George E., 28954A.
Williams. Ernest W.. 28855W.
Harvell. Joe L . Jr.. 28957A.
Bradshaw. Gene. 2f!958A.
Biugh, David S , 28959A.
Floyd. Charles R . 28960A
Th( mpson. James K , 28962A.

Boone. George T., 28»63A.

Seegers. James F . 28964A.

Rogers. Charles E . 28965A.

EK)vle. James K , 2a966A.

Olln. Richard E. 28887A.

Beckwlth. Charles A.. Jr . 28968A.

Schelonka. Edward P, 28©68A.

Fisher. James L , 28970A.

Gordon. John N . 28971A.

Fluhr. Wallace E . 28972A.

OrafT. Robert S . 2<ja73A

Taylor. Kenneth W., Jr . 28fl74A.
Medical Service Corps

n.-'her. Elwood E . 29341A.

Blakeney. J' e F . 28011A.

Lynch. Jeremiah R., 29342A.

Note -Dates of rank of all offlcer* nomi-
nated fir promotlnn will be determined by
the Secrcliiry i^t the Air PHarce.

Postmastths
The following-named persons to be post-
masters:

ALABAMA

A'.lce H Hyatt. Orady. Ala.. In place of S.
C Athey. retired.

Harry Y Dempsey. Jr., JacksonTllle, Al*.,
In place of J. T. Martin, retired.

ALASKA

Victor R Mllllgan. Ketchikan. Alaska, In
place of P N Ripley, retired.

John G. WllUania. St., YakuUt. Alaska.
Office made PresldenUal July 1, 1947.

AKKAJrSAS

Hubert E Holland, Dardanelle. Ark, In

place of J D Gault. retired.

CALirOENIA

Kathryn Jean Long, Alcatraz, Calif., In
place of E R Martin, deceased.

Marshall N McFle, Anaheim. Calif.. In
placo of L H Hoaklns, resigned.

Other M Parker, Cuyama, Calif. Offlc*
established July 18,' 1953.

Evelyn L Hash. Fields Landing, Calif., in
place of D W Mitchell, retired.

Je«sse Ralph Layton, Pullerton. Calif., tn
place of F D Lowrey. removed.

Manuel George Sousa, Half Moon Bsy,
Calif , In place of L B. Watts, deceased.

Roy A. Hubbell. Holllster, Calif , In place
of W. H O Brlen, deceased.

Madeline B. Hord. Johannesburg. Calif..
In place of M. F. MacQulddy, resigned.

George S Brtngle. McCloud, Calif., In place
of P. W. McGrorty, retired.

Mary Frank Donau, Manzanlta Lake. Calif.,
In place of A S. Dcnau, resigned.

J

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8641

Raymond E. Caudlll, Port Chicago, Calif.,
In place of O. H. German, deceased.

Kenneth B. Johnson, Salinas, Calif., In
place of J. L. Murphy, retired.

Loren Bxirns Klrby. San Fernando, Calif.,
In place of T. R. Wllaon. resigned.

Jesse J. Parks, Jr., Tustln, Calif., In place
of C. H. Campbell, transferred.

COLORADO

Beulah B. Mays, Brlggsdale, Colo.. In place
of B. W. Jenkins, transferred.

Lloyd E. Simpson, Paonla, Colo., In place
of T. H. Wand, retired.

Bruce N. Cramb, Wiley. Colo., In place of
C. H. Davis, retired.

CONNECnCDT

Arthur L. Pepin. Jewett City. Conn., In
place of L. E. Boucher, deceased.

Jeanne H. Wright. New Preston. Conn., in
place of W. J. Gilbert, declined.

DELAWARE

Bdw-ard G. P. Jones, Jr., Delmar. Del., In
place of R. R. German, retired.

rLORIDA

Orlue E. Hendrlckson. Crawfordvllle, Fla.,
In place of L. H. Raker, deceased.

WUUam J. Durrance, Fort Meade, Fla., In
place of 8. G. T\irnley, deceased.

George B. Jordan, Indlantown, Fla., In
place of M. M. Gold, removed.

CEORCU

Ava L. O'DUlon. Bishop. Ga., in place of
W. F. Wells. Jr., resigned.

Opal McKoon. Luthersvllle, Ga., In place of
U. B. Reeves, deceased.

George M. Freeman. Quitman, Ga., in place
of J. D. Kllpatrlck. resigned.

John Clyde Twiggs. St.. Young Harris. Ga.,
In place of W. R. Hall, retired.

IDAHO

Jos-ph A. GUlett, Declo, Idaho, In place of
L. A. GUlett, retired.

ILLINOIS

James S. Rutter, Addison. 111., In place of
J. 8. Rutter. resigned.

Donald R. Harris, Bethalto, 111., in place of
Kenneth HenXhaus, deceased.

WUUam K. Stevenson. BlggsvUle, 111., In
place of L. E. Dixon, deceafed.

John F. Wooldrldge. Broughton, lU., In
place of Winifred Hughes, removed.

Melvln V. Mader. Forest Park. 111., In place
of A. H. Schuler, deceased.

Roy E. Thomas. Marengo, 111., In place of
C. T. Carney, removed.

WUUam V. MarUn, OdeU. 111., in place of
J. L. Langan. deceased.

Francis E. Overstreet, Rarltan, 111., In place
of B. A. Houtchens, resigned.

Emery E. Tlpsord, Saybrook, 111., in place of
W. O. Butler, retired.

Hugh H. Holsapple. Toledo. lU., In place of
R. B. Orlssom. decetksed.

Clarence E. Harden, TolODO, 111., in place of
C. E. Harden, transferred.

nVDIAISA

Henry E. Rlppe, Hobart, Ind., In place of
W. G. Black, retired.

Victor J. Rubers, St. Melnrad, Ind.. in place
Of R. K. Hubers. retired.

IOWA

Adolph L Opsal, Armstrong, Iowa, In
place of M. E. Darles. removed.

Kenneth L. Shaw. Camanche, Iowa, in place
of L. P. Beans, retired.

Richard F. Messier. Rockiord, Iowa, in place
of C. L. Schmidt, transferred.

KANSAS

Glenn O. Tarrant. El Dorado, Kans.. in
place of F. H. Stelger, retired.

Ernest R. Dicks, Hutchinson, Kans., In
place of R. IT. Hockaday, retired.

Edgar L. WUtse, Paola. Kans., in place of
W. H. McDowell, resigned.

CI II 544

Burl D. Prusslng, Bhawnee, Kans., in place
of Beth Constance, resigned.

Gallen R. Braden, Wakefteld, Kans., in
place of C. F. Gates, retired.

KnmTCKT

Mattle L. Riley. Benton. Ky., in place of
C. B. Cox, retired.

Mary E. Wilson, Bypro, Ky., in place of
A. B. HaU, removed.

Richard D. Spauldlng, Clay City, Ky., In
place of M. G. McGulre, deceased.

B«ftbel O. Hall, Clearfield, Ky„ In place of
A. M. Bowne. retired.

Frank M. Powell, Danville, Ky., In place of
R. D. Stlgall, transferred.

Earl M. Spangler, Hlghspllnt, Ky., In place
of E. J. Lovltt. resigned.

WUUam R. Parker, HodgenvUle, Ky., in
place of E. D. Enlow, retired.

Charles E. Sullivan, Horse Cave. Ky., in
place of J. H. McGee. Jr., removed.

Nathan I. Clements, Union, Ky., in place
of N. R. Huey. retired.

LOUISIAM-

Robert J. Rossi, Gonzales, La., in place of

L. S. Gonzales, resigned.

MAINZ

Emery S. Dickey. Brooks, Maine, in place
of K. B. Morehead, removed.

Marvel W. Harshaw, Brownvllle Junction,
Maine, In place of W. P. Rosebush, deceased.

Gordon Gould, Hinckley, Maine. In plaCe of
E. A. Slmoneau. retired.

ICAKTLAND

Luther V. Wlnstead, Clinton, Md., In place
of R. R. Ripple, resigned.

Richard E. Howard, Funkstown, Md., in
place of R. G. WUUams, retired.

MASSACHT78KTTS

Cyrus I. Dennis. Leominster, Mass., in place
of M. E. G'Toole, retired.

MICHIGAN

Prank B. Sheridan, AUendale, Mich., office
established November 1. 1954.

Gordon Arthur Young, Coloma, Mich., in
place of N. J. DuVall, retired.

Elileen D. Wood, Lacota, Mich., in place of
N. B. Dewey, retired.

Norman F. Smith, Marlette. Mich., in place
of J. 8. Dunsford, retired.

Daniel C. Stanchlna. Norway, Mich., in
place of C. J. Bal. resigned.

Barbara J. Miller, Sanford, Mich., in place
of E. C. Hess, retired.

MINNESOTA

Raymond O. Halvorson. Ceykm, Minn., in
place of H. A. C. Saggau. removed.

Charles H. Bordwell. Keewatin. Minn., In
place of O. A. Olson, retired.

Jay F. Aykens, Steen, Minn., in place of
M. F. Griffin, removed.

Alexander E. Rathmanner, Wlnsted. Minn.,
in place of A. P. Faschlng, transferred.

MISSISSIPPI

Abram C. Abraham, Leland, Miss., in place
of W. W. Armstrong, retired.

Fmma J. Cummlngs, Pheba. Miss., in place
of J. C. Washington, deceased.

MISS0X7SI

Tony E. Cates, EUslnore, Mo., In place of
P. G. Wlngo, deceased.

Lena V. McMurry, Moscow Mills, Mo., in
place of Q. T. Carter, deceased.

IfEBKASKA

Stanley J. Smith, Daykin, Nebr., in place of
V. P. Adams, deceased.

Dean J. Rocke, Hallam, Nebr., in place of
X. M. Alberts, retired.

Helen B. Birrs, Palmyn, Nebr., In place of
M. B. Bouck, resigned.

James J. Pucha, Platte Center, Nebr., In
place of Kitty Henneesy, retired.
nvADa

Florence J. Holman, Bast Blj, NeT., In place
of E. I. Hermansen, retired.

KEW HAMPSBIKE

Herbert R. Seldon. Gossvllle. N. H., in
place of G. H. Yeaton, retired.

Mary E. Nichols, Lincoln, N. H., in place
of A. D. Towers, declined.

Jessie G. Thompson, Moultonboro, N. H.,
In place of R. E. Goodwin, retired.

Helen C. Sleeper, North Haverhill, N. H.,
In place of C. W. Southworth, retired.

Henry F. Stapleton. Plttsfleld, N. H., in
place of L. E. Sheehan, deceased.

Delwyn E. Phllbrlck, Rye Beach, N. H., in
place of H. J. Hayes, retired.

NrW JEBSET

William E. Stevens, Broadway, N. J., in
place of J. S. Howell, retired.

Wesley H. Beekman, River Edge, N. J., in
place of R. B. Cunningham, removed.

Joseph E. Mott, Tuckerton, N. J., In place
of K. C. Wetmore. deceased.

NEW MEXICO

otto Klaudt, Demlng, N. Mex., In place of
M. C. Wehmhoner, transferred.

NEW T08X

Henry A. Qoetz, Albany, N. Y.. in place of
J. P. Hayes, removed.

Harry F. Sacklnger, Bolivar, N. T., in place
of J. S. Dempsey, Sr., resigned.

Fred Hoffman, Jr., Brockport, N. Y., In
place of E. T. Mulhem, retired.

MerUn G. Ham. Claveraclc. N. Y.. in place
of H. J. Sagendorph, retired.

Walter A. Labuda, Climax, N. Y.. in place
of M. F. Lockwood, deceased.

Laverne Robert Staebell, East Pembroke,
N. Y., in pfltce of M. N. Seamans, resigned.

Rex L. Steele, Ellzavllle. N. Y.. In place of
A. L. Coons, retired.

Raymond W. Delaney, Endicott, N. Y., in
place of A. J. Hand, retired.

Alice A. Holvlk, Great River, N. Y, in place
of M. E. Drywa, resigned.

John A. Baugh, Jr.. Middle Grove, N. Y.,
In place of C. A. Stedman, retired.

Robert W. Betts. Millport, N. Y.. in place
of H. C. Plala, resigned.

Daniel V. Walker, Oyster Bay, N. Y., in
place of J. A. McOarr. deceased.

WUlard C. Schmltt, Westtmry, N. Y.. in
place of J. J. Bennett, transferred.

NORTH CAROLINA

Grady S. Tucker, Locust, N. C. ofQce estab-
lished October 17, 1955.

Jake H. Wright, Jr., Middlesex, N. C. In
place of R. A. Parker, resigned.

James H. Canlpe, Mcrven, N. C, in place
of N. R. Klbler, retired.

WilUam K. Delbridge, Norlina, N. C, in
place of T. T. Hawks, deceased.

Charles Clifton Mock, Pfafftown, N, C, in
place of Mamie Pfaff, retired.

Robert W. Sharpe. Sharpsburg. N. C. In
place of Estelle Eason, removed.

Malcolm Vance Hickman, Winston -Salem,
N. C, in place of W. B. Booe, resigned.

NORTH DAKOTA

Ge<M^ J. Dletz, Belfleld, N. Dak., In place
of S. O. Doyle, retired.

Donald C. Hawley, Hope, N. Dak., in place
Of P; L. Freund, retired.

OHIO

Thomas Royal Gatton, Butler, Ohio, in
place of D. R. Swank, transferred.

Francis T. Kristenak. Clay Center, Ohio, In
place of W. R. Sunsen, retired.

Howard M. HlobL Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, in
place of E. BvEUer, resigned.

Joseph D. HfuKwk, Diamond, Ohio, In place
of R. H. Johns, retired.

Hennan L. Kruse. Edgerton, Ohio, In place
of H. J. Brown, retired.

Nick C. Marrale, Leroy, Ohio, in place of
L. E. Gorham. retired.

Elvah Davis, Lockwood. Ohio, In place at
L. W. Rice, retired.

Nor» Bell A. Might, McCatchenTlIle, Ohio,
in place of M. E. Parsell. resigned.

8&12

Pred A. Stanley, Newton Falls,
placa of L. B. Orlffltb. retired.

Oene C. Alexander, Rarden, Ohio,
of Paul McKlnley, removed.

Oliver T. Van Sickle, Somerset,
place of I. A. Downey, deceased.

Hugh P. McPhee. Struthers, Ohio,
of John Sekerak, retired.

Ila M. Porter, Vincent. Ohio, In
L. V. Haddow. retired.

Robert L. Meeae, Wtlmot, Ohio, in
Ralph Meese. deceaaed.

Adam J. Reay. Windham. Ohio. In
H. M. Parker, retired.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

Ohio, In
In place

Ohio, la
In place

place of
place of
place of

OKLAHOMA

R. Ray Heath. Stillwater. Okla., In place of
H. A. McNutt, resigned.

Jack Shackelford, Webber* Falls, Okla., In
place of M. D. Harmon, retired.

OaEOON

Clara T. Lane. Wheeler, Oreg . In place of
B. B. Nunn, retired.

PKNNSTLVANIA

Francis P. Golden. Coudersport, Pa , In
place of C. D. Patterson, retired.

Elba I. Coder. Mapleton Depot. Pa., In place
of C. E. Bell, retired. ,,

Prank K. Seaman. Sr.. Marietta, Pa.. In
place of E. B. Mll«y, Tvtlred.

Louis >K. Weintz. Mate moras. Pa.. In place
of Prank iiA^m:, retlrad.

Mary A. Eayi. Mount Braddock. Pa. In
place of N. Y Phelan. deceased.

Hugh R Saxton. NleboUou. Pa.. In place of
L. A. Wallace, retired.

Ernatt T. Thomaa. Red Hill, Pa., in place
of C. C. Bernd, retired.

Tbaddeus C. Sharer. Saylorsburg. Pa., la
place of J. P. Siegel, retired.

Elmer C. Bentz, Scottdale, Pa., In place of
G. S. McCurdy. retired.

John Kenneth Long, Shlppensburg, Pa., In
place of C P. Hockeramlth. retired.

Lee L. Altemose, Tatamy, Pa., in place of
E. S. Happel, retired.

John a. Butler, Williamsburg, Pa.. In place
of J. K. Morrison, retired.

ptnaiTO aico

Efraln Pouport, Las Pledras, P R., In place
of Angeline Prlas. retired.

SOUTH DAKOTA

OUbert M. Ruden, Hurley. S. Dak., in place
of R. A. Biahop, resigned.

TXNNCSSEE

Dan L. Clapp, Corryton. Tenn., In place of
C S Nicely, transferred.

Willie H. Cook. Liberty. Tenn., In place of
J. E. Hale, retired.

TXXAS

George L. Hanke. Aspermont, Tex., in place
of W. M. Robblns. declined.

Joseph P. Hutton. Canadian. Tex . In place
of P. V. Bryant, retired.

Lonnle E. Nordt, Damon. Tex , In place of
L. C. Nordt. deceased.

Jane R. Davis. Prltch, Tex., in place of
W. C. Lee. deceased.

Edith M. Casey, New Caney. Tex., in place
of O. B. Davis, retired.

Coleete O. Brown. Notrees, Tex,. In place of
C J Brown, resigned.

Vernon L. Naul, Overton, Tex,, In place of
W, A. Gillespie, retired.

Robert C. Wataon, Plains. Tex., in place of
Cora Read, retired.

George W, Kemp, Richardson, Tex.. In place
of W. C. Wallis. transferred.

Uvaldo Sema. San Diego, Tex.. In place of
L. P. Garcia, removed.

Birdie L. Undaey. Slmms. Tex,. In place of
N. E. Webb, retired.

VTIGINIA

George Paachal Grtndataff. Damaacus. Va.,
In place of W. C. Mock, deceased.

Arthur B. Chard. Pleldale. Va., In place of
Johnnie Wllaon, removed.

Kenton H. McCoy. Lexington, Va., In place
of M L. Beeton. retired.

Louis A. McVey, Meadowvlew. Va., In place
of H. C. Browning, retired.

VTXCIN ISLAN88

Charles E. Clarke, Prederlksted, V. 1 , in
place of Adele Berg, resigned.

WASHINGTON

Lawrence V. Grape, lone. Wash , in place
of O H. McPaul. retired.

Jackson D. Hubbard, Othello. Wash., in
phice of B H Barton, retired,

Ivan K. Keve. Waltsburg. Wash., In place
of G, C Houtchens. retired.

WEST VIKGINIA

Fred E Wiseman. Charleston, W. Va.. In
pL^ce of J, W Singleton, removed.

Evelyn Wolford. Edgarton, W, Va . In place
of L, J, Weaver, resigned

Ruby Cobb, Glasgow. W Va , in place of
A. C Moore, retired,

Andrew J, Stacy, laeger, W. Va . In place of
R, B Cooke, resigned

Myrtle H McCane, Mallory. W. Va., in place
of L. M Powell, resigned.

Frederick F Murphy. War, W. Va . In place
of R, T, Hauck. resigned

John J Miller. Winona. W. Va . In place
of R. L, Pugh, retired.

WISCONSIN

Frederick M Grlswold. Lakemills. Wis . In
place of P, C, Wolff, retired,

Warren R, Erdmann. Oakfleld. Wis. In
place of E. E McKnlght, retired,

Norbert P Schumerth. West DePere. Wis.,
In place of H. P. Vande Hei. deceased.

WTOUINC

George W, Nichols. Big Plney, Wyo , In
place of O. L. Barp. resigned.

CONFIRMATIONS

Executive nominations con-'rmed by
the Senate June 10. 1957:

Unitxd Statxs An Poacx

The following-named officer under the pro-
visions of section 8066. title 10, United States
Code, to be assigned to a position of impor-
tance and responsibility designated by ttie
President in rank as follows:

Ma] Gen, Richard Clark Lindsay, 476A.
Regular Air Force, In the rank of lieutenant
general.

PaOMOTTONS IN THX NaVT

The following- named offlcers of the Naval
Reserve for permanent promotion In the line
and stdH corps as provided by law:

TO BE rear aomulals
Line
John J, Bergen Clyde W, King

George A Parkinson Charles R Khoury
Duncan S. Baker Lloyd V. Berkner

Medical Corps
Waltman Walters Morton J, Tendler

Benjamin Tenney, J •. William G. Uamm

Sup^dy Corpt
George D, Horning, Jr.

The following-named appointments or
ADomoNAL Api>ointiiknt8 and PmoMonoHS

IN THE NaVT AMD MaUNX CORPfl

The nomination of Wilbur D. Latham and
1,404 other persons for appointment or pro-
motion, in the Navy or in the Marine Corps,
which were received by the Senate on May
27, 1957, were confirmed today, and may be
found In the proceedings of the Senate for
May 27, 1957, under the caption "Nomina-
tions." beginning with the name of Wilbur D.
Latham, which appecui on page 7717. and
ending with the name of Charles McLennan,
which Is shown on page 7720.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, Jlne 10, 197)7

The House met at 12 o'clock noon.
The Chaplain. Rev. Bernard Braskamp,
D. D., offered the following prayer:

O Thou who art the gracious and
beneficent God and Father of us all. we
rejoice that our beloved country from
the beginning of its history has been a
haven and home for a vast multitude of
Thy children seeking the blessings of
freedom.

Grant that in these turbulent and
troubled days, when the problems of
interhuman relationships seem so acute,
we may never allow anything to divide
our people and mar that unity of spirit
upon which our national security and
very existence depend.

May our leaders in church and state
be inspired and blessed with a clear vi-
sion of Thy divine will and be equal to
the arduous task of establishing a social
order that has in it the spirit of com-
radeship and cooperation, of justice and
good will.

Help us to speed the coming of that
day when not only all who live within
the borders of our land but men and
nations everywhere shall be merged into
a beloved community and into a com>
mon wealth of free and peace-loving
people.

We are praying especially for our
President, tieseeching Thee to hasten his
recovery to health and to share Thine
eternal wisdom with the doctors piid
nurses, enabling them to know Jiist what
to do. Thou art the Great Physician
and we shall give Thee all the praise.

Hear us in Christ's name. Amen.

The Journal of the proceedings of
Friday. June 7, 1957, was read and
approved.

PARLIAMENT OP GHANA
The SPEAKER laid before the House
the following communication, which
was read:

Thx SrKAKca, Nattomal Afl«XMai.T.

PAKUAMKirr House.
Accra. May 29, 19S7 .
The SpiAKn or trx House or Rxranurra-
nvse or the Umited States or Amesica.
Washington, D. C. United States of
Amertco
Deab Me. Speakee: I have been requested
by the National Assembly of the Parliament
of Ghana to convey Its thanks to the House
of Representativea of the United States of
America for lU resolution of March 6. 1857,
extending to us Its most cordial greetings
pnd good wishes on the occasion of the
independence of Ghana.

Your action is highly uppreclsted, and
may we wish you In return all success and
God's blessing.

Yours very sincerely.

Sir Kmmanxjel C. Quist, O. B. E.

TRANQUILIZERS AND PEP PELLS

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani-
mous consent to extend my remarks at
this point In the Record.

The SPEAKER. la there objection to
the request of the gentleman fr<Mn
West Virginia?

There was no objection.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

i

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, public
alarm over increasing consumption of
the so-called tranquilizers and pep pllla
was highlighted last week by the Amer-
ican Medical Association meeting in
New York aty.

Public health workers and adminis-
trators of mental health institutions
have for some time recognized the ex-
tent to which voluntary resort to these
drugs is endangering the character and
mental stability of youth and adults
alike.

The Interstate and Foreign Commerce
Committee has just completed hearings
on proposed legislation aimed at polic-
ing the sale and distribution of trade-
named preparations containing these
dangerou.s drugs in one form or another.
Evidence indicating the widely dis-
tributed sources through which they
are bootlegged leads one to doubt the
effectiveness of remedial legislation au-
thorizing anything less than a nat'on-
wide, fully manned policing organiza-
tion.

The Pure Pood and Drug Adminis-
tration should be given sufBcient funds
and personnel to compel full and com-
plete reporting of quantities manufac-
tured, when, where, and to whom sold,
and the brand names under which they
are distributed. This would make it dif-
fV:ult for unlicensed persons to make the
drugs available promiscuously as is now
the custom.

But mere legislation can by no means
succeed in suppressing the sale of widely
heralded nostrums promising so much
to emotionally unstable individuals
seeking relief for their frustrations when
sensational news writers and advertis-
ing displaj's continue to impress the
public with the marvelous results fol-
lowing their use without reference to the
ill effects following improper use.

The real danger lies in lack of knowl-
edge. Adults who are frustrated and
incapable of appreciating the ill effects
are prone to fall to the easy habit of
turning to drugs. On the slightest pre-
text they become habitues, even as the
narcotic addict allows the craving to de-
stroy the will to resist. The personality
becomes lost. They become venders for
profit. They seek out the unsuspecting
youth in schools, social gatherings, any-
where where groups and individuals can
be tempted to experience a "thrill."
It is here that youngsters learn to try
anything once, and many of them slowly
lose their willpower and self-control.

So, parents, teachers, and responsible
elders, by disseminating knowledge of
the dangers inherent in these drugs, will
prepare the background needed to be-
vtrare the temptation offered by venders
and illegal dispensers of such drugs.

8643

CALL OP THE HOUSE

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker,
I make the point of order that a quorum
is not present.

The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum
Is not present.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I
move a call of the House.

A call of the House was ordered.

The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to their
names:

[RoU No. 1041

Alger Granahan Osraers

Anfuro Gregory Philbln

Bailey Harvey Poage

Barrett Eealey Powell

Bass, N. H. Hoeven Prouty

reamer Holland Radwan

Blatnlk Holtzman Ralni

Bosch James Roosevelt

Bowler Kearney Santangelo

Buckley Keeney St. George

Eyme, HI. Latham Seely-Brown

Chudoff LeCompte Shelley

Cooley McConneU Smith, Wis.

Corbett Mclnilre Taylor

Coudert Machrowicz Teague, Tex.

Dawson, UL Mason TeUer

Dempsey May Walnwrlght

DolUnger Michel Walter

Donohue Miller, Md. Wlgglesworth

Dooley Montoya WlUls

Ensle Morano Wlthrow

Fisher Moulder Wolverton

Pogarty Multer Zelenko
Frelinghuysen Norrell

Qarmatz O'Konskl

The SPEAKER. On this rollcaU 359
Members have answered to their names,
a quorum.

By unanimous consent, further pro-
ceedings under the call were dispensed
with.

CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OP 1957

COMMTITEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Mr. BURLESON. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the Committee
on Foreign Affairs may sit during gen-
eral debate today.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Texas?

Mr. CHRISTOPHER. Mr. Speaker. I
object.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, I move
that the House resolve itself into the
Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union for the further con-
sideration of Che bill (H. R. 6127) to pro-
vide means of further securing and pro-
tecting the civil rights of persons with-
in the jurisdiction of the United States.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly the House resolved itself
Into the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the fur-
ther consideration of the bill, H. R.
6127. with Mr. Porakd in the chair.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
yield such time as he may desire to the
gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Wnrr-

TKW].

Mr. WHTTTEN. Mr. Chairman, I
am strongly opposed to this bill. I
think the proposed legislation, which
this committee is considering, could
lead to the destruction of our judicial
system and even otu* form of govern-
ment.

First, may I say that I served in the
Mississippi Legislature 1 session, and
served almost 9 years as district attorney
in my section of Mississippi, prior to
coming to the Congress. In my posi-
tion as district attorney. I dealt with
law-enforcement offlcers throughout the
southern area, and I had the opportunity
to learn something of what goes on in
my section of the South.

May I point out that the argxunents
advanced in favor of the legislation which
you are considering are based upon an

erroneous conclusion as to what the
facts are. I do not believe there is any
question in anyone's mind but that this
legislation is directed toward the South
Yet you are wrong In your belief as to
conditions there.

I would like to read to you the Mis-
sissippi statute as to who can vote I
quote:

Every Inhabitant of this State except
Idiots, Insane persons, and Indians not
taxed, who Is a citizen of the United SUtes.
21 years old and upward, and who has
resided in this State 2 yf»n. uaO. who la
able to read any section of |he Constitution,
or If unable to read the sama, who is able
to understand the same when read to him,
or give a reasonable Interpretation thereof!
and who shall have been duly registered as
an electcn: by the ofDcers of this State un-
der the laws thereof, and who has never
been convicted of the crime of perjury, for-
gery, embezzlement, or bigamy, and who
has paid taxes which may have been legaUy
required of him. and which he has had an
opportunity to pay according to law for 2
preceding years, and shall produce satis-
factory evidence that he has paid such
taxes on or before the 1st day of Pfeb-
ruary of the year In which he shaU offer to
vote, shall be a quaUfled elector in the city
of his residence, and shall be entitled to
vote In any election held not less than 4
months after his registration. Any minister
of the gospel shaU be entitled to vote after
6 months' residence In the election dletrlct,
city, town, or village If otherwise qualified.'
No others than those above Included shaU
be entitled or shall be allowed to vote In any
election.

It has been the belief In my State back
through the years that voting was a
privilege. We are all familiar with the
law which says that the qualification of
the electors is a matter of State deter-
mination. It has been the bell^ In my
State that if a person were not Interested
to the point of registering, if he were
not Interested to the point of paying $2
in support of schools, little was to be
gained by any assistance on the part of
anybody to force such a person to r^:ls-
ter or to pay this poll tax in time.

I would like to also correct an im-
pression about the poll tax in Missis-
sippi. We make exemptions on the poll
tax for those over 60 years of age. We
make exemptions for those who are only
21 years of age for their first vote. We
make exemptions for certain persons
who have disability. But all persons are
obligated to pay the poll ta= in Mis-
sissippi, irrespective of whether they vote
or not. The only connection between
voting and the poU tax in Mississippi is
that. If you care to vote, you must pay
before the 1st of February in the year
in which you offer to vote.

I think that Mississippi might have
repealed the poll tax many years ago
except for the pressure from Washing-
ton to force them to repeal it The poll-
tax requirement is in the constitution.
It would require a constitutional amend-
ment to remove it. It is my sincere be-
lief that except for pressure from Wash-
ingtcm, in all likelihood Mississippi
would have followed other States in re-
pealing the poll tax.

On the other hand, we do get about
a million dollars from the poll tax, which
is a considerable amount when it comes
to trying to support schools during this
period when we are d<ring our dead level

8644

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Jinie 10

1957

best to improve school facilities. I be-
lieve if you were to check the matter,
you would find a bigger percentage of
improvement in the South, and particu-
larly in Mississippi in the last 20 years,
in the progress that has been made in
providing ample school facilities, than
anywhere else in the country.

We cannot solve this matter by cater-
ing to the pressures that are right now
centered on us. because the purpose of
those drives is not to correct a thing that
I know does not exist down there, but
it is an appeal to other areas.

This issue has gotten into the realm
of pressure politics here in the Congress.

I have been here long enough to have
friends in Congress from Chicago tell me
how elections were handled on occasion
in some areas there. I recall that former
Representative Marcantonio told a group
of us that so long as he jumped on
Congressman John Rankin, of my State,
occasionally, he could stay in Congress
as long as he lived. He followed it up
and said if Mr. Rankin jumped him on
occasion. Mr. Rankin would stay here as
long as he lived. As we all can see. this
goes beyond a mere legislative situation.

We have tried to have honest elections
in my State; and. in spite of all our ef-
forts, we. like every other State that I
know of, have a continumg problem with
that fly-by-night type of citizen, of which
every State has a number, who on the
eve of the election can be bought one
way or the other. I am glad that it is a
limited number \n my area. I think it is
a limited number in other areas. I am
not going to give away the Members of
Congress, but since I have been here I
have been close enough to Members from
all sections to where I know our problem
is a general one. May I say I think it is
much less than in many of t^ese areas.
Thus, it is that we require registration
in advance. We require a toll tax of $2
per year, which you can see is peanuts, if
I might use that term to describe how
small it is. The only thing is that a
man who wants to vote must pay it on or
before the 1st of February m the year
in which he votes, and our primaries
come alcmg in August and the elections
in Novernber.

What is the purpose of that? The
purpose is to keep some candidate or
some group of people backing some can-
didate, whatever their reason from go-
ing out on election eve and through th«»
use of money, promises, or some other
thing, throwing an election from one side
to the other. We have a Corrupt Prac-
tices Act in Mississippi which is directed
toward the same thinjf. In none of
these, or in the substantive law. will you
f\nd where there is any attention paid t<j
color.

We have a situation down there, which
may not prevail forever, but it has a Ion*
time, of having a one-party State. I
would like to show you the figures m the
1951 election, a general election, where
for all candidates for State offices, gov-
ernor, and all other candidates, the vote
in the whole State of Mississippi was
42.047. Why is that? Not a smgle Dem-
ocratic nominee had an opponent,.
Many of your own relatives did not vote
because there was no contest. In my
State the Republican Party does not

even have a primary. They meet in con-
vention and select their candidates.
The same is true of the other nilnor par-
ties which have appeared from time to
time.

Thus it is that in our general election
we do not even have any contest, and
therefore nobody pays any attention 'to
the voting. We will say last year was an
exception to that, in view of President
Eisenhowers nation.il popularity— he
did not carry my State— but we did have
more attention to the general election
since there was a conte.st on between the
feelings of more Mississippians than
heretofore existed.

We get to another thing In connection
with this, which we think is sound,
judged by all prior Supreme Court de-
cisions. We in my State have felt that
we wished <o have justice in the courts.
We wish all our citizens to have justice
in the courts. In the years that I was
di.'^trict attorney, and as I told you I
was for almost 9 years. I recall hardly
any instance where a Negro or a colored
person was before that court that I did
not have from 1 to 10 peop'e. if the de-
fendant had anv kind of character or
standing at all. coming to ask me to let
him off leniently. It is usual and it Is
typical.

It is hard for ppople in northern area.s
to understand why we are so excited
about these things, because in the
North you live segre-^ated. I live here in
Washington, but I hve out in a white
area. I will see more Negroes the day
I £10 home to my little town of about 3.500
people than I see in WashinRton in the
course of a whole congressional session,
because here they live in a certain area,
and we live in another area. You know
it is true. It Is true in New York and
Chicago.

Durinjf the Democratic convention I
had the privilege of driving over South
Chicago. I was driven by a citizen of
Chicago. I asked him how they were
meeting the integrated school problems.
He said. We don t have any real prob-
lem in Chicago. The minute the
Negroes move into a white block or move
into a white school, the first year it is
mixed up a little bit. the second year the
whites move out and give it to them."
We do not do that in our area. We live
integrated. We do not have segregated
sections in our cities because, in all
seriousness, we have more love and more
appreciation for the good colored citizens
in our area than I have found in the 15
years I have t>een in Congress in any
other city or any other State in the
Nation.

In other words. I can clearly see that
the efforts of some in Congress definitely
stem from back-home pressures from
the northern areas. It does not come
from the areas where you set out so
graciously to correct what we know needs
no correction.

As I started to say, in the handling
of justice In our section, we have felt
that a person who was interested enough
in public affairs to register and pay $2
and do it by the 1st of February to retain
his right to vote would make a better
juror. Jurors in the State of Mississippi
must be qualified electors. I think It Is
sound. I think it is sound for the ad-

ministration of Justice. I know our
courts to a great extent are getting Into
bad standing with the American people —
not just in the South, because of the
segregation decision — but because as we
know, in the f^eld of jurisprudence and
the field of judicial law they have gone
far beyond what the court has done In
many years past. There are other
things that contribute greatly to this
feelmg in the rest of the country that you
need to do something to whip the South
in line because we are mistreating some-
body. I say it is not so. But it is easy to
.see why that feeling in the public mind
has been built up.

I will indicate to you why we are so
helpless to correct that. Last year the
Judiciary Committee of the United
States Senate had its hearings. At that
time one of the Senators raised the
question of the Till case, which hap-
pened down in my area. It is one of
those tragedies that all right-thinking
people, white and colored, deplore. It
is one of those cases where the sheriff
of my county, a fine citizen, when he
heard of It. set out and did what every
officer would do. went out and made a
search and found a body and brought
the body in. and went through all that
any officer should do.

The judge of that judicial district is
a fine citizen; and he gave every right,
not only to the Sute in its prosecution
of the case, but every right to the de-
fendants as the law required. They
made every effort to obtain all the evi-
dence that was available; and it was
properly presented.

The attorney general of the State
.sent an assistant to help the very fine
district attorney. Everything in the
world wafi done to present the strongest
case possible to that jury. I will agree
that subsequent to that trial, and in re-
cent months, there have been magazine
articles by these two defendants which
would lend some weight to a belief that
they might have been guilty. But I will
pomt out to you that in the trial of all
cases, not only in my State, but else-
where, the defendant is not required to
testify against himself. It is a priTiciple
that has existed m the English law back
to Magna Carta days.

You may second guess the jury which
tried that case. It is an age-old pastime
on the part not only of the public, but of
lawyers, to second guess or find fault
with a jury decision. But the sheiiff of
that county, who had performed his
duty, testified before that jury Urat in
his opinion the body which had been
found, and which had to be proven be-
yond a reasonable doubt to be tliat of
the claimed deceased, was older, more
mature, and had been in the water much
longer than could have been possible
with regard to Till.

We deplore the whole thing but. In
comparison. I could point to what I read
has happened in Chicago, what I read
has happened in New York every day.

Here is the thing I wish to point out.
While so much Is made of the Till rase —
and if you had been on the Jury you
might have decided differently, or if I
had. I might have — that Jury was sworn
to acquit the defendant imless th«'y be-
lieved him guilty fc»eyond every rt ason-

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

able doubt. That Is the test in all the
courts in all the States and in aU the
land. But in testimony before the Ju-
diciary Committee last year, I pointed
out what the Mississippi people would
do. I called attention to a case. I went
back after that and got the file out.
This case was in the adjoining county of
Yalobusha. Miss. This paper is of
the date January 24, 1936. "William C.
Mitchell sentenced to hang Friday,
March 13, for murder of Negro." On
the front page of that paper there is an
editorial, which makes this statement:
Twelve good Yalobusha County men de-
liberated the fate of WlUlam Clark MitcheU.
After about an hour they returned with a
verdict of guilty as charged. The Judge Im-
mediately pronounced the sentence which
was that on March 13. 1936, the defendant
should be hanged.

8645

The Jury in that case was composed
of 12 white citizens of that county. Not
a newspaper carried any reference to
my statement before the committee as
to the case, because It did not serve the
purpose of putting the heat on this po-
litical issue which is being blown up for
the purpose of carrying votes in our
northern cities.

This was the case of a white man
killing a Negro:

The case went to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court afBrmed It. Subse-
quently, in the southern State — and the
defense was mental lapse and mental
troubles — a Judge in a lower court of the
State issued a writ of error coram nobis,
saying that the man was Insane and the
court was unaware of it, if it had been
aware he would not have been indicted,
and if they had indicted they would not
have tried him. and all of that. So a
stay of execution was granted ; the lower
court set that aside, and a new date was
set. It went back to the Supreme Court,
and the Supreme Court afHrmed it again.

This man had been in the military
service; and Just prior to the actual exe-
cution the VFW and the American Le-
gion got into it. The Ckjvemor did com-
mute the sentence to life imprisonment,
and the man is serving his life sentence
20 years later.

Now. against that story, showing what
the southern people do when the proof
warrants it. I have a paper from Mem-
phis, Tenn.. in which it was announced
that Chief Justice Warren stayed the
execution of a Negro citizen who was
to be executed in Mississippi. It says
that counsel for Ooldsby, who was bom
In Mississippi, and so on. who was con-
victed of the shooting of a white lady
in 1954, appealed on grounds there were
no Negroes on the grand or trial juries.
Earlier Federal Judge Allen Cox, of the
north Mississippi district, had refused a
stay of execution. The United States
Supreme Court had previously reviewed
the Ooldsby case and affirmed the Missis-
sippi Supreme Court conviction, which
upheld the conviction and sentence.

Mr. and Mrs. Nelms, owners of a place
of business, refused to render curb service
to a carload of Negroes. I will not review
the testimony in connection with the
case; but the Negro. Ooldsby, who was
the only one who had a gun, shot Mr.
Nelms and shot his wife through the
throat, and she died. That was in 1954.

The State courts moved in proper
manner and tried the case in proper
manner. It went to the Supreme Court.
Here the Chief Justice has issued a re-
prieve or stay of execution, notwith-
standing that his own Court had affirmed
the lower court's decision, notwithstand-
ing that they had said that the evidence
amply warranted the verdict. Accord-
ing to the press, the reprieve was based
on the fact that there was no Negro on
the grand jury or the petit jury.

As I have pointed out to you, we have
had a one-party .tate. Because certain
people move from one community to an-
other over a very short period of time,
frankly, very few of them do qualify.
That Is not an effort to keep them from
qualifying as voters. But if you let a
man vote who Just got to town it would
be like we read occurs in Chicago or New
York — we would have people moving
voters in by the carloads on election
day to swing an election. We are sound,
in my Judgment, in requiring residence,
not only in the county or State, but in
the precinct in which the voter votes.
If you did not have that he could vote
here and go to the next precinct and
vote there, and so on down the line.

I dare say that the chances of finding
a Negro who had taken the trouble of
registering or taken the trouble of pay-
ing his poll taxes, who had met the qual-
ifications of an elector in the coimty,
would be about one out of a thousand in
a normal drawing of juries by chance so
as not to have a fixed trial. The chances
would be one to a thousand of having a
Negro on the Jury unless you deliberately
put him there. With all the love and
respect we have for people of all races,
when the Chief Justice of the United
States Supreme Court, or any other
court, says that you have to hand pick
and put on any jury a particular man,
or a particular color of man, or a par-
ticular race of man, it amounts to ivory
picking, if not fixing, by the Supreme
Court. That is the type of action which
has got the administration of justice in
terrible standing with the public gen-
erally. When we see people who are ac-
cused of violent crimes frequently have
their case dragged around for years and
years before there is any conclusion;
when we see a Justice of the Supreme
Court, who presumably took part In a
decision affirming the lower court's deci-
sion earlier, going against his own deci-
sion a few weeks later, it can only lead
to less regard for the courts.

I hope I made myself clear In present-
ing these matters to you. I have two Ne-
gro colleges in my district. I have many
friends who are Negroes. I know that
they enjoy more respect, more support,
more assistance, and everything that you
can mention that would be good and fine
in my section than you will find in New
York City, Washington, D. C, or Chi-
cago. In the United States there are
people who would like to have the Ne-
groes vote for them on election day.
There are people here who would like to
use their support, and there are people
who like their money ; but it has been my
observation that they, themselves, large-
ly want to be left alone.

We have helped them. They hava
helped us. I think our record in the

South compares most favorably with any
In the country.

Now, we turn to what would be doxie
In this effort to stir up a lot of agitation,
for you would not correct ansrthing. Let
us look at this bill that you are consider-
ing. Take subsecUon (b) of section 104,
entitled "Powers of the Commission." it
says that the Commission may accept
and utilize services of voluntary and un-
compensated personnel, and pay any-
such personnel actual and necessary
travel and subsistence expenses incurred
while engaged in the work of the Com-
mission, or in lieu of subsistence a per
diem not in excess of $12.

Under that provision the Commission
could accept the services of members
of the NAACP and pay them $12 a day
to win any election.

Mr. Chairman, if you will go back in
the files, or I could do it, you will find
that on the eve of every national election
for the last several terms, the Attorney
General, whoever he was, has come out
with some statement of what he is going
to do in the South. The origin of the
Dixiecrat Party in the South was an
action by Justice Clark, who was then
Attorney General. We had a terrible
occurrence in Smith County, Miss. It
was on the eve of an election. Tom
Claiic announced to the press — ^it was
in the press before they knew it any-
where else — ^what he was going to do
In the way of sending Department of
Justice people Into Smith County, Miss.
That case in Smith County had been
properly handled, and I think you would
agree it was properly handled. But our
governor, and the judges, and the officers
who were discharging their duties as
good, conscientious Americans, were
treated as though they were completely
against law and order, and treated as
though they were in favor of destruc-
tion of everybody's rights.

That resulted in the feeling on the
part of our governor, the late Fielding
Wright, that led to the States' Rights
ticket in Mississippi.

If this bill is passed, you may presume
that surely a Commission would not do
that. Again, you are getting into a gov-
ernment of men rather than a govern-
ment of restrictions. You have not
spelled that out in the law. It would de-
pend ou who was on the Ccnnmission
and how badly they wanted to win an
election. I have seen some individuals
want to win elections very, very strongly
In my years here in the Congress.

When you get 3 people in the Republl-
can Party and 3 people in the Demo-
cratic Party on the Commission and
each group trying to get the Negro vote
in New York and in Chicago, where does
that leave the rest of us?

I think that it weakens the very
framework of our Government when
that occm^, and it has occurred regu-
larly. These commissions have quasi-
judicial authority. They are in the na-
ture of your courts. Their findings In
most instances as to the facts are con-
clusive. It really endangers our coun-
try.

Now. going to the power of the sub-
pena imder this bill, which you are con-
sidering, subpenas for the attendance
and testimony of witnesses and/or the

8646

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

lisi

production of written or other iXMttterv
may be issued over the slsn&tiire of th«
Chairman of the Commission or such
subcommittee or any person designated
by such Chairman.

Under that provision the Chalrmim
could drag any citizen, north or south,
all over the country. It Is to be remem-
bered that those who would appoint half
of the members of this Commission are
the ones who recommend this legisla-
tion.

Let us turn to one that Is even worse
than any of that. The provision
marked as part IV or HI of the bill :

Whenever any persona hare engaged or
there are reasonable grountto to bellevf that
any persons are at»ut to engage In any acta
or practice! which would glye rlae to a caua*
of action pursuant to paragraph lit. 2d.
or 3d. the Attorney General may InaUtute
for the United States or In the name oX
the United Stataa but for the benefit of the
real party tn Interest a clrll action or other
proper proceeding for redress or preventive
relief, including an application for perma-
nent or temporary Injunction, restraining
order, or otherwise. In any proceeding the
United States shall be liable for cost tJie
same as a prlvat* citizen.

Mr. Chairman, under that provision
the Attorney General could move tn and
take inmitive actions against private
cltizensror what he, the Attorney Gen-
eral, thought such citizens might have
thought. The Attorney General, who
recommended this legislation, could sue
for a person who did not want to sue.
He could complain for a private citi3?en
who had no complaint. He could pe-
nalize other private citizens because he
believed they were about to engage in
an attempt. What difference betwt'en
the power which would be given here to
the executive and a dictatorship?

Under that provision the right to trial
by Jury goes out the window. The Su-
preme Com-t has rendered its decision in
the segregation cases. In the Clinton,
Tenn., case they Lssued an injunction
restraining the folks who were before
the court, and who had been made sub-
ject to the suit. Subsequently, the FBI
was sent into the area and 16 persons
whose names were not tn the original
action, who were not parties defendant,
whose names had not been used in the
order of the court, were arrested and are
now t)eing held for contempt of that
court. That means that the Supreme
Court, as evidenced by the district court
in that Instance, has announced what it
says the law is, and then has announced
further if you do not obey the law we
will throw you in Jail, or at least we
have the right to; and we have you be-
fore us for contempt, where that can
follow, without trial by j ury , if the pend-
ing legislation becomes I4w. Such a
course absolutely violates all the com-
mon law. all the substantive law, all the
statute law in every English-speaidng
country that I know of since the 12th
century.

The question asked here: If the Court
Is going to do that, do you not tliink
it would be better for us to pass legisla-
tion here saying what the penalties are.
and so forth?

Is there any basis for believing that If
a Supreme Court will go so far as to an-
nounce the law. then carry it out by an-

nouncing that since we announced It
everybody is bound to It. and we will
throw you in jail for contempt, la there
any feeling on the part of anyttody that
any statute we might pass might dip
the Court's wings In that Instance? No.
What you will do In passing legislation,
since they are going to destroy the right
to trial by Jury. Ji pass a statute saying
that the tegislatire dlvisioo of the Oov-
emment has put Its mark of appro\'al
on what the Court Is doing — except that
we will say that you should not go fur-
ther than this, that, or the other.

In this bill before you. you give the
Attorney General the right to injunc-
tion.

Is It not serious that you would con-
sider legislation here that the only peo-
ple who could defend themselves against
{ure the 435 Members of the House and
the S^ Senators? Every other man in the
United States — and we would be subject
to it if we left our po&itions here — would
be subject to being grabbed up by the
Attorney General for what he might be-
lieve we had thought.

The conditions that exist in my part of
the country have been described to you.
We are proud people. But the minute
the force of Federal Government goes
into an area where we are 1 ving on good
terms with each other, where we work
tocether, it will make a situation 10 times
worse than it has ever been; and our
situation in the South has always been a
hundred times better than you folks in
northern cities have any idea. I mean
that.

But I say. if this legislation becomes
law, mark my words, you are going to
have a third party in the South. When
you get a third party in the South, you
are probably going to have a fourth party
in the Midwest or Far West or maybe in
Chicago or New York. Then we are
KOing down the hill to what has occurred
in other places.

Such action as you propose might lead
to the multiplicity of parties which has
practically destroyed the effectiveness of
the French Government, which is also
one of the real problems in Italy so far
as effective government is concerned.
Such a step really will be set in motion
the minute you pass a civil- rights bill on
the basis that you have to make the
South do something, which the majority
of the committee voted out last year, aiKl
which I tried to point out is based on
completely erroneous view of the facts.
They are completely in error about what
conditions are down there.

In the process of passing this legisla-
tion, you are endangering not Just the
situation between white and colored
citizens; but whatever the motivating
force is. you are writing into substantive
law, or you would in this bill, provision
which would reach every section of the
United States. If you will check Hitler's
actions in Germany or Stalin's actions
in Russia, the first thing they did was
issue an order; and they, too, always
claimed it was to help some group.
Then when they issued the order, they
arrested the citizens hke they did In
Clinton. Term., cited them for actions
a^iainst the Government order, without
the ri?ht of a Jury trial. The Govern-
ment said, "We issued the order, we are

supreme. Of course, we are dolnc It for
a good purpose." That 1b what Hitler
s&ld, that to what Stalin said. But they
said, "We issued an order, and you have
to subject yourselves to It; and if you do
not do It, you will go to jail; and you
have no right to trial by Jury."

Have we reached that day m the
United States? And it Is all becjiuse of
an erroneous belief as to conditions in
my area, if I give credit to honesty on the
other side. On the other hand, there is
much to Indicate that nobody cares how
we get along down South, for is you
know we get along together much better
than other sections on this Issue.

I say that Hitler or St&lln took over in
those countries by first having the courts
to la&uc an order. They enforc(-d that
order by grabbing people up for noi
carrying the order out. They gave them
no riprht to trial by Jury. Now draw your
parallel. The Supreme Court Issued
this nonsegregatlon decision. In the
view of myself and many lawTers In this
country. It amounted to a constitutional
amendment, and we know the Ccnstitu-
tlon provides how it shall be amended.
Having issued that order, which I abso-
lutely believe amounts to a ccnstltu-
tional amendment. Judging b} what
happened at Clinton, Term., tae Su-
preme Court said what the law If — Con-
gress has not passed any a:t, the
Supreme Court says now what t.he law
is — therefore, you folks on this school
board down here have to obey tliat law.
They were brought properly before the
Court. Then those that were so in-
structed before the Court presumably
obeyed the Court's order. But here the
district Judge has called in 16 ottier peo-
ple who had not been before the court,
were not parties to the suit, aitd cited
them for contempt of his court, which
would lead to imprisonment. I ask you
if you cannot see the parallel betv.een the
two if this bill becomes the law?

I feel very, very strongly that the leg-
islation before us would be destructive to
our form of government. I say that in
all sincerity and in all candor, and as
calmly as I know how. I am talking
about the brood authority that would be
given in this. I am talking about what
could be done. When you get Uj where
you can bring a man into court and en-
join him for what you think he has been
thinking, it is going just about i^s far as
you can go.

If you pass this legislation, you can
enjoin a man about to attempt an act.
I think you can go a little furtiier than
you can with the statutes with which I
am familiar.

I have reference to the wording
"about to engage m any act." which con-
stitutes looking into a man's mind to
ascertain the facts without any c vert act.

I think quite definitely it is a departure
from what we have had In any law I have
ever dealt with; and I have prosecuted
cases of a similar type, where they had
engaged, and things of that sort. If the
man had not engaged, and if you set out
as Attorney General to take action under
this, and you went in and charged that
he was about to engage, if he had actu-
ally made an overt act, he was In the
process of engaging, but if he had not

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE

committed an overt act, then you would
have to get him because he was about
to engage ; and there being no overt act,
the only way you could do it would be by
reading his mind.

I wish to make one concluding state-
ment. You are presumably basing your
actions on a situation which you believe
exists In the South. I say you are
erroneous In your beliefs. You are bas-
ing your arguments on what you would
do If you had the job of carrying out the
authority which would be granted by
this legislation. I am saying that the
authority is much broader and would
lend Itself to doing many things that you
do not conceive a man would do. If It
were the next election year, and highly
important to carry Chicago, Detroit, or
New York, it might be easy to send these
FBI agents down South. We have seen
examples of that in the past. This bill
would lend itself to all kinds of chicanery
of that type. It would permit the Attor-
ney General to sue for people who did
not want to be sued for, and make com-
plaints for folks who did not want to
complain.

I suggest In all candor, since the Attor-
ney General can go and slash out at any-
body with the Government paying all the
cost, that you might — and I am serious
about this — use the same language for
the Attorney General. If you can move
against somebody who is about to engage
In something, you ought to give the same
privilege to the citizen. Except for be-
ing a Member of Congress, imder the
ruling in the Clinton. Tenn., case, the
judge might be able to cite me for what
I said here today.

If the Attorney General can go into
court, with the Government paying all
the costs, aqd take action against a man
because he believes he Is about to engage
in something. I think you should give
the citizen the right to go into court and
enjoin the Attorney General because he
thinks he is about to do something. I
would suggest this amendment:

Whenever any private Individual believes
the Attorney General or any representative
of the Federal Government has engaged or is
about to engage In any of the actions or prac-
tices authorized in this act, such private
individual may institute for the United
States, or In the name of the United
States, but for the real party In Interest a
civil action or other proper procedure for
redress or preventive relief including an ap-
plication for a permanent or temporary in-
junction, restraining or other order. In any
proceeding hereunder the United States shall
be liable for costs the same as the private
person.

It would simply give the Individual the
same right you would give the Attorney
General, that Is, of stopping him from
harassing him to death.

May I repeat, this bill permits the
Attorney General to anticipate the ac-
tions of somebody and go into court
without the approval of that person. My
amendment would permit a person, who
anticipated the Attorney General was
beginning to attempt or begirming to en-
gage In certain actions, to go into court
and issue a restraiiiing order against the
Attorney General for violating the rights
of such citizen.

If you really want to protect the rights
of the individual citizens of this country.

8647

Mr. Chairman, the place to start, so far
as this bill is concerned, is to adopt such
an amendment, and let the private citi-
zen have the right to go Into court and
restrain the Attorney General.

The point I am making Is that you are
writing legislation that has so many
loopholes, which lends Itself to so many
interpretations, and that is so loosely
prepared, the actions I am talking to ^ou
about are possible imder the bill. What
occurred would be dependent upon the
class and type of man you had in the
Attorney General's Office. If the Attor-
ney General, let us say, thought he could
help his party by saying he thought I
was about to engage in making an at-
tempt, and filed a suit in court to enjoin
me under this bill, then under my pro-
posal If I could see he was about to do
that to me I would be permitted to go
into the same court and charge that the
Attorney General was about to embar-
rass me; and I believe I have a right to
a court order to restrain him from ac-
cusing me of depriving some of my
friends of their rights.

Can you not see that charges under this
bill would be the most effective means of
carrying elections? You could inflame
great blocks of voters in dozens of cities
In this country. If this bill becomes the
law. in any election the Attorney Gen-
eral could say, "I am sending the FBI
there, and I am filing these suits"; then
when the election is over, the issue is
moot. This bill opens itself to that type
of politics which would be injurious to
the Nation.

As I said earlier, I believe we have
more love and affection and more respect
for each other, both races, in my section
of the country than you will find in
New York City. Detroit, Washington, or
any place you go. If left alone, we have
much less of a problem than the rest
of the country.

But It Is highly popular in many sec-
tions of the coimtry to run against
something far away. I was out in a
Midwest State last fall where a Member
of Congress gives the TVA every kind of
fit when speaking In his section. The
TVA is down In Tennessee. He is out
in the Midwest. He is a good friend of
mine, and I told his people he is the
smartest politician that I know. He
runs against the TVA, thousands of
miles away from him, and makes It a
big Issue in his district every election
year, and wins. It keeps him from ex-
plaining what goes on In his own dis-
trict. Perhaps I should be as smart as
he.

It Is popular In the rest of the coun-
try to run against the South. We do
not have anything like the problems
you have in New York, Detroit, or any-
where else.

I want to be frank with you. I think
this measure is much more dangerous
than if you provided jail sentences and
even penitentiary sentences, because
there we would have the right to trial
by jury. 'When you take action through
the civil courts, where they can Issue
an order and throw you in jail for con-
tempt of court, though you had no
notice and perhaps did not even know
of the order, you have bypassed protec-

tion the English-speaking people have
had sincp the 10th century. This biU,
in my humble judgment, is much more
dangerous than a criminal statute.

Here you would destroy the greatest
protection that the English people
fought for, the right of trial by jury. If
judges can say what the law is, then
issue an order, arrest persons and put
them in jail for not obeying the order
which perhaps they did not even know
about — similar to what could have hap-
pened in Tennessee If this blU were law,
you really have a court directed dicta-
torship.

Mr. Chairman, If aU were of the same
race, and If all were white, believe me,
the civil rights bill before us today would
be highly dangerous and could lead to
the destruction of our system of govern-
ment.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
yield 20 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. Dennison],

Mr. DENNISON. Mr. Chairman, I-
rise In support of H. R. 6127 in Its present
form and without any amendments
thereto.

I am aware that much of the debate
has turned on some rather fine legal
points. I am also aware that many in
this body still have some very serious
questions about this legislation. Because
I feel so strongly that this bill should be
passed I would like to address myself to
one or two points of contention which
are of a legal nature In the hope that I
can contribute some perspective to this
civil rights bill and particularly to the
right to vote section.

First, we must remember that the pur-
pose of this measure is to give legal
effect and vitality to the 15th amendment
of the Constitution of the United States,
which provides:

Section 1. The right of citl«ns of the
United States to vote shall not be denied
or abridged by the United States or by any
State on account of race, color, or previous
condition of servitude.

Sw. a. The Congress shall have power to
enforce this article by appropriate legisla-
tion.

No one questions the wisdom of that
section. No one doubts that It is the
supreme law of the land. The Constitu-
tion says so In article VI as follows :

This Constitution, and the laws of the
United States which shall be made In pursu-
ance thereof; and all treaties made, or which
shall be made, under the authority of the
United States, shall be the supreme law of
the land; and the Judges In every State shall
be boimd thereby, anything In the Constitu-
tion or laws of any State to the contrary
notwithstanding.

And all of us here have sworn to up-
hold It.

The purpose of this bill Is to protect aU
people — we are all created equal, are we
not?— in their constitutional right to
vote Irrespective of their color, race, reli-
gion, or national origin.

Is there a one in this Chamber today
who does not believe in the right of each
and every American citizen to vote irre-
spective of his color, race, religion, or
national origin?

Is there a one here who doubts that
all men are created equal — that is what

8648

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

the Declaration of Independence says,
does It not?

Is there a one here today who believes
that a man or a woman seeking the right
to vote may or should be discriminated
against in the attempt to exercise that
right? Is there a one here today who
would ever approve discrimination of
that kind in the exercise of one's right
to vote?

I take it that we agree that the right
to vote is a moat sacred right which Is
the very foundation of our republican
form of government. This being the
fact, it is equally evident that we are
unanimous in our resolve to protect every
American citizen in the exercise of his
right to vote — anytime he so desires —
and irrespective of any racial or reli-
gious difference he may have.

In our common resolve to uphold and
defend the Ccaistitution and particularly
article XV thereof, we must decide how
best to do so: so as to give the fullest
effect to the clear intention of the Con-
stitution. Obviously, we must develop
a method which will at once be both
speedy and yet completely consistent
with all the fundamental principles of
the common law.

This bill, H. R. 6127, has been devised
to meet those requirements. I need not
remind you that it provides for the
granting of an order by a district court
judge which says to one who threatens
to discriminate against another: "You
shall not interfere with that man's right
to vote by reason of his color, race, reli-
gion, or national origin." This order is
called an injunction.

Much has already been said about an
Injunction. I need say no more than
that it is an extraordinary right. It re-
quires a judge to prevent a wrong before
It has been committed. A judge whose
authority is invoked has a duty to pre-
vent such wrong especially where the
commission of it would result in an ir-
reparable loss, such as the loss of the
right to vote at a given election.

Injunctive relief, as has been men-
tioned, exists in many cases. It exists
against management in certain labor
cases. It exists in our State and in most
States against labor unions where vio-
lence or a threat of violence occurs in
connection with a strike.

The fact that such relief exists for
the prevention of a wrong does not con-
stitute a prior indictment of either man-
agement or labor. It follows that the
bill under consideration for the preven-
tion of an act which the Constitution
definitely says is wrong is not an indict-
ment of a people. This law does not
state that any specific wrong exists —
that must be ascertained before the In-
junction could be issued — but it does say
that if some interference in the right to
vote is made, it can be prevented.

Now, if the person against whom the
court order is issued obeys the order,
that is the end of it. If he does not. he
may then be cited for refusing to obey
the court's order and tried for his alleged
contempt of the court. The controversy
on this bill centers on the treatment of
one who is charged with disobeying the
injunction.

In the contempt proceedings, under
our law, the defendant will have avail-

able the time-honored rights which have
alwasrs been accorded a litigant before
the bar in such cases. He shall have the
right of comisel; he shall have the right
to face his accuser; he shall have the
right of examination and cross-exami-
nation; he shall have the right to pro-
duce witnesses in his behalf. His trial
shall be condiicted according to the
usual rules of evidence. He shall enjoy
the presimiptlon of innocence until
proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
He shall have a right to testify on his
own behalf or he may protect hiOMelf by
the fifth amendment. And if after he
has enjoyed all these rights he Is then
found giiilty, he may appeal his case to
a higher court.

Coequal with our acknowledged obliga-
tion to uphold and give real effect to the
constitutional right to vote without im-
pairing the rights traditionally avail-
able to a defendant under the common
law is our duty to maintain and guar-
antee a free and independent judiciary
without which the whole fabric of gov-
erimient — the separation of powers —
would erode.

The greatest question of our day is
the stu'vival of our democratic way of life.
In my opinion the greatest bulwark of
a free society is a free and Independent
judiciary. A court is only free when it
retains within Itself the power to enforce
its own order without intervention of
some other tribunal. If it lie in the
mouths of anyone except a higher court
to challenge an order of any court then
that court may soon become the hand-
maiden and the servant of those to whom
it must defer.

ArUcle n of the United States Con-
stitution establishes a separate and in-
dependent judiciary. At the first ses-
sion of the first Congress of this coun-
try the principle of a free and independ-
ent judiciary was enacted into law.
Among other things this act of Congress
gave to the courts of this land the power
to administer oaths — consider the con-
sequence if it did not have that power
and if some other person or body did —
the power to make its own rules — what
if court's rules were made by others —
the power to enforce its judgments and
the power to punish for contempt of
court. These p>owers belong to no one
else nor should they.

These inherent powers, and there are
others, of the courts of our land permit
the courts the independence and respect
that they now have. Once we give to
anyone else any of these powers, we se-
riously weaken the integrity of our ju-
dicial system.

Historically, and with good reason, our
courts have been charged with the en-
forcement of their own orders. Please
observe that I distinguish between the
enforcement of an order of the court and
a law. In the trial of a person accused
of violating a law enacted by a legisla-
ture a jury usually is given the authority
to determine whether that law has been
violated. The Constitution gives the
authority. But in tlie case of the viola-
tion of an order of court, such as an In-
junction. It Is the court which must de-
cide whether or not a violation exists.
If it could not. the very power of the
court to make the order in the first

place would become a mo(±er7 for It
would not have the ability to enforce it.
To deny a court this power or to give It
to any other body would be a tragic ob-
struction of Justice.

The Constitution recognizes the need
for inherent powers in a court If It is
to be free and Independent. Thus we
find no provision for a trial by Jury in
contempt cases.

In the case of Oompers against Bucks
Stove k Range Co. the Supreme Court of
the United SUtes said:

And, if upon tb« ezAmlnatton of the rec-
ord It should appear that the defendants
were In fact and In Uw guilty of the con-
tempt charged, there oould be no more Im-
portant duty than to render such a decree
aa would serve to vindicate the jurisdiction
and authority of courts to enforce orden and
to punish acts of disobedience. For while
it Is sparingly to be used, yet the power of
courts to punish for contempts Is a neo—
sary and Integral part of the Independence
of the Judiciary, and la absolutely eaaenUal
to the performance of the duties Imposed on
them by law. Without It they are mere
boards of arbitration whose judgment! and
decrees would be only advisory

If a party can make himself a Judge of
the Talidlty of orders which hare been lamed,
and by his own act of disobedience act thsm
aside, then are the courts Impotent and what
the Constitution now fittingly calls the Ju-
dicial power of the United States would bs %
mere mocltery.

This power has been uniformly held to be
necessary to the protection of the court from
Insults and oppressions while in the ordi-
nary exercise of Its duties, and to enable It
to enforce Its judgments and orders neces-
sary to the due administration of law and
the protection of the rigbu of suitors. (Bes-
aett V Conkey (194 U S. 324, 333).)

There has been general recognition of the
fact that the oourU are clothed t; th this
power and must be authorized to exercise It
without referring the Issues of fact or law to
another tribunal or to a jury In the same
tribunal. For If there was no such authority
In the first Instance there would be no power
to enforce Its orders If they were disregarded
In such Independent Investigation. Without
authority to act promptly and independently
the couru could not administer public jus-
tice or enforce the rights of private litigants.
(Btssett V. Conkey (\9\ U. S. 337) .)

The right of a court to enforce Its own
orders without resort to any other au-
thority finds its clearest expression in
Carter's case (1899) decided by the Su-
preme Court of Appeals of Virginia (96
Va. 791). This was an appeal from a
contempt conviction during the proceed-
ings of which the defendant demanded
a jury trial. A statute was then on the
books in Virginia granting a right to trial
by jury in such cases. In holding the
Jury trial statute unconstitutional as be-
ing contrary to the concept of a free and
independent judiciary the VirgiiUa court
stated:

The power to punish for contempts is In-
herent In the courts, and is conferred upon
them by the Constitution by the vrry act of
their creation. It Is a trust confldod and a
duty Imposed upon us by the sovereign peo-
ple which we cannot surrender or suffer to b«
Unpaired without belxig recreant to our duty.

In concluding that the Virginia Jury
trial statute was unconstitutional the
court said :

That In the courts created by the Constitu-
tion, there Is an Inherent power of self-de-
fense and self-preservation; that this power

/"r^xT/"DI:ccIr^MAT uFrnpn — HniT<sF

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8649

may be regvilated but cannot be destroyed, or
•o far diminished as to be rendered ineffec-
tual by legislative enactment: that It is a
power necessarily resident In and to be exer-
cised by the court Itself, and that the vice
of an act which seeks to deprive the court
of this Inherent power Is not cured by pro-
viding for Its exercise by a jury; that while
the legislature has the power to regulate the
Jurisdiction of circuit, county, and corpora-
tion courts. It cannot destroy, whUe It may
confine within reasonable boiinds. the au^
thorlty necessary to the exercise of the juris-
diction conferred.

It waa suggested In argument that to
maintain the position that to entrust Juries
with the power to punish for contempts
would impair the efficiency and dignity of
courts, disclosed a want of confidence In that
time-honored Institution. May It not be
said in reply that to take from courts a
jurisdiction which they have possessed from
their foundation betrays a want of ccnfl-
dence In them wholly unwarranted by ex-
perience? The history of this court, and
Indeed of all the courts of this Common-
wealth, shows the Jealous care with which
they have ever defended ^d maintained the
jiut authority and respect due to juries as
an agency In the administration of justice,
but our duty, as we conceive It, requires us
not to be less firm in vindicating the right-
ful authority and power of the courts.

We cannot more properly conclude this
opinion than by a quotation from a great
English judge: "It Is a rule founded on the
reason of the common law, that all con-
tempts to the process of the court, to Its
judges. Jurors, officers, and ministers, when
acting In the due discharge of their respec-
tive duties, whether such contempts be by
direct obstruction, or consequentlany; that
U to say, whether they be by act or writing,
are punishable by the court Itself, and may
be abated Instanter as nuisances to public
Justice.

"There are those who object to attach-
ments as being contrary, in popular consti-
tutions, to first principles. To this It may
brleny be replied, that they are the first
principles, being founded on that which
founds government and constitutes law.
They are the principles of self-defence; the
vlndlcstlon, not only of the authority, but
of the very power of acting In court. It is
In vain that the law has the right to act. If
there be a power above the law. which has a
right to resist: the law would then be but
the right of anarchy and the power of con-
tention" (Holt on Ubel. ch. 9).

Whatever opinion may t>e entertained of
some of his predecessors. Chief Justice Holt
was no servile minion of arbitrary power.
He was an actor In that great revolution
which ended forever in Great Britain the
pernicious dogma of the divine right of
kings, which first recognized the wiU of the
people as the only rightful source of govern-
ment, and established the Independence
of the Judiciary as one of the surest bul-
warks of free Institutions.

Certainly the right of a court to hear
contempt proceedings stands on the very
same foundation as trial by jury Rex
V. Almon (24 Law Quarterly Review.
184).

In conclusion let me say by way of
summary that this body can by this bill
carry out its solemn obligation to uphold
and defend the Constitution — and par-
ticularly the right of those irrespective
of color, race, religion, or national ori-
gin, who desire to vote. This body can
by passing this bill meet a need that has
existed for almost 100 years — a need to
give vitality to that part of the Constitu-
tion guaranteeing a person the right to
vote irrespective of color, race, religion,
or national origin.

This body can by this bill uphold the
Constitution while at the same time pro-
tect the rights of those who are accused
of violating it and most Important of
all— this body can do this and maintain
the dignity and Integrity of the court
system so that our courts may still be
the custodian and guardian of their own
orders and ultimately of our liberties.

Let it be said when this great debate la
over that the flag which flies over this
very Chamber never flew more proudly
and that henceforth no citizen — ^no, not
one — shall because of a difference in
appearance or religion be denied his
right to participate as a free American
In the free elections of this land.

Mr. KEATTNQ. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr.DENNISON. I yield to the genUe-
man from New York.

Mr. KEATING. I onlyXwish every
Member of this body could Vave heard
the fine analysis of this problem which
the gentleman from Ohio has\iven us.
This is one of the most constructive
speeches I have ever heard onThe floor
of this House. I regret that eve^ Mem-
ber was not present. I certaliiiy com-
mend the gentleman for theobvious
study which he has devoted to this prob-
lem and the excellent grasp o/ the sub-

ject he has displayed. The gentleman
has demolished completely theargument
for an amendment to put Jhto this bill
something entirely new to Federal juris-
prudence, the so-called jovy-trial amend-
ment.

Mr. DKNNISON. I thank the gentle-
man.

Mr. HENDERSON. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DENNISON. I yield to the gen-
tleman from New York.

Mr. HENDERSON. I join In the com-
mendation of the very flne and scholarly
remarks of my colleague from Ohio. I
think they show a very deep study of the
subject and are most beneficial to the
Members of the House.

Mr. DENNISON. I thank the gentle-
man.

Mr. McCULLOCH. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DENNISON. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Ohio.

Mr. McCULLOCH. I join in the state-
ment of my colleague from New York
[Mr. KxATiMC] in complimenting our col-
league from Ohio [Mr. Dknnison] on this
remarkable, imemotional, factual, and
judicial presentation of this controver-
sial aspect of the bill. We should have
had the entire membership of the House
present.

Mr. DENNISON. I thank the gentle-
man.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
such time as he may care to use to the
gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Smith].

Mr. SMITH of Mississippi. Mr.
Chairman, the bill before us today has
as its avowed purpose the protection of
the civil liberties of the American people.
I submit that. If enacted Into law in the
form in which it is presented to us, it
will destroy civil liberties instead of pro-
tecting them. It will create far more
racial strife than it will eliminate. It
will gravely endanger our system of con-
stitutional liberties.

This bin has been written with the
stated intent of eliminating wrongs which
are alleged to take place In the Southern
States. The exhaustive hearings before
the committees in both the House and
the Senate have proved this Indictment
of a whole people to be insupportable.

But the legislation is far more than a
matter of concern to the Southern States
alone. If these provisions, which would
deny normal constlutional liberties to
our citizens, are allowed to become law,
they will serve as precedent for the
denial of similar freedoms to all Amer-
icans throughout the country. The
great danger of this legislation is that
it could crush the foimdation stone of
our system of liberties, and by the day-
to-day action of Federal Government,
grind those liberties to dust. Unlimited
governmental power In this field Is an
open doorway to those governmental
powers Inherent in the totalitarian dic-
tatorships we look upon with such fore-
boding and disdain.

TRIAL BT JITBT

There are many specific encroach-
ments upon liberty which this bill would
establish as law, but undoubtedly the
greatest of these would be the denial of
the right of trial by jury to those
charged with violations of the act.
Throiighout the history of our judicial
system, the right of trial by jury, pre-
ceded by proper Indictment by a grand
jury and carrying with It the right to
confront and cross-examine witnesses,
has been a basic safeguard of our free-
dom. American citizens have considered
the right of trial by jury as part of
their Inviolate heritage as American
citizens. It has come down to us through
the centuries, and as a people we first
proclaimed this In the Stamp Act Con-
gress of 1765 when we condemned an
act of the British Parliament which in
many details was similar to the bill
which confronts tos today.

When the amendment Is offered to
provide adequate provision for trial by
^ury in this bill, I hope to speak at great-
er length on this issue. The question
must be fully discussed In order that all
Members may understand beyond doubt
the grave decision that will confront
us when the time comes to pass upon
this ftmdamental issue of whether we
are to continue as a Nation of men dedi-
cated to the strength of freedom and
protected, not coerced, by the law.

Here for the third time In this century
the United States Congress Is called up-
on to debate the right to trial by jiu-y
in contempt cases. In 1914 the Clayton
Act, and in 1932 the Norris-LaGuardia
Act, both extended this basic safeguard
to the American people accused of con-
tempt by the courts. Thus we have
already behind us a history of legis-
lation and experience that make it evi-
dent beyond question that the Injunc-
tive process Is susceptible to abuse and
that any infringement by this means
on the safeguards provided our citi-
zens should be guarded against.

We have these safeguards because
down through the hundreds of years of
English and American history, we have
time and again proved their essentiality
to law and order over tyranny and the
chaos bred of tyranny. These are the

8650

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

bastions raised against the onslaught of
too great power in the hands of too
small men. Are we to suppose that men
will be any less subject to error in the
future than they have been In the past?

OVKBI.OOK

In the heat and press of the day's
problems, it is often difflcult to look to
the years ahead of us. Thus, men often
overlook the end effect of their acts in
their haste to achieve the goal of the mo-
ment. This was recognised by Justice
Brandeis. when he stated in Olmstead
against United States :

Experience should teach us to be mo«t
on our guard to protect liberty when the
Government's purposes are beneflcent. Men
born to freedom are naturally alert to repel
Invasion of their liberty by evU-mlnded
rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk
m insidious encroachment by men of zeal,
well-meaning but without understanding.

The proponents of this legislation ex-
cuse their invasion of the historic right of
trial by jury on the ground that in some
fields it has not been effective. Faced
with the fact of the violence they would
by this means do. they assert that the ob-
jective they seek excuses the evil they
propose. This philosophy of govern-
ment has no place in a democratic so-
ciety. Even if it were to be conceded
that the objective is worthy, it could not
be worthy enough to warrant the de-
struction of the very basis upon which
our system of justice rests.

The principles upon which our Gov-
ernment was founded, and upon which
we have progressed to our position as the
world's most fortunate people, may not
be swept aside by the vicissitudes of the
moment. If this were true, we would
have lost our 'iberties long ago.

The sponsors of this bill say. in defense
of what they propose, that the criminal
prosecutioi.s have been cumbersome and
slow, and that jurors have been reluctant
to indict and convict. They say that we
must have a shortcut to accomplishment
of the desire objective. Shortcuts are
excellent devices, if all you seek is speed.
They are seldom conducive to safety.
The little wisdom of seeking a shortcut
is dealt with very appropriately by Judge
Henry Clay Caldwell, presiding judge of
the United States Court of Appeals for
the eighth circuit, in his opinion in Hop-
kins against Oxley Stave Co.

It can make little difference to the victims
of shortcut and unconstitutional methods,
whether it is the mob or the chancellor that
deprives them of their constitutional rights.
It Is vaU; to disguise the fact that this desire
for a shortcut originates In the feeling of
hostility to trial by Jury. • • • A distrust
of the people means the overthrow of the
Government our fathers founded.

Although a century and a half of de-
velopment has produced great changes in
many of our political institutions, the
fundamental principles of our judicial
system have continued the same in most
essential respects, including trial by jury.
Trial by jury is the one judicial power
which the people have reserved unto
themselves; it is the foremost institution
for the administration of justice in a de-
mocracy; it constitutes the basis of free
government. It assures that justice will
be dispensed, not only with the utmost
purity, but in a manner calculated to

merit the confidence and satisfaction of
the people.

ATTOaNlT CEMKKAL'S POWEB

In H. R. 6127. the Attorney General
Is given the power, at his own discretion,
to bypass, circumvent, and evade the
constitutional right of indictment by
grand Jury and trial by petit jury of
State and local officials as well as private
American citizens in civil actions arising
under sections 1971 and 1985 of title 42
of the United States Code. The provi-
sion that those civil actions are to be
brought "for the United States, or in
the name of the United States" is in-
serted in H. R. 6127 for the deliberate
purpose of depriving the individuals
charged with indirect contempt for sup-
posed violations of injunctions issued in
civil rights cases arising under sections
1971 and 1985 of title 42 of the United
States Code of the benefits of jury trials
and limited punishments to which they
would otherwise be entitled under sec-
tions 402 and 3691 of title 18 of the
United States Code Sections 402 and
3691 of title 18 of the code stipulate in
express terms that the right to demand
a trial by jury does not apply "to con-
tempts committed in disobedience of any
lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree,
or command entered in any suit or ac-
tion brought or prosecuted in the name
of. or on behalf of, the United States. "

This legislation, presented to us in a
cloak of alleged nobility, is in fact an
attempt to deprive the people, all of the
people, of the right clearly reserved to
them by the Constitution, "the trial of
all crimes shall be by jury." Congress
has enacted statutes which protect a
citizen's right to vote and which prohibit
acts that would deprive a citizen of his
franchise. Any person who commits such
an act is guilty of a crime against the
Government. Any method of removing
jurisdiction from the judgment of his
peers endangers a citizen's most funda-
mental liberty. An eminent legal au-
thority. S. S. Gregory, in his address as
president of the American Bar Asso-
ciation m 1912. *>evy aptly summed up
this threat to our constitutional rights
when he stated :

The real question Involved is whether trial
by Jury shall be retained In all essentially
criminal prosecutions in the Federal courts.
Where the law prohibits an act, the effect
of enjoining against its commission Is merely
to change the procedure by which the guilt
of the person charged with doing the act
thus prohibited shall be ascertained and his
punishment fixed. By enjoining against the
commission of crime and then proceeding on
a charge of contempt against thrse accused
of committing It. the administration of the
criminal law Is transferred to equity and
the right to trial by jur/ and all other
guaranties of personal liberty secured by
the Constitution are destroyed.

The proposals which have been sub-
mitted to us today would give far greater
power to the Attorney General of the
United States, whoever he might be. than
has ever been conceived, or conceded, to
be necessary. We cherish the tradition
that ours is a government of law, not of
men. If we enact this bill, we shall have
turned our backs upon this concept of
government which has served us so re-
markably well. This bill vests so much

authority in one individual, the Attorney
General, that any power-seeking occu-
pant of that ofBce could literally destroy,
through the power of his own office, any
and all of the protections accorded our
citizens by the vast txjdy of our law.

These proposals would become opera-
tive upon the initiative of the Attorney
General. In other words, the Attorney
General would have full freedom to de-
cide whether the law had been violated.
Action would be taken only against such
persons as the Attorney General might
select. Such a situation would literally
wipe out the concept that courts are
supposed to administer equal and exact
justice in complying with laws which
apply in like manner to all men in like
situations. The dangers Inherent in
such a grant of power to a single official
are great, even if we disregard the possi-
bility of deliberate abuses. The abuses
which could develop in the hands of an
Attorney General who deliberately set
out to use his power for personal or polit-
ical purposes are almost unimaginable.

BREACH OP EIGHTS

The power which this bill would con-
fer upon the Attorney General obviously
involves a major breach of the right* re-
served by the Constitution to the States.
The most obvious example of this is
the elimination of the right to seek ad-
ministrative remedy within the States.
Under the powers which would be
granted here, the Attorney General could
nullify State statutes for one citizen,
while other citizens whose situations he
chose to ignore would be powerless to
avail themselves of the bounty of his
whimsical judicial largesse.

This bill would empower any Attorney
General to litigate, at public expense,
virtually all claims of virtually all aliens.
citizens, and private corporations within
the jurisdiction of a State that they had
sufleied intentional discrimination by
the action of State or local officials, taken
under State statutes or municipal ordi-
nances, or orders or regulations made
under them pertaining to elections: pub-
lic education; business and trade; labor;
charges, prices, and interest; railroads,
motor carriers, telegraph companies,
public warehouses, and other public
utilities; ad valorem iivcome, inheritance,
license, and sales taxes; local public im-
provements; highways and streets;
buildings; fish and game; the keeping of
animals; civil remedies and procedure;
crimes and criminal procedure; and all
other matters committeed by our system \.
of government to State control.

Congress would be unwise in the ex-
treme if it should approve a bill author-
izing any Attorney General to open, at
the expense of the taxpayers, such a
Pandora's box of many legal miseries.
The abuses Inherent in this legislation,
and its overwhelming threat to our tradi-
tional American liberties, are more than
enough reason for the Congress to reject
this bUl.

But even if we elect to consider the bill
only from the point of view of its effect
upon race relations within our country, ,
there is still every reason to reject it.
The operation of the system of injunc-
tive process which would be instituted by
this bill would unceasingly stir and em-

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

broil new racial disputes throughout the
country. Actions of this nature would
clearly make more difficult. If not Im-
possible, any farther progress toward
more harmonious race relationships
throughout the entire country, for it
should be noted now and then, lest some
of our fellow citizens conveniently forget
It. that the problems of race relation-
ships are not confined to the South, or
to the Negro. They spread from border
to border and coast to coast, in all
climates and colors and garbs.

We seek, I believe. In this body the
well-being of all our fellow citizens, and
the citizens who will stand in our places
In the years to come. We do them no
service if we actively add to the divisive
forces among us and destroy the bulwark
of a nation's liberties in questing after
a solution to the problems of Individual
peoples in their struggle to live together
in amity and independence.

Those of us who measure the merit of
legislation on the basis of what it will
contribute to improved conditions for our
citizens will do well to reject the legisla-
tion before us today.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
such time as he may care to use to the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Vanik].

Mr. VANIK. Mr. Chairman. I want
to take this opportunity to urge the ^n-
mediate adoption of the civil rights bill
in exactly the form in which it was re-
ported by the Judiciary Committee.
My only regret is that this Congress
cannot make even stronger assurances
for the protection of civil rights.

As Americans, we cannot be proud
that this legislation has become neces-
sary. The cruel facts of southern re-
sistance to equal citizenship have com-
pelled action with no further delay.
Our democracy cannot develop and as-
sume its proper place in world leader-
ship as a just and moral nation If we
permit discrimination against the vari-
ous racial, religious, or ethnic groups
which make up our Nation. To prove
itself worthy of world leadership, our
free-enterprise system must emphasize
freedom as strongly as we strive for en-
terprise. With our own house in dis-
criminatory disorder — we are scarcely
positioned to struggle for a better world.
It is regrettable that the Congress of
the United States must legislate against
depressing conditions of intolerance
which exist in several States of the
South and it is also regrettable that
Congress has been so slow to act. The
sad fact is that for several generations
Congress has failed to make any sub-
stantial contribution to the fight for
equal opportimity for all Americans.

The cause of civil rights and expanded
civil liberties received its first impetus
in the administration of the late Frank-
lin Delano Roosevelt. If it were not for
the tremendous problems brought on by
depression and the war. tremendous
gains would have been achieved. These
aims were revived by former President
Harry Truman who in 1948 gave the fol-
lowing as his civil-rights objectives:

1. W* believe that aU men are created
equal under law and that they have the right
to equal Justice under law.

8651

3. We believe that all men have the right
to freedom of thought and of ezpreesi(»i and
the right to worship as they please.

3. We believe that all men are entitled to
equal opportunities for Jobe. for homes, for
good health, and for education.

4. We believe that all men should have a
voice In their government, and that govern-
ment should protect, not usurp, the rights
of the people.

Mr. Truman further stated that these
basic civil rights are the source and the
support of our democracy. Former
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and
former President Harry Truman were
the first national Executives since the
Civil War to address themselves to the
problems of discrimination and tl.e evils
of segregation. President Dwlght D.
Eisenhower recognized the national
scope of the problem and ctmtinued to
propound what has become an estab-
lished Executive position with respect to
civil rights.

The Supreme Couft decision was a
brilliant contribution. Many States and
many large cities of the North have made
a tremendous drive against discrimina-
tion In housing and In employment. It
is In the Congress of the United States
where the struggle for human better-
ment In this vital area has been retarded.
The inertia of Congress on this vital
issue of our times is most difficult to
comprehend. Certainly Congress Is
close to the public pulse — or should be.
It is difficult to believe that the Repre-
•entatives of this assembly should allow
themselves to be behind the times and
much slower than the executive branch
of the Government or the Judicial
branch of the Government recognizing
the simple principles of equal living in
recognizing the need for Implementing
these principles with laws that could
bring them about.

There was a time before the decision
of the Supreme Court when many Mem-
bers of Congress could believe that some-
how or another the problems of the
South with respect to discrimination
would be resolved. It has since become
apparent that time has accentuated
rather than mitigated the problem. It
has persisted and worsened with each
passing day. Without the speedy and
universal effect of laws prohibiting dis-
crimination and segregation and their
immoral effects, the dignity of all men
throughout the broad reaches of this
country caruiot be attained. This legis-
lation must become law in Its present
form.

I have given this legislation serious
and careful study, and as a lawyer and as
a former judge I see no place where it
can give cause for concern to any but
those who would seek to transgress upon
the civil rights of another person as
established by a court directive subject
to full review. Liberty Is a creation of
the law, and the right of all people to
freely participate in our elective process
must come about through the suppres-
sion of acts or the conduct of other
persons who would seek to restrain or
impede these rights. Certainly the right
to unrestrained voting Is equal to any
other right accorded citizens of the
United States.

This legislation will not cure all of the
problems of discrimination and segrega-

tion In the United States. It Is only the
step of a child where a man's gait is
required. Segregation In housing Is per-
haps the greatest impediment to the de-
velopment of a modem American so-
ciety. Segregated housing develops seg-
regated neighborhoods which In turn
develop segregated schools, churches,
and otlier community facilities. That
segregation In turn encourages delin-
quency and crime and poverty, as well
as other social evils. Large areas of
needed legislation remain the work of a
future Congress, and It Is Incumbent
upon us to concentrate upon what can
be done now.

The vast xmexplored resource In
America is the tremendous productive
capacity which we suppress and ignore
because of the artificial barriers of racial
discrimination. Only an equality of op-
portunity can bring this richness of
America to the surface. Only in an at-
mosphere of social freedom can the indi-
vidual develop to his maximum capacity.
These principles of freedom and equality
of opportunity have made our Nation
great, and when they are extended and
applied to aU of our citizens, our Nation
will enjoy a growth and maturity which
we cannot today comprehend.

No one has disputed the power of Con-
gress to regulate Federal elections or to
prc^bit racial discrimination, and since
Congress has this power, it faces no
other alternate But to legislate in the in-
terest of all the pec^le and insure that
every person can enjoy his full measure
of the privileges as well as the Immuni-
ties of citizenship. The highest privi-
lege of citizenship is the equality of op-
portunity which is a basic American con-
cept, and to make that privilege possible
our Nation must develop a legal immu-
nity to prejudice, discrimination, and
their costly attributes.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
20 minutes to the distinguished member
of the Committee on the Judiciary, the
gentleman from Tennessee [Mr.
Frazikr].

Mr. FRAZIER. Mr. Chairman, the
bill under consideration. H. R. 6127, is
supposed to protect civil rights but in
reality if it once goes into operation it
will constitute one of the greatest as-
saults on the cherished rights of our
citizens, and our States, and our local
governments ever perpetrated on a free-
dom-loving people.

The bill operates on the wrongful
hypotheses that the State governments
are no longer able to enforce their laws ;
that the executive, the legislative, and
the Judicial officers of our States are
violating their oaths to support the Con-
stitution of the United States.

I urge you to oppose this legislation;
because It is not needed and its enact-
ment would unjustly reflect discredit on
the people and governments of our
States; because it would result in further
invasion of areas of government that
properly belong to the States; because
it would establish and set in motion an
inquisition that could accomplish noth-
ing except to intensify distrust and mis-
understanding; because It would grant
to the Attorney General of the United
States — the power to sue individuals on
behalf of other individuals — heretofore

o^en

rnMr,nP<;<;TnNAT RF.rORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

rOMr^rBPQQTnMAT l>l:r'/^T>r^ TTirvrrr-^

8652

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

H

--?

unheard of powers, among them the use
of the writ of injunction as a means of
intimidation. The Attorney General of
the United States urges that the Con-
gress confer upon him the authority to
Institute civil suits in the United States
courts for— the benefit of the real parties
in interest — for the redress and preven-
tion of violation of civil rights. The
authority to apply for writs of injunction
is a provision that the Attorney General
has asked for especially.

This bill would authorize the Attor-
ney General to institute a class action
and. under general allegations of wide-
spread violations of civil rights, obtain
an injunction applicable to a whole com-
munity— a virtual Federal interdict.
The language of the bill does not exclude
mandatory injunctions, so the power to
coerce is one of the powers that would
be granted by this legislation. Such
power is too great to be conferred — the
mere conferring of it is a violation of
freedom.

The enactment of chis legislation —
H. R. 6127 — would break down the last
vestige of the rights of the individual
States.

The real issue Involved Is whether
Federal authority should be expanded to
cover matters which heretofore have
been recognized as within the jurisdic-
tion of the States.

This legislation is not only a violation
of the rights of the Southern States, at
which it Is aimed, but its enactment is a
violation of the rights of each and every
one of the 48 States. It applies to the
North, and the East, and the West, as
well as to the South. While it may be di-
rected at the South. iV.^n well become
a two-edged sword applying to you gen-
tlemen from Missouri, New York. Massa-
chusetts. Ohio, and California. And the
time will doubtless come — if it should be
passed — that you will rue the day you,
in your misguided moments, allowed this
legislation to pass.

Part 1 of the bill before us provides
for the establishment of a Commission
on Civil Rights, composed of six members
appointed by the President. It provides
for their compensation and expenses, and
sets forth what the Commission is sup-
posed to accomplish. Now, what is the
duty of this Commission?

First. To investigate allegations In
writing under oath or affirmation that
certain citizens are being deprived of
their right to vote by reason of the color,
race, religion, or national origin of the
victim.

Second. To study and collect in-
formation concerning legal develop-
ments, constituting a denial of equal
protection of the law under the Con-
stitution.

Third. Appraisals of the laws and poli-
cies of the Federal Government with re-
spect to equal protection under the Con-
stitution.

The Commission is also authorized to
employ a full-time staff director, and
such personnel as it desires.

It may hold hearings at such times and
places as It sees fit; issue subpena for
witnesses which may be served by any
person designated by the Commission.
In the case of contumacy or failure to
obey a subpena, upon application of the

Attorney General of the United States,
any United States district court shall
have Jurisdiction to Issue an order to
require such witnesses to appear before
the Commission, or subcommittee, and
failure to do so may be punished by the
Federal court as contempt.

The authors of this proposal contem-
plate that it will yield thousands of
complaints and even more thousands of
subpenas will be issued. The various
allegations will, in the first instance, be
Incontrovertible and wholly ex parte and
the principal concerned, against whom
the charges are made, when summoned
as a witness is given no opportunity to
cross-examine. True, the person sum-
moned as a witness may have counsel —
section 102— but only for the purpose of
advising him of his constitutional rights.

Actually it is contemplated that the
Commission sought to be set up by the
proposed bill will go on a huge fishing
expedition to catch unwary election offi-
cials and other citizens in its nets, aid
the southern regions are expected to
yield the largest catch.

Bait will be furnished by the NAACP.
the Civil Rights Congress, and other left-
wing organizations.

Now. having set up this Commission
with powers never before conferred on
any commission, and rarely on commit-
tees of this Congress, and with unlimited
p>ersonnel at a tremendous cost to the
taxpayers for the purpose of conducting
investigations of alleged and, in most
cases, imaginary wrongs, and to make
recommendations for correcting these
supposed violations of civil rights, and
before the commission can make a ^m-
gle investigation or recommendation,
this fantastic legislation proceeds m part
II. to create an additional Assistant At-
tornel General to assist the Attorney
General in his duties; to head a new di-
vision in the Department of Justice, en-
tailing the employment of many addi-
tional lawyers at great cost to the public.

In the Committee of the Judiciary in-
quiry was made as to the number of ad-
ditional lawyers the new division would
require — 50 or 100 or more, but no agree-
ment could be reached.

For 15 years I served as a United
States attorney, and I know, from ex-
perience, that for years and years there
has, and now exists in the Department
of Justice, a Civil Rights Section, just as
competent to do this work as a new di-
vision, and to which section the Attorney
General has the right and can assign as
many or as few of his highly paid at-
torneys as he so desires. With this sec-
tion already established, why burden the
taxpayers with the creation of another
division?

Part III of the bill relates to the old
conspiracy statute of July 31. 1861. first
enacted at the outbreak of the War Be-
tween the States, and to the Ku Klux
Act of April 20. 1871.

The present proposals are much more
far reaching and even more obnoxious
than the law of 1871.

Under the provisions of H. R. 6127, the
Attorney General is authorized to insti-
tute civil actions In the name of the
United States or on behalf of the United
States for injunction or other relief.
Whenever one was engaged in or there

was reasonable grounds to believe that
one was about to engage In acts that
would give rise to a cause of action under
existing law, and the eoosent of the ag-
grieved individual Is not a necessary
precedent for such suit — such action
may be taken even though parties have
failed to exhaust State remedies avail-
able to them.

Part m. which Is the most Iniquitous
part of the bill, confers upon the Attor-
ney General of the United States powers
unheard of heretofore in a free country.
It supersedes and sets aside all State
administrative remedies : wipes out State
sovereignty; it authorizes the Attorney
General in the name of or on behalf of
the United States to institute civil action
in civil-rights matters whether or not
the aggrieved party requests such proce-
dure by the Attorney General or whether
or not the aggrieved party objects to ench
action. In other words, ^he Attorney
General is clothed with all power to
come into the Federal court and against
the wishes of the aggrieved party in-
stitute a civil action in the aggrieved
party's behalf In the name of the Gov-
ernment. He does this at the cost of
the taxpayers of America. He thus de-
prives the States of their right to en-
force their criminal laws. He thereby
deprives the defendant of a right of trial
by fury.

It allows the Attorney General to make
of the Federal local judge the admin-
istrator, the prosecutor, and the exec-
utor of the functions of the States and
localities.

The real purpose of this part Is to
create jurisdiction in the Federal dis-
trict courts to supervise, control, and
dominate, together with the Attorney
General, the internal management of
local affairs, particularly in schools, and
elections.

The Attorney General seeks, by these
additions, to have conferred upon him
the powers to enforce these sections by
injunctions.

Part rv of the bill amends the exist-
ing law by an entirely new section. The
proposed amendment would make it un-
lawful for any person, whether acting
under color of the law or otherwise, to
intimidate, threaten or coerce any per-
son for the purpose of interfering with
the rights of such other person, to vote
at any special or primary election re-
lating to Federal officers. An additional
subsection provides a remedy for such
interference in the form of a civil action
instituted by the Attorney General on
behalf of the United States or in the
name of the United States to prevent
anyone from interfering with or about
to Interfere with tlie right to vote.

As in part HI, there is a waiver of
State remedies. The present proposal
provides a new remedy. The scope of
the proposed amendment goes far be-
yond what the statute now encompasses.
The proposed amendment includes pri-
mary elections held solely or in part for
the purpose of selecting or electing any
such candidate. Thus, It can readily be
seen that by this legislation, the At-
torney General seeks not only to control
our general elections but even our pri-
maries. Since the inception of this Gov-
ernment the Congress has never legis-

lated In the election field except to fix
the date for holding national elections
and to Implement the 14th and 15th
amendments by providing enforcement
through criminal statutes.

It has never been questioned that
basically and fundamentally matters of
elections are controlled by the States.
This bill proposes for the first time to
Inject the power of the Federal Govern-
ment In the area of voting rights. And
this is brought about by authorizing the
Attorney General to seek Injunctions in
civil cases In the name and on behalf
of the United States. The one and only
means of such enforcement is through
contempt proceedings. The contempt
is punished by fine or Imprisonment.
Under Federal law, where contempt of
court Is also a violation of Federal or
State law. the accused is guaranteed the
right to demand a trial by jury.

Although the Attorney General seeks
authority to handle these cases as civil
actions, and would delude us Into believ-
ing that; it is apparent that we are sub-
jecting our people to criminal process.
Section 2691 of title 18— Crimes and
Criminal Procedure— United States
Code, states that contempt of an Injimc-
tlon constitutes a crime. But where suit
is brought in the name of the United
States as contemplated by the bill a trial
by Jury may not be had.

Parts III and FV of the bill provide a
device to bypass State laws. State reme-
dies. State courts. State Judges, and State
agencies. Here Is the second step de-
liberately planned to strike down States
rights. Finally, under the calculated
scheme of the bill all actions instituted
would be filed In the name of or on be-
half of the United BUtes and tried before
the Federal court#%nd in the enforce-
ment of Federal court orders and decrees
through contempt proceedings the de-
fendants would be deprived of trial by
jury.

By this legislation you abandon the
sovereignty of the States. Our citizens
are deprived of the sacred right of trial
by jury.

You confer upon the Attorney General
unheard of powers. You give him the
power .to investigate all national elec-
tions. He is empowered with the au-
thority to Investigate and supervise the
primaries, not only of the Democratic
Party, but also of the Republican Party.
This goes further than any statute ever
before enacted.

Under the Constitution the States are
the sole judges of the qualifications of
the voters and throughout the long his-
tory of the United States, the manner
in which our elections are held has been
a time honored fimctlon of the States.
The broad language of this bill would
open practically the entire field of elec-
tions. Including State primaries to Fed-
eral Intervention. The intrusion of the
Federal Government into this field has
not heretofore been permitted or even
considered, except In instances clearly
defined by the 14th and 15th amend-
ments. No man should be trusted with
that much power.

In my State of Tennessee the Negro
has the same voting rights as any white
citizen. If he has qualified by register-
ing, he can and does walk up to the poll-

8653

Ing place on election day and casts his
vote like any American citizen. We have
no poll tax In Tennessee — but when we
did every citizen who had paid that tax,
which went for the maintenance of the
pubhc schools, whether he be black or
white, was entitled to vote ahd to have
his vote counted. I never in all my ex-
perience have known of an Instance in
my State when a voter who had qualified
was deprived of his right to vote because
of his race or color.

We have provided equal educational
opportunities for him despite the fact
that the Negro race paid less than one-
tenth of the taxes Imposed for educa-
tional purposes, and the white people
have uncomplainingly paid the rest.

You. who advocate the passage of this
legislation in a misguided effort to pro-
tect the civil rights of the Negro in the
South, know not what you do. In this
bill you Jeopardize the rights of every
citizen of the United States.

I wish that each and every one of you
would come to my State — you would
realize how needless is this legislation.
In the 15 years I served as United States
attorney In a district covering 41 of the
95 counties of the State. I never had
presented to me a complaint that a Negro
had been deprived of his right to vote or
had been intimidated, or had his civil
rights Interfered with in any manner.
But I did have many complaints of vio-
lations of the civil rights of others
brought to me after every election. It
is true most of them were violations of
the Hatch Act, and as United States
attorney it was my duty to have these
complaints investigated, which I did.
We prosecuted many of these cases.

I know this legislation Is not needed;
I know it Is not wise. In reaching this
conclusion I have been infiuenced by no
prejudice against the Negro. I bear him
no grudge. I entertain for him no un-
kind feeling. I have never failed to con-
demn every act of lawlessness Inflicted
upon the Negro and have always de-
manded for him a fair and Impartial trial
when he was charged with violation of
the law.

Mr. Chairman, I know the Negro— his
faults and his virtues — and he has many
virtues. My knowledge and observation
of the Negro race covers almost the span
of my life, for they helped nurse me In
my Infancy, played with me In my boy-
hood and I have known and studied them
in my mature manhood. I have de-
fended them as a lawyer, prosecuted
them as a United States attorney — ^I have
tried and passed sentence on them as a
Judge. I would do the Negro no wrong.
I would help him If I could.

I would strengthen him when he is
weak. I would teach him by practical
and Industrial education to be a better
man. I would shield him from his own
weaknesses and excesses. I would steady
his stumbling feet as he treads the stony
way that leads up to his moral and ma-
terial betterment.

Living in the South, I know this Is the
attitude of the white people of the South.
It Is difficult for you who have not grown
up with them to understand this atti-
tude.

If you are not advocating this legisla-
tion purely as a gestui-e In the hope of

winning the Negro vote In futxu-e elec-
tions. If you want to preserve the rights
of the Negro as weU as every other citi-
zen, then vote against this Iniquitous bill.

Do not by the passage of this legisla-
tion jeopardize the civil rights of every
citizen of the United States. I urge you
to defeat this bill designed to destroy the
last vestige of the Individual rights of
the States you represent.

Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. FRAZIER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Tennessee.

Mr. COOPER. I desire to congratu-
late my colleague from Tennessee on the
splendid speech he has made and I con-
cur with him fully In hij very able state-
ment. I have always opposed legislation
of this type and am strongly opposed to
tills pending bilL I will ask the gen-
tleman if he will not agree with me that
the fact Is that this is not candid legis-
lation; that It was conceived in an at-
mosphere of political expediency and
certainly should not be enacted into law.

Mr. FRAZIER. I certainly agree with
the gentleman and appreciate his state-
ment.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FRAZIER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Louisiana.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. I want to
also join with my colleague, the gentle-
man from Tennessee [Mr. Coopir], In
congratulating the gentleman upon a
masterful presentation of the merits and
demerits of this bilL I know the gentle-
man has had many years' experience as
United States attorney, and with that
experience his knowledge of this subject
Is transcendent. I want to congratulate
him on the splendid presmtatlon made
In this speech.

Mr. FRAZIER. I thank the gentle-
man.

Mr. MATTHEWS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman jrleld?

Mr. FRAZIER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Florida.

Mr. MATTHEWS. Mr. Chairman. I
wish to congratulate the distinguished
gentleman from Tennessee. I wish all
of our colleagues could have heard the
excellent presentation that he has made.
I join with him In sincerely hoping that
this iniquitous piece of legislation will
meet overwhelming defeat.

Mr. FRAZIER. I thank the distin-
guished gentleman from Florida.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. FRAZIER. I yield to the genUe-
man from Alabama.

Mr. ANDREWS. I want to commend
the gentleman for one of the finest
statements I have heard made in this
debate. It shows that the gentleman
has given a great deal of study to this
subject which is of such vital Interest
to the South and to all America.

Mr. FRAZIER. I thank the gentle-
man.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. FRAZIER. I yield to my distin-
guished chairman, the gentleman from
New York,

#-rkX7m> rcciniC ATP FrOR D — HOUSE

June 10

i n^y

III

t"

JM

II

\w

86&4

CONGRESSIONAL RECCED — HOUSE

June 10

1957

Mr. CELLER. I am very happy to
state that I have always found the gen-
tleman who Is now occupying the floor
to be a most dedicated Member of this
House, who has rendered vahiable serv-
ice on the Committee on the JudlciaiT.
and I am always happy to be associated
with him. While I necessarily do not
agree with the principle announced. I
luiow It was. from his point of view, a
very praiseworthy statement, and I am
anxious to have the gentleman now In
the wen know that your dear ones have
been listening to your speech.

Mr. FRAZIER. I thank my distin-
guished chairman.

Mr. SHUFORD. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. PRAZIER. I yield to the gentle-
man from N«rth Carolina.

Mr. SHUFORD. I want to associate
myself with others who have spoken,
commending the gentleman on the fine
speech he has presented on this burning
Issue. I think he has done a masterful
Job, and I am sorry that more Members
were not here to hear it.

Mr. FRAZIER. I thank the gentle-
man.

Mr. LOSER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. FRAZIER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Tennessee.

Mr. LOSER. Mr. Chairman. I want
to }oln my very diatingulahed colleafnie
from Tennessee (Mr. FnAsinl In the
magnificent address that he has made
to the Members of this great body. I
have known him for many, many years.
He la a worthy son of a very distln-
g\ii8hed father. His father was a mem-
ber of the United States Senate from
Tennessee. He likewise served as Gov-
ernor of our Stats, and the gentleman
now addressing us has served as United
States attornsy. I am happy to Join
with him in this magnificent address
that he has delivered here today. I con-
cur In his very fine statement.

Mr. FRAZIER. I thank my distin-
guished colleague for his very flatterlni
statement.

Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FRAZIER. I yield to the genUe-
man from Tennessee.

Mr. BASS of Tennessee. I would Uke
to Join with my colleagues from Temies-
see and other parts of the Nation in com-
mending my coUeag'je [Mr. FkazixrI for
the very fine address he has given on this
subject. Certainly his membership on
the committee and the years given to the
study of this subject qualify him as an
expert on this matter.

Mr. FRAZIER. I thank the geaUe-
man.

Mr. HARDY. Mr. Chairman. I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Virginia?

There was no objection.

Mr. HARDY. B4r. Chairman. I have
studied this bill and the report, and be-
fore the general debate started I was
greatly disturbed by many of the far-
reaching new proposals advanced in the
name of protecting civil rights. As I

have listened to the debate. I have be- dehberatlons (rf the J^^ldary Commit-
come more and more aisturoea

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

I am grateful to my able colleagues
who have presented so clearly an out-
line of many of the dangers hiherent in
this legislation. They have discussed
the constitutional Implications of this
measure. They have pointed out en-
croachments on the rights which the
Constitution assigned to the States.
More importantly they have pointed out
the danger that legislation of this type
may actually circumscribe the liberties
which our forefathers thought they were
assuring for all time when they ap-
proved the first 10 amendments to the
Constitution, our Incomparable Bill of
Rights.

Under our Constitution every citizen
Is entitled to equal freedom and equal
Justice and equal opportunity. Surely.
I know as weU as anyone else that in-
equities exist— there are injustices, prej-
udices, sometimes hatred and fre-
quently misconduct. I do not believe
however, that these are singularly ap-
plicable to any specific geographic sec-
tion of our Nation or to any particular
group within our population. In a Na-
tion of nearly 170 mlUl9n people in-
equities and injustices alid prejudices
are bound to exist. They will always
exist as long as human beings are
human.

All of us want to promote fairness and
to eliminate Inequities, but in seeking
this ehislve objective we must not create
greater Injustices than we relieve.

Every citizen of our Nation is entitled
to the liberties provided in our Con-
stitution. But. as we try to assure them
we must be careful not to take away or
to restrict the liberties of others.

As we in this Congress approach a
vote on this legislation, we should ask
ourselves whether in the name of pro-
moting equity we would produce greater
inequity — in the name of granting rights
to some people, we would take away ths
rights of others — in the name of pro-
moting harmony, we would actually
create discord — in the niune of promot-
ing amity, we would engender hatred.

Let us not forget that no matter how
hard we try, we cannot by law control
the relationships of one human being to
another — the attitudes— the morals and
the behavior. Many of these intangibles
respond only to divine law and when
we encroach on this field, failure is in-
evitable. The brotherhood of man im-
der the fatherhood of God is a desirable
objective, but it is something which will
be fostered only by putting grater re-
liance on our churches and our schools.
The coercive force of law in these areas
is wrong. Let us not make the mistake
of passing this measure.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
30 minutes to a very praiseworthy mem-
ber of our Committee on the Judiciary.
the distinguished Representative from
Virsrlnia. Governor Tuck.

Mr. TUCK. Mr, Chairman. I thank
the genUenmn from New York for allot-
ting me this time. While I wholly dis-
agree with him on this subject and rise
to express unalterable opposition to the
bill in its entirety. I am glad to be able
to say to him and to my colleagues that
he has at all times presided over the

tee with ability, flnnness and Impar-
tiality and in a manner to reflect credit
upon the high pubUc statkm to which he
has been elevated.

My colleagues on the Judiciary Com-
mittee who have pireceded me to opposi-
tion to this bill, particularly the fjentle-
man from Louisiana [Mr. WillrK and
the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Porrl,
and the gentleman from Tennessee, have
expressed themselves so clearly ind so
succinctly and so convincingly, and have
nuu^haled their thoughts and views In
such a skillful and dexterous manner
that I am hesitant and reluctant to ad-
dress myself to the subject because I
know that I do not come with tiie cold
logic they had and I cannot mea.<;ure up
to the high standards of excellence set
by them and others.

As we are today closing this lilstorlc
debate. I hope that despite our divergent
views, we car^-alt approach the subject
in a spirit of amity and of good win and
that we can consider the problem with
hearts unfilled with emotion and minds
unclouded by prejudice or by passion.

The whole proposal since its inception
has accomplished nothing except to fo-
ment strife and misunderstanding and
to engender bitterness and hatre<l whier*
cordiality theretofore existed among per-
sons of diflerent views and different
races. It is unfortxmate that a proposal
of such an Inflammatory nature slkould
ever have been made and I predict that
its adoption wlU be marked by countless
future years of Irritation and acrimony.

A few days ago someone handftl ma an
editorial from the Norfolk (Va.) Journal
and Guide, wherein ths editor of that
newspaper referred to the public senrloes
of my colleague, the gentleman from Vir-
ginia [Mr. Aaarrrl. and me in a ioomful
and disdainful maiuier. Among other
things he said that we. as repi'esenta*
tives of the dominant political party.
were probably the two most cunr^loig and
astute political maneuverers the Com-
mon«*ealth of Virginia had produced for
more than 100 years and that we were
employing our talents for the sole pur-
pose of creating discord between the
races and riding herd over the minority.

I regret that that editorial was ever
written. It would not have been but
for the bitterness following, in the wake
of the Court decisions and thr clamor
for the so-called civil rlghU bill I chal-
lenge this unwarranted and untrue
newspaper statement. The ediU)r of this
newspaper was not fair enough to point
out the large increase In publi>3 appro-
priations made upon my recocomenda-
tion for the education of the colored
people of Virginia. He did not mentk>n
that I had signed an executive order
making available hundreds of thousands-
of dollars for the establishouuit of a
State park for Negroes. Nor did he think
to point out that I requested the State to
purchase the Booker WashingUMi birth-
place where the colored people named
one of the buildings after me. The edi-
torial did not mention the fact that vaote
money was made available diiriog my
4-year administration for the treatment
and eradication of tuberculosis among
the colored people of our State than all
previous administrations combined from

the foundation of the Virginia Health
Department down to that time. I am
not a recent convert to fairness and to
harmony between the races. More than
30 years ago as a yoimg member of the
Legislature of Virginia I voted for Gov-
ernor Byrd's antl-lynch law, and there
has not been a single death by lynching
in Virginia since that time.

As Governor I tried to serve the
colored citizens of Virginia with courtesy
and consideration. I have never used
the powers of any office to which I have
been elected in a harsh or unfair man-
ner toward any man or any set of men
regardless of race or color, and what is
more, I never will. The conduct of the
people of Virginia is such that they can
stand today at this threshold and upon
our record, as always, unruffled, un-
ashamed and imafrald.

But this bill Is not designed to improve
the lot of the colored man or to confer
upon him any rights he does not already
have. It confers no rights upon anyone
except the Attorney General of the
United States. At the same time, it
deprives all others of existing rights and
strikes a fatal blow at the vitals of the
fundamental principles upon which this
Government is based. It Is not the
worthy and Innocuous piece of legisla-
tion that its proponents claim. It Is not
the right to vote bUl that the Washing-
ton Post and others contend. If that is
all It were, few voices on this floor and
elsewhere would be heard in opposition
to It except for the fact that It author-
ises the United States Government to
Invade areas heretofore reserved exclu-
sively to the States by the Constitution
of the United SUtes. The real vice of
this bill Is that It destroys our Constitu-
tion and shatters our Bill of Rights.

Let us see what It does. Part I estab-
lishes a Federal Commission on Civil
Rights, which under Incredibly broad
powers of subpena and which under
vaguely defined duties and powers could
dispatch a traveling band of Inquisitors
throughout the land to harass our clti-
sens and to Impede them In the dis-
charge of their public and private duties.

On the flimsy ground of mere allega-
tions, the Attorney General favors sad-
dling upon the entire Nation the burden
of a new national commission operating
independently all over the Nation: ap-
plying its Inquisitions and Intimidations
whenever and wherever It chooses; drag-
ging citizens away from their businesses
and from their homes and loved ones at
any time and for any distance and to any
place the new Commission desires, upon
the compelling force of subpena ; merely
to investigate whether and to what ex-
tent these allegations are well founded
and to try and bring about the correc-
tion of any conditions the Commission
determines to be civil rights violations.

The utter lack of necessity for the
creation of any such Civil Rights Com-
mission as is contemplated in this pend-
ing legislation is shown by the testimony
of the Attorney General himself.

The Commission will function, in prac-
tical effect, as an arm of the NAACP, the
American Civil Liberties Union, and
other leftwing bodies. It would be
financed from the United States Treas-

8655

ury at what cost the sponsors cannot or
will not predict.

It Is shocking to the intelligence to
hear this described as a moderate begin-
ning on the civil rights bill, and It is the
first time to my knowledge that any re-
sponsible legislative body has under-
taken to create a study commission and
at the same time and in the same meas-
ure proceed forthwith to legislate upon
the subject.

Part II may not at first glance appear
so objectionable, but even scant knowl-
edge, of the operations of Federal bu-
reaucracy will present an unerring pic-
ture of the course this new division on
civil rights would pursue. It would un-
questionably plunge the country into
widespread litigation and such groups
as the NAACP would keep it supplied
with alleged causes of action. The exist-
ing civil rights section of the statutes
provide the Attorney General with all of
the authority necessary and the Attorney
General has admitted that he has au-
thority already to assign civil rights en-
forcement duties to any of the present
Assistant Attorneys General.

The Department of Justice has done
very well, thew many years, without
such a division. No compelling reason
can be advanced for establishing it now.
The provisions of part n would do noth-
ing to Improve domestic tranquillity In
the complex and very delicate field of
civil rights, but on the contrary would
surely lead to discord, strife, and a
deeper bitterness. These self-styled
moderates would release upon the coun-
try a horde of political bloodsuckers and
harpies clothed with the badge of power
and authority who could and no doubt
would In Instances reduce us to a "police
state" and thus make life unbearable
and Intolerable.

Some of the worst evils of the pro-
posed legislation lie concealed in part
m. It would provide weapons by which
the entire SUte and Federal relation-
ship would be effectively destroyed.
Age-old guaranties of personal rights
would be stripped away. Government
by law In which SUte powers are pre-
served and individual rights are pro-
tected would be replaced with govern-
ment by injunction — government by the
uncheckable whims of Federal judges.
Coimtless alleged denials of equal pro-
tection of the laws, however fantastic,
would be translated Into binding injunc-
tions obtained without regard to State
remedies and State pourts.

The effect of this section of the pend-
ing bill would be to place the powers of
a tyrant in the hands of every Federal
Judge, some of whom have clearly acted
in a bombastic and arrogant and inju-
dicial manner. Under the catch-all
term of "equal protection of the laws"
almost anyone may contend that he is
being deprived of something. Upon the
flimsiest allegations of an "about to"
conspiracy — without even the consent of
prospective plaintiffs and even against
their will — the Attorney General may
demand an ex parte injunction, with-
out notice and without hearing.

As a member of the Judiciary Com-
mittee and as a lawyer with some con-
cept of ethical conduct, it was sickening
and saddening some months ago to hear

the Attorney General of the United
States beseeching and imploring the
C(nigres8 of the United States to place
him and the high office which he holds
in partnership with nmners and cappers
and those who would engage in the un-
orthodox and despicable practice of
barratry, champerty, and maintenance.
This section contains the most danger-
ous and objectionable of all the pro-
posals; namely, It would deprive citizens
of the right to trial by Jury. It would
violate the sacred precincts of the con-
stitutionally imbedded system of jury
trial by permitting the United States to
become a party to what appears to be a
civil suit, develop it into a criminal pro-
cediu-e and result in the abolishment of
the time-honored means of appljring the
sanctions of the penal statute.. The
right of an accused person to demand
the nature and cause of his accusation,
to be confronted by his accusers, and to
call witnesses in his behalf, would be
banished and set at naught.

An accused person by the law of the
land is entitled to the right of speedy and
Impartial trial by a Jury of his peers in
the locality where the alleged violation
was committed. It is hornbook law
that every person accused of crime
is prestuned to be innocent. This would
conform to the principles enunciated
in our Bill of Rights. Those of us who
oppose this legislation do not contend
that any Judge should be deprived of the
right to try a person for contempt and
Impose punishment in a case where the
contempt was committed in the presence
of or close proximity to the court because
we do not want to hamper and impede
the administration of public Justice.

To undertake to twintmty<i the impor-
tance of the Jury trial in contempt pro-
ceedings on the ground that they are an
outgrowth of a olvU action la a lethal
doctrine and does not conform to my
concept of our American way of Ufe.

It would be more appropriate to entitle
part in as an act to ratify and confirm
the decision of the Supreme Court of
the United Stotes deUvered on May 17.
1964. and Its subsequent decisions in the
Illinois case, the two Pennsylvania oases,
the New York case, the New Mexico case,
the California case, the Du Pont case, the
FBI case, and a host of others. In all of
these cases, the Court Ignored precedents
of long standing and undertook to write
the substantive law of the land without
regard to the rights of the Congress, the
States, or the people. The Supr«ne
Court, as at present constituted, has
shown by these decisions great concern
for the preservation of the Integrity of
the 5th amendment to the Constitution
and none for the 10th.

If these decisions are allowed by the
Congress to stand. I can tell you now that
our local and State governments will
topple over into the abyss of destruction
and remain nothing more than the hol-
low shells of a lost liberty. It is a sad
commentary that the Supreme Court,
the very instrumentality set up in the
Constitution by the Founding Fathers for
the protection and preservation of our
rights should use the powers supposed to
be conferred to rape the people of liber-
ties they have enjoyed for hundreds of
years.

8656

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

8656

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

Proponents of th« bill in part IV com-
pletely overlook and refuse to recognize
the fact that there are no Federal elec-
tions. DO Federal election machinery and
no constitutional provision for it. Tb«
Constitution expressly negates any con-
sideration of such authority in the Fed-
eral Government. It is absolutely clear
that such authority rests solely with the
States. Under our Constitution the leg-
islatures of the respective States have the
mandatory duty and right to regxilate
their own electoral process. The Attor-
ney General has no power over State
elections and should never be permitted
to meddle with them. The exhaustion of
State administrative remedies is one of
the oldest, most thoroughly established,
and salutary rules in American juris-
prudence. The amendment relating to
the right to vote would abolish this prin-
ciple.

Attempts to invoke these so-called
civil-rlghta proposals constitute a blatant
expression on the part of the Congress of
the United States to the effect that the
people and the ofSclals. and particularly
the judges of the respective States, are a
faithless and perfidious lot. In such a
situation. I cannot sit idly by without
uttering a vigorous protest.

If you strike down the power of the
States to control their own afifairs and
their own elections and concentrate all
power in Washington, you strike at the
heart of what has made this Nation great.
I do not stand alone in the enunciation
of this sound doctrine. In support of
this I can call as witnesses many distin-
guished men and great Americans, both
past and present.

A distinguished gentleman stood on the
portico of the capitol of a Southern State
and made the following statement:

The Federal Government did not create the
States of the Republic. The States created
the Federal Government. The creation
should not supersede the creator. For If
the States Iom their me«ning. our entire
system of Government loaes Ita meanlni< and
the next step is the rise of the centra llMd
national slate In which the seeds of autoc-
racy can take root and grow.

That same gentleman the following
year made this statement :

I am here because of my Indestructible
conviction that unless we preserve In this
country the place of Bute i^overnment with
the power of authority, the reaponslbllltiea.
and the revenues necessary to discharjfe those
responsibUities. then we are not going to
have America as we have known It. We wiu
have some other ijrm of government.

Those are beautiful and statesmanlike
expressions of the views and principles
which have made our Nation strong and
Rreat. I subscribe to them 100 percent.
Thpy sound as if they were made by
Patrick Henry. Thomas Jefferson. John
Calhoun. John T>ier. Woodrow Wilson
or Harry Byrd. or by all of them but
they are not. The first is a quotation
from a speech made by Mr. Eisenhower
in the campaign of 1952. and the second
is a quotation from President Eisen-
hower's address to the National Gover-
nors' Conference in Seattle. Wash in
1953. I am sorry that he has seen fit to
place the influence and power of the
office of President behind proposals that

will utterly destroy principles which he
claims to espouse.

I WMMler if we of the present genera-
tion do not take our rich heritage aiMl
the priceless privileges which we eixjoy
as commonplace. We must never be
unmindful of the sacrifice made by our
forefathers and of their struggles to se-
cure these blessings. It behooves us ever
to be vigilant in our determinations to
preserve them. It is not inappropriate
at this time to reflect upon the history
of our Constitution and the first 10
amendments.

Some years ago I read the life of John
Marshall by the great historian, the late
Senator Beverldge. of Indiana. I com-
mend these boolcs to every American.

In his matchless volumes on the sub-
ject of Marshall, he devotes 161 pages to
the Constitutional Convention of Vhr-
ginia which convened in Richmond on
June 2. 1788. Patrick Henry, prema-
turely old at 52, was there; Pendleton,
walking heavily under the burden of his
years and a cripple, was there, as were
Randolph. Monroe, Marshall, and Rich-
ard Henry l^ee. who were young men
barely past t.ie age of 30. Mr. Beverldge
described in some detail these men and
James Madison. Thomas Jefferson. Ben-
jamin Harrison, signer of the Declara-
tion of Independence and destined to
be the father of a President of the United
States and the great-grandfather of an-
other. The presiding officer of the con-
vention was Virginia's first law teacher
and able chancellor, the aged and white-
haired George Wythe. There came also
from Gunston Hall the aristocratic and
brilliant, but gouty. George Mason.
Throughout the entire proceedings the
great Influence of Washington for the
adoption of the Constitution hovered
over the convention. Mason and others
of almost equal brilliance had come to
unite with Patrick Henry to oppose the
adoption of the Constitution unless it
was amended to embody the principal
provision of the Virginia Bill of Rights.
For the first tune In American lUstory a
shorthand reporter was there to report
the debate and the proceedings which
continued for 22 days. It was a great
array of talent and patrioti.sm.

Senator Beveridge says that the array
of ability, distinction, and character on
both .sides was noUbly brilliant and im-
pre.ssive. He added, that seldom, if ever.
in any land or age. had so gifted and
accompll.shed a proup of men contended
m ariiument and disctisslon at one time
and place.

For what were Henry, Mason. Monroe.
Grayson, and others contending? They
were seeking to guarantee the very prin-
ciples for which we contend todav. the
preservation of the individual and States
rights, and to take care that certain im-
perishable truths .<hould be embodied in
the fundamental law of the land. They
believed that all power is vested In and
con.sequently derived from the people,
that magi.nrates are their trustees and
servants, and at all times amenable to
them They believed, anwncr other
thin^^. that each State had a right to
maintain a well-regulated militia, that
no soldier .shall In time of peace be
quartered in any house without the con-

sent of the owner. That tlie people haw
a right to be aecnre in their penoi» aad
io be protected from unwarranted
aearcbes and lelaureB. Tliey contended
that the freedom of the lu-ese is <me of
the great bulwarks of llt«rty and can
never be restrained but by despotic gor-
emmenks; and any citizen may freely
speak, write, and publish Ills aentlmente
on all subjects, being refponaible only
for the abuse of that right

And above all they believed that in
criminal prosecutions a man has the
right to demand the caute and nature
of his accusation, to be confronted with
the accusers and witnessts. to call for
evidence in his favor, and to a speedy
trial by an impartial jury cl his vicinage
without whose unanimoai consent he
cannot be found guilty: that none shall
be deprived of life or libeity. except by
the law of the land or the judgment of
his peers; nor be compelled in any crim-
inal proceeding to give evidence against
himself, nor be put twice in jeopardy for
the same offense.

They joined with the greit Roger Wil-
liams of Rhode Island and his band of
hearty followers who estiiblished that
State, small in area and papulation but
great in its determination and rocky
sLrength of character. It is. as you know,
represented on this floor now by the
distinguished gentleman who presides
over our deliberations today. Rhode
Island was the last of the Colonies to
adopt the Constitution and so zealous
were the followers of Roger Williams to
maintain and preserve the autonomy of
the States and to guarantee complete
and absolute separation of church and
state, that the adopting resolutions of
Rhode Island contained Language sub-
stantially as follows: That religion or
the duty which we owe tc our Creator
as well as the manner of discharging it
can be directed only by reason and con-
viction, not by force or violence; and,
therefore, all men are equally entitled to
the free e.xercise of religion, according
to the dictates of conscience; and that
It is the mutual duty of all to practice
Christian forbearance, love and charity
toward each other. No religion Is worthy
or has a right to exLst which has to
depend for its support upon government
or law.

As a re.sult of the debates In the Vir-
ginia convention which arou5ed other
States, and on accotmt of the determi-
nation of such men as Patrick Henry.
George Mason, and Roger Williams and
others, the Congress at the very next
session submitted the first 10 amend-
ments which were promptly ratified by
the requisite number of States.

What would Jefferson and these other
men, who founded our Government on
the basis of State soverelsnty. think of
a Federal bureau established to go Into
Southern States originating suits against
their citizens as punbhment for con-
forming with State laws and State con-
stitutions?

What have we done to deserve such
treatment? We believe we are worthy
to be accorded a place and full fellow-
ship In the sisterhood of States. Henry
fanned the flame of the American Revo-
lution, and Jefferson penned the Dec-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECX)RD — HOUSE

laration of Independence. Matfiaon
authored the ConatituUon. Ifason drew
our immortal Bill of Rlgbta which is now
embedded In the Ihvt 10 amendments
to the Constitutton. It is true that w«
engaged in a war for the maintenance
of these principles, fighting to the last
ditch with the most conspicuous bravery
in human history. But after 4 long years
of arduous struggle we were compelled
to surrender at Appomattox to the sheer
force of numbers after our soldiers had
won everlasting world esteem. We took
our defeat with fortitude. Our men,
many of them crippled and old, went
home in April to impoverished lands and
depleted resources, but the bloody fields
of April had by fall become rich with a
teeming harvest. As I sit here in this
Congress and witness the handing out
of billions to defeated nations, many of
them wholly unworthy. I think of the
kind of Marshall Plan brought to the
South to bring about our reconstruc-
tion. It was the Marshall Plan in re-
verse. No section of the country be-
fore nor since the War Between the
States has contributed more, in any re-
spect, to the defense of the United
States than the South. The blood of
our citizens is mingled with the blood of
yoivs on every sea and battlefield of the
world from the early American Indian
wars to the late Pacific wars. Yet, we
are to be punished because we disagree
with Federal decrees designed to destroy
the oldest way of life in the Nation and
a decree based on the authority of the
writings of one Gunnar Myrdal. a
Swedish Socialist Imported to the United
Btatee in 1939 by the Carnegie Founda-
tion of Alger Hiss fame.

In conclusion. Mr. Chairman, there is
one source of encouragement today. We
live in the knowledge that the love of
liberty never dies. There are tyrants to-
day who no doubt believe they have for-
ever enslaved mankind. They are ab-
•ohitely wrong because we all know that
suffering humanity from the icy tundras
of Siberia to the banks of the picturesque
Danube is at this hour longing for free-
dom. The history of the world shows
that you may enslave a whole genera-
tion of people and the next generation
win rise up to destroy the oppressors and
restore liberty.

We of the South are fighting these
proposals because we want to preserve
freedom. What we lack in numbers, we
make up in our determination to protect
the States and the rights of the people.
We know that the form of Government
we have enjoyed and cherished for lo
these many years cannot long endure
if the States are to be mere provinces
of the Central Government. I appeal
to you of other States to Join us in this
struggle for America. Let me remind
you that you cannot impeach our rights
without jeopardizing and endangering
your own and all others. You who glee-
fiilly support this bill to pimlsh the
South may some day find joonelyes like
Haman of old. impaled and hong on the
scaffold he built for Mordecal. We do
not pretend or imagine oundvec to be
footttall players on the grkUroQ. and W9
do not have quarterbacks and coaches
to direct us. We are American Con-

8657

greamen, the free and untrammeDed
lemceentathres of the unterrifled people.

In these turbulent and trade daya^
^^lat are our plans? Whatlsourmottof
It Is this: We ti^ not be afraid. We
will nerer surrender to the flagitious
forces of evil which threaten to destroy
America. We will not give in to anger,
or hatred, or JealoosieB. We will never
be unkind to any man, wranan. or child.
We will trust Qod and bravely face the
future.

Mr. CELUSR. Mr. Chairman, I yield
such time as he may desire to the gentle-
man from North Carolina [Mr. WHrrE-
im].

Mr. ■WHTTENER. Mr. Chairman, on
Friday last I referred to the educational
situation In North Carolina In the re-
marks that I made on the floor. In that
statement I referred «)eclflcally to the
salary schedule of white and Negro
teachers and pointed out that the Negro
teachers in North Catrolina have a higher
average annual income than is had by
the white teachers.

In order to have the latest possible sta-
tistics on this question I communicated
with Dr. Charles F. Carroll, superintend-
ent of public Instruction of the State of
North Carolina, and he has given me the
following statistical information with
reference to the school year 1955-56.
This Information is as foUows:

MumiB AMD AvnuGs SALAuza Paib nunc
ST'TB Pdnos
The avertge annual salaries paid to teach-
ers for 9 months' service, claaslfled principals
for 10 mooths' service, superrlson for 10
mantha' serrlce for 185<^-6e are reflected in
the foUowlng:

L Nmnber

CInsroon] teaeben. .
Ckuiifled prlncipais.
Bupenrlaora.

ToUl

9. Average lamtX salarieK
Classroon] teachpn..
CIsasified principals.
Buperviaon.

Whits

a^ios

1,223
174

23,502

$3,0W.g6
8,039.38
4,01X10

Colored

8,57B
413

0,044

$3,194.81
5, 14ft. 30
4,151.38

Total

30^ an

1,638
320

32.546

cm — MS

My purpose in making this informa-
tion available to my colleagues Is to fur-
ther indicate that the pending so-called
clvIl-rlghts legislation is not in the best
interest of this country. It can do noth-
ing other than to disturb the splendid
relations and fair treatment which the
people of the South of all races have
enjoyed In the past.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
such time as he may desire to the gentle-
man from Georgia [Mr. Davis].

lilr. DAVIS of Georgia. Mr. Chair-
man, the Jury trial phase of this debate
has been ably and thoroughly presented
by the speakers who have preceded me.

I do not see how one could hear the
arguments presented by these able law-
yers and students of the Constitution
and fall to be convinced of the danger —
the threat to the American form of gor-
emment which Is Invcrtved In this at-
tempt to destroy the right of jury trials.

I vould not let the opportunity pass
vtthout placbig myself on record as
telQff unequivocally opposed to this at-
tempt to strike down what I regard as

one of the f ovndatlen stcmee of free gov-
ernment It is a potent weapon, a strong
IwoteeUon. one of the greatest shields
which the believers in free government
have yet devised against tyranny and
oppression. Trial by Jury has been the
prised poeseeslon of Anglo-Saxons since
the English barons forced King John to
grant Magna Carta at Runnymede in
1215. I cannot forget todiqr the words
of John Qreenleaf Whittler, reminding
us that "We too are heirs of Runny-
mede."

I believe with that great Englishman,
IxM^ Brougham. In his statement that.
"All we see about us. kings, lords, and
commons, the whole machinery of the
state, all the ai^aratus of the system,
and its varied woiidngs, end in simply
bringing 12 good men into a box."

It has been a shocking thing to me to
hear Members take the floor during this
debate and with seeming unconcern ad-
vocate the tearing down of this great
provision which has stood throughout
the centuries as a barrier and protection
of every citizen, however weak and help-
less he might be, against tyranny and
oppression by any government, however
powerful it might be. either Federal or
State.

In the limited time which has been
allotted to me, I shall endeavor not to
repeat the arguments of the able Mem-
bers who have spoken in behalf of the
Jiiry trial amendment on both sides of
the aisle. I concur in those arguments,
and I shall proceed to discuss other
matters relating to this pending legis-
lation.

This is needless legislation. Such de-
mand as there is for it is political and
artificial. The hullabaloo which has
been stirred up over it was created by
radical and rabble-rousing organizations
such as Americans for Democratic Ac-
tion, NAACP, and a string of other or-
ganizations of the same character, who
have developed an expert technique Ih
propaganda broadcasting.

I direct your attention to material In
the printed hearings on this bill Itself
which Illustrate my statement that this
legislation is useless. On page 344 of the
printed hearings, you will find appendix
B to a statement of the Attorney Gen-
eral which begins on page 325. This
statement of the Attorney General il-
lustrates the absurd, ridiculous and un-
reasonable extent to which the Attorney
General and the Justice Department
have gone in pandering to the NAACP.
This statement of the Attorney Gen-
eral and the appendix which is found on
page 344 of the hearing was introduced
by Oialrman Emaitoxl CsLLxa of the
Judiciary Committee at a coomiittee
hearing before Subcommittee No. 2 of
the Judiciary Committee.

I want you to notice the ridiculous and
absurd number of complaints of viola-
-tions of clvU rights which was stirred
UP an^ caused to be filed with the Jus-
tice Departsaent by this nuUcal organi-
zation, the NAACP.

In the years for which total number
of complaints of alleged civil-rights vio-
lations were given and tqtal number of
cases tried and convictions secured, the
tlgures given by the Attorney General

8658

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

were as follows: In IMO, 8.000 civil
rights complaints were received; no fig-
ures given as to how many cases prose-
cuted, or how many convictions se-
cured. In 1942. 8.812 complaints re-
ceived: prosecutive action taken in 76
cases ; no statement sis to how many con-
victions or acquittals. In 1946, 7.229
complaints were received in civil rights
and political cases. Fifteen cases were
prosecuted, in which five convictions
were secured. In 1947, 13,000 com-
plaints were received; 12 cases were
prosecuted, of which 4 defendants were
convicted. In 1948, 14.500 complaints
were received: 20 cases prosecuted: no
figures given as to convictions. In that
same statement the Attorney General
estimated that 15,000 complaints would
be received during 1949.

Certainly when a situation exists
where 13,000 complaints are filed alleg-
ing violations of civil rights, of which
12 were considered worth trying, and of
that 12 cases tried 4 convictions were
secured, undoubtedly the world's record
Is broken for the filing of groundless
complaints.

Yet these groundless charges, stirred
up by the NAACP. 41 percent of
whose ofBcers and directors are cited In
the records of the House Committee on
Un-American Activities as having con-
nection with subversive organizations,
caused the harassment and hindrance,
and in some cases intimidation, of po-
licemen, sheriffs, prosecuting attorneys,
and law enforcement officers all over this
country. It cost the taxpayers millions
of dollars to process 13.000 groundless
complaints. The Department of Jus-
tice, according to the testimony of wit-
nesses, maintains in the Federal Bureau
of Investigation 172 specialists on civil-
rights matters, and the Attorney Gen-
eral maintains in his Civil Rights Sec-
tion 7 civil-rights attorneys and 4 other
civil rights employees.

While the Attorney Geneials office Is
spending millions of dollars of the tax-
payers' money on this civil-rights fool-
ishness, he is costing the taxpayers of
the countiT other millions of dollars
which could be saved if money spent for
employees in this useless civil rights sec-
tion were used to employ attorneys to
try cases whiA are 5 years and more
behind in the tax division and court of
claims, cases in which Interest is run-
ning against the Government, and will
finally have to be paid, at the rate of
$5,000 per day. or nearly $2 million per
year. If the Attorney General would
use this money which he is wasting fool-
ing with 13.000 groundless civil-rights
complaints, and hire lawyers to catch
up with these untried cases in which in-
terest is running against the Govern-
ment, these millions of dollars could be
saved.

Testimony on this waste of taxpayers'
money is found in the statement of
Attorney General Brownell on page 56
of the Senate State, Justice, and Com-
merce Subcommittee hearings on May
10. 1956. and the testimony of Mr. W. E.
Burger on page 47 of the State. Justice,
and Commerce Subcommittee hearings
of the House on March 2, 1953.

One might well ask why the United
States Department of Justice would con-
tinue year after year to encourage and
magnify thoiisands of groundless com-
plaints, which their txperlence of 18
years since the Civil Rights Section waa
set up in 1939 has demonstrated to be
groundless. I think the testimony of Mr,
8. A. Andretta. administrative assistant
to the Attorney General, on page 149 of
the State. Justice Senate subcommittee
hearings for fiscal 1957 let the cat out of
the bag and gives the answer. This is
that testimony :

Senator Johnsov Mr. Andretta. I want to
ask you 1 or 2 queattona. I understand that
the appropriation carries provision for sev-
eral lawyers in the Civil Rights Section; U
that right? I understand It la seven.

Mr ANDRiTT* Yes; It Is.

Senator Johnson I understand that, gfolng
back to 1951. you have had the same num-
ber

Mr ANDRriTA Yes; the same staff.

Senator Johnson. If you were not asking
for any additional people In the Civil Rlghta
Section In all these years — 1952. 1953, 1954,
1955 — why Is It that you are asking for a
whole new Division In an election year, 1956?

Mr. ANoarTTA. I don't know bow to answer
that.

Senitor Johnson. Thank you very much.

Now, the same question presents itself
with reference to these pending bills. If
the 18 years' experience with this Civil
Rights Section in the Justice Depart-
ment shows that as many as 13,000 civil-
rights complaints will be stirred up and
filed In a year, of which all but 4 were
groundless, what reason is there for cre-
ating a new Civil Rights Division, which
could be done under this legislation?

One reason, I think, is this: Although
there are many good law-abiding Negroes
in this country, nevertheless the bulk of
the crimes of violence are committed by
Negroes. The records show it, and there
is no escaping the truth of it. This radi-
cal organization, the NAACP. under the
guise of protecting civil rights, runs to
the assistance of Negro criminals and
seeks to protect them from the punish-
ment for the crimes they commit. This
has been their record.

This pending legislation, if enacted,
would tie the hands of the law-enforce-
ment officers throughout the country,
and would place law-abiding men. wom-
en, and children at the mercy of brutal,
merciless, hardened criminals.

Much of the crime of this country la
committed by dope addicts. A Federal
Narcotics Bureau report issued on Feb-
ruary 15 shows that 60 percent of the
drug addicts in the United States are
Negroes, and that news item and that
report from the Narcotics Bureau is car-
ried in the Washington papers of Feb-
ruary 15. 1957. That article and that
report says that Negroes represent about
10 percent of the total population, that
the Bureau's breakdown gave the figures
that 60 percent of the United States
drug addicts are Negroes. The break-
down shows white population, 87.8 per-
cent, with 29 percent of the addicts;
Mexican, 1.5 percent, and 4 percent of
the addicts; Puerto Rican, 0.2 of 1 per-
cent of the population. 5 percent of the
addicts. Other races. 0.5 of 1 percent of
the population, 2 percent of the the
addicts.

The article is as follows:

Brrrr Piacxirr or Untrs Statis Daua
ADDicra Aaz Nbokokb

WASHDVoToir, Pwbruary IS. — A Narcotics
Bureau report that 60 percent of United
States drug addlcu are Negroee was nuule
public Priday.

Negroes represent about 10 percent of the
total population, the report said. It waa
contained in testimony by Narcotics Com-
missioner H J. Ansllnger to a House Appro-
priations Subcommittee In closed bearing
Pebruary 4.

The bureau's breakdown gare these other
figures: White population. 87 8 percent of
the total, with 39 percent of the addicts:
Mexicans, 1.5 percent of the population, 4
percent of the addicts; Puerto Rico, 0 2 per-
cent of the population. 8 percent of the ad-
dicts; other races. 0 5 percent of the popula-
tion. 2 percent of the addicts.

Representative Passman. Democrat of
Louisiana, said In a statement the analysis
was furnished at his request. He com-
mented It shows an extremely one-aided
racial distribution of addiction, and he
added •

"I think this Is significant and should be
brought Into true persp-ctlve. so that the
problem may be factually and objectively
recognized by the public."

Here in the city of Washington, the
Nation s Capital, where both white and
black ought to make the t>est possible
showing, crime records for fiscal year
1955 show that of major crimes com-
mitted. 82 percent were committed by
Negroes, the figures being 1.947 com-
mitted by whites, 9,053 committed by
Negroes. The crime records of the Fed-
eral Department of Justice show that
of 13 Eastern. Northern, and Western
States, including Illinois. New Jersey,
New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, the
rate per 100.000 of Negroes in prison on
felony charges was 681 percent over
whites. The same crime records sho*
that in the 10 Southern States the Negro
Is a better citizen than his northern
counterpart, the rate of Negroes per
100.000 in prison on felony charges there
being only 248 percent over whites.

Law-enforcement ofBcers in every sec-
tion of this country know that this pend-
ing legislation would seriously cripple
law enforcement.

On February 1 of this year Police Chief
William H. Parker, of Los Angeles. Calif.,
in speaking to the California Peace Of-
ficers' Association, pointed out the dan-
ger of this legislation. He told the asso-
ciation that those very bills pending be-
fore the Judiciary Committee, being the
civil-rights program offered by the Eisen-
hower administration through Attorney
General Brownell, would put the police
out of business.

That Is not my language. That Is the
language of Chief Parker, of the Los
Angeles Police Force. He further stated
that he opposes the proposal to estab-
lish a Federal commission to investigate
alleged civil-rights violations by local
law-enforcement agencies. He declared
that such a group, a Federal Civil Rights
Commission, would play into the hands
of Communists, "who know they cannot
bring about a revolution or make ad-
vances in the face of a resolute police
force."

Gentlemen, the California Peace Of-
ficers Association, after hearing Chief
Parker, authorized its executive commit-

tee to petition Congress to "look at both
aides and beware of legislation which
might seriously cripple law enforce-
ment."
The article Is as follows:

pAAKxa Hits Civn.-Rioim LsoziLJtTioir law

KtaruaCSMZltT 1£*T Bz HAMPXaZD, Hb TKLLC

OmcKfts

Fmbko. Pebruary 1.— The California peaea
Offlcers AsaoclaUon, at the urging of Police
Chtef Wmiam H. Parker, of Loe Angeles, aska
Congress to be careful of any clvU-rlghta
leglalatlon which would hamper law-enforce-
tnent otncers.

The group's action waa taken here today.
The executive committee was authorized to
caution Congress to "look at both sides and
beware of legislation which might serloualy
cripple law enforcement."

Ban Diego Police Chief Elmer Janaen. asso-
ciation president, said the action will not
commit the organization to oppose or sup-
port any specific legislation, but wlU state
the organization's views.

Parker declared the clvU-rlghts program
offered by the Elsenhower administration
through Attorney General Herbert Brownell
"would put the police out of btislness."

He said he opposes a proposal to eetab-
Ilah a Federal commission to Investigate
alleged clvU-rlghU violations by local law-
enforcement agencies.

Parker declared such a group would play
Into the bands of Communists, "who know
they cannot bring about a revolution or make
advance* In the face of a resolute police
force."

There is no necessity for this legisla-
tion in order to protect voting rights.
The law now on the statute books Is
ample to protect any person from being
deprived of his right to vote. I call your
attention to the case of Thornton et al.
against Martin et al.. registrars of Ran-
dolph County. Ga.. No. 520 In the United
States Ehstrict Court for the Middle Dis-
trict of Georgia, Columbus Division.
This case was tried In 1955.

The suit was brought by nine Negro
plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and
others who alleged that their names had
been lUegally removed from the voters'
registration list In 1954. A Jury verdict
was taken In which the allegations of
the plaintiffs were sustained and $880
damages were awarded to the named
plaintiffs. A decree was entered by the
court upon the Jury verdict In which
the registrars were ordered to place the
names of 134 Negroes back on the voters*
list within 10 days of the decree, and
the order was complied with.

If there are any other Negroes in
Georgia or anywhere else who claim
they are Illegally deprived of the right
to vote, the same remedy under the
same law is available to them in the
United States district court just as in
the Randolph County case. Being
brought under Federal laws, and tried in
a Federal court, the same remedy Is
available to citizens of any State, a fact
which is well known to the Attorney
General and his civil-rights section.

The Negro population of this country
is 10 percent of the total population.
By far the great majority of the Ne-
groes— about two-thirds — have lived and
now live in the South.

In the South we have had the bur-
den of educating them, carrying them
on the relief rolls, furnishing housing
for them, and solving the multitude of

problems that arise whenerer two races
live in close proximity in large numbers;
and these problems do arise whenever
this condition exists, whether it be
South. North, East, or West.

We have dealt generously with the
Negro in the South.

In the South, we have known for many
years that, if Negro children are to be
educated, the cost of educating them
would have to be paid for by white peo-
ple. I live in De Kalb County, Oa..
whose population is 210.000. It was 186 -
000 in 1950. The city of Atlanta lies
in Fulton County and De Kalb County;
and I want to give you some facts about
our treatment of Negro children which
may be news to some of you.

In 1950 I requested the superintend-
ent of county schools in my home county
to give me figures from his records re-
garding the number of Negro children
in our county public school system, the
cost of operating those schools, and by
whom that cost was paid.

The facts were that we had 2,042
Negro children in the county public
school system; that the county, not in-
cluding the State contribution, spent
$85.33 per pupil on white and colored
alike, which amounted to $174,243.86 the
county paid toward the education of
these Negro children.

His information further showed that
Negro property owners In De Kalb
County paid school tax upon 1,348 par-
cels of real estate, total valuation of
$357,320. net valuation after deducting
homestead exemptions, $77,600. Negro
property owners paid taxes upon 842
items of personal property, gross valua-
tion $79,500, net valuation after home-
stead exemption $50,750. The Negro
property owners thus paid school tax
on $128,350 of taxable property. Our
school tax rate is $1.50 per $100. The
total amount of school taxes paid by
those property-owning Negroes waa
$1,925.35.

The county operated 4 Negro school
buses to haul Negro scho^children to
the county public schools^ an annual
expense of $2,000 each, or aTotal expense
Just for school buses of $8,000. So the
total school taxes paid by the Negroes of
De Kalb County into the county school
system was not enough to pay the oper-
ating expense of one school bus; it was
less than one-fourth the actual money
spent by the county to haul their chil-
dren to the schoolhouses. The $1,925.35
would provide less than $1 per pupil for
the 2.042 Negro children who attend the
county public schools.

We have known all through the years
that we have to carry the tax burden.
We have carried it uncomplainingly, and
are now carrying it uncomplainingly, be-
cause we know that if the burden of ed-
ucating their own children were carried
by the Negroes, they simply would not be
educated. Last year, in 1956. 1 asked the
county school superintendent to furnish
me the same information which he pre-
viously furnished me in 1950. Last
school year the State of Georgia paid
$92.35 per pupil for operating purposes.
De Kalb County paid $51.70 per pupil,
making a total of $144.05 per pupil. Of
the $51.70 local payment the Negro tax-
payers paid $1.93 per pupil; the white

8659

taxpayers paid $49.77 per pupU. In the
past 6 years the De Kalb County Board of
Education has spent $1,377,223.28 re-
housing Negro children and purchasing
school equipment for than. Thi^ repre-
sents $517.95 per Negro pupil In capital
outlay.

The value of Negro property In my
borne county has grown now to $326,920.
and their annual school taxes for 1956
amounted to $5,124.47. which, as I stated
before, amoimts to $1.93 per Negro pupU
On Sunday. December 11. 1955, Ete Kalb
County dedicated 13 new school build-
ings. Eight of those were for white
children, and five of them were for Ne-
gro children. At this time all Negro
children in our county are in new class-
rooms. All Negro schools meet full
standards for accreditation; of the Ne-
gro teachers, 17 percent hold master's
degree; 75 percent hold bachelor of arts
or bachelor of science degrees, and only
8 percent have less than 4 years of col-
lege. No Negro teacher with less than a
bachelor of science degree has been em-
ployed in the last 5 years.

We have provided for the Negroes in
the South imcomplainingly, and as I
stated above, the great majority of them
are in the South.

While we have been doing this, other
sections of the country, instead of help-
ing to solve the problem, have made it
worse by meddling, by criticism, by pro-
moting dissension and ill feeling with a
holier-than-thou attitude, and by spon-
soring such legislation as this now under
consideration.

Now. If any obligation rests upon white
people to carry these burdens. It is not
an obligation which rests upon the South
alone. It is an obligation of all the peo-
ple, in every section. Throughout the
years, we in the South have discharged
not only our obligation but yours also.

It is time now for you of the North,
the East and the West to accept your
share of this burden. If it is a Christian
duty to do more for the Negroes than we
have been doing, then by the same token,
an equal share of the responsibility rests
upon the North, the East, and the West.
Those sections of the country cannot dis-
charge their Christian obUgation or civic
obligation by pointing the finger of crit-
icism at the South and saying "dig
deeper — do more."

If you want them treated better, take
your share of them, and deal with them
in your own States and in your own ju-
risdictions.

Many of the Members of this House
who, in the past, have supported this
ridiculous and absurd civil rights legis-
lation do not have a handful of Negroes
In the entire State. Let me say to you,
your protestations of alarm and concern
have a decided hollow ring when we stop
to consider that your complaints are di-
rected against a people who have for gen-
erations uncomplainingly carried not
only their own burden, but yours also.
Let me say to you, stop evading your own
responsibility. Take your share of the
country's Negro population and care for
them. It will not only help your own
self-respect. It will given you an under-
standing of a problem which you have
never had, and which you do not now
have.

II

H I

8660

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Unless you are willing to do what you
are demanding of the South, then your
attitude is hypocrisy, and your clalma
are sham.

This burden cannot be shared equally
If UiC bulk of the Negroes are kept in
the South. The equitable way to distrib-
ute it is for the North, the Eaat and the
West to take your share of the Negroes.
You have not done it up to this time.

Even the small percentage- of the
Negroes who have left the South for
other sections have been relegated to
Negro ghettoes: they have been grossly
overcharged for rent; they have been
segregated in residential areas, and
through this means segregated in the
schools pretty much to the same extent
as they were segregated in the South.

They have been discouraged from c<»n-
Ing to your sections. In some instances
they have even been sent back to the
South because the citizens in the so-
called "promised land" refused to take
them with their string of inevitable "de-
pendent children" and put them on the
relief rolls. One Negro woman who went
to Cleveland. Ohio, from Sumter County,
Ala., last year with eight dependent chil-
dren, was actually banished back to Ala-
bama by a Judge of the Cleveland Juve-
nile court. No work was furnished for
them: no means of livelihood provided;
they were simply sent back against their
will from Cleveland. Ohio, to Sumter
County, Ala. Here is the news item as
It appeared in the Atlanta Journal on
June 8. 1956 :

No RxLiET IK Ohio, Jobless Motheb and
Eight Ohokrxd Back South

Clkvxlano, June 8. — Became they are not
eligible for relief funds In Ohio, a Jobless
Negro mother and her eight dependenu were
under a court order Friday to return to
Livingston. Ala.

The mother. Mrs. Martha Winston. 40. ob-
JectMl tearfully to the ruling by Juvenile
Court Judge Albert A. Woldman Thursday.

~I toought the children here because I
didnt want them to grow up in the South,"
she nid. "I won't go back South."

"Do you want your children to starve"*"
asked the judge as he Issued the order to
return to Alabama. "Do you want that lit-
tle baby to die?"

"I'll do the best I can. and If that's not
enough, then Its up to the L>ord. ' the
woman replied.

But Friday, the court ordered deputies to
go to the family's home In an Ea-st Side slum
section and put all nine on a bus or train
for Alabama.

The dependents are seven children — the
oldest is a 17-year-old girl — and an U-day-
old Infant born to the girl out of wedlock.

Between them and relief aid In Ohio Is a
law that only persons who have lived In
Ohio a year can qualify.

Mrs. Winston and her husband separated
5 years a^o. She said she came to Cleve-
land 4 years ago because she could not earn
a living In Alabama. She brought her chil-
dren here last October.

As a means of getting the family's plight
to the attention of the court, Mrs. Win-
ston was charged with neglect of six children
under 16 by keeping them out of school.

"I kept them out," she said, "because
they did not have any shoes or clothes to
wear."

She said she occasionally was able to get
% day or two of work. But the family had
•aten nothing In the last 3 days.

A local welfare representative told Judge
Woldman that the Sumter County. Ala., re-
lief organization had acknowledged the chil-

dren to be legal resldenU of Alabama and
entitled to relief there.

"If tbeee people are allowed to remain
here, your honor, word will get back to the
South and we will be flooded with similar
families. • the welfare representative told
the court.

You will note from the last para-
graph in this news item that the Cleve-
land people "do not want to be flooded
with similar families."

This attitude and desire to rid them-
selves of responsibility and place it all
upon the South is not a Christian atti-
tude or a religious attitude. So I say to
you take your own percentage of them,
give them the same treatment you are
asking the South to give them, and then
you can with good grace criticize us for
any deficiency. So, it is a fact that other
sections of this country have discour-
aged Negroes from coming and casting
their lot in these sections. The time is
here now for you to show good faith.
There is pending in the House, H. R.
4672. introduced by Representative An-
drews of Alabama. The purpose of this
bill Is to authorize the Federal Govern-
ment to assist dissatisfied Negroes in
moving away from the South, and going
to the North. East, or West to seek more
satisfactory living conditions. Why not
support this bill and thus secure an
equitable distribution of the Negro popu-
lation into every State in this Union?

We In the South believe that we have
maintained the best possible race rela-
tions throughout the years until rabble-
rousing and meddlesome, trouble-mak-
ing organizations and individuals began
to meddle in these race relations.

We have had In the South Just about
twice as many Negroes as are scattered
throughout the entire balance of the
Nation. To be exact, according to the
1950 census there were 15.042,286 total
Negro population In the United States.
The total in the South was 9.654,664.
leaving a balance of 5,387,622 for the
remaining three-fourths of the States.
In the Southern States the average
Negro population Is approximately one-
third of the whites. In some of the
southern States Negro population is
more than one-third of the white.

It Is a cruel fact that hypocritical
representations of some contemptible
politicians seeking Negro votes have
created false hope in the minds of
southern Negroes. Some Negroes have
accepted these hypocritical statements
at face value and are moving into such
cities as New York. N. Y.. Chicago. HI..
Detroit Mich.. Columbus, and Cincin-
nati. Ohio, and elsewhere, believing that
they win be accepted into schools,
churches, and all phases of community
life. When they arrive, they find the
opposite Is true. They are herded into
squalid tenement quarters like cattle
They are overcharged. They arc
cheated. If they settle in a white neigh-
borhood the white people rush to move
away as if the bubonic plague had struck
the community. Although Negroes are
not segregated by law. they are segre-
gated by reason of residence, and the
only way their children can be sure of
attending nonsegregated schools is for
the school authorities to haul Negro
children from Negro communities past

Negro schools, and enter them in white
schools In white communities, and on
the other hand to haul white children
from white communities past white
schools and put them in Negro schools
and Negro communities.

It Is hypocritical for so-caUed liberals
In other sections of the country to point
an accusing finger at the South and say
we are more intolerant and have more
racial antagonism than other sections In
the face of occurrences in other sections;
In the face of such occurrences as fights
between 300 white and Negro school stu-
dents at the Kansas Municipal Stadium
on April 24, last year; a fight between
about 200 whites and Negroes, with thou-
sands of spectators milling about, in As-
bury Park. N. J., on July 2. last year;
a fight between white and Negro sailors
in Honolulu on June 9. last year, restilt-
ing in the death by stabbing of 1 white
sailor; fighting between white and Negro
Air Force recruits in Crocker, Mo., on
June 1. last year; a racial disturtiance
in Muncie. Ind.. on June 10. last year,
resulting in the closing down of a newly
integrated swimming pool in that dty;
Memorial Day race riots last year in
Crystal Beach. Ontario, which was re-
ferred to in newspaper stories as a night-
mare of flashing knives and sobblnff.
frightened passengers; a riot at New-
port. R. I., among 1.500 white and Nefro
sailors and marines, their wives, and
women companions, on September 18,
last year, which completely wrecked a
club and sent 15 sailors to a hospital;
1,110 taxi drivers in St. Louis going on
strike on August 18, last year, in pro-
test against the hiring of Negro taxicab
drivers.

On July 25, last year, a Toronto Judge
upheld an apartment -house owner in his
refusal to rent to a Negro. There were
cross burnings and court hearings In Co-
lumbus, Ohio, on November 14. last year,
resulting from Negroes moving into a
white section in Columbus; banishment
of a Negro woman and 8 children
from Cleveland. Ohio, on June 8, last
year, although the woman tearfully pro-
tested she did not want to return to
Alabama.

Ohio seems to be learning something
about the race problem. On August 1,
last year, a Negro, one I. W. White, Jr.,
executive director of the Council To Aid
Migrant Workers in Cleveland, wrote a
letter to an Alabama schoolteacher ad-
vising him to urge his pupils to stay in
the South Instead of coming North. He
was reported as having said that "the
exodus North of southern Negroes has
hurt the battle of Negroes to obtain
'first-class citizenship'." The Ohio Su-
preme Court, on April 18. last year, up-
held an amusement park near Cincin-
nati in refusing to admit a Negro.

The papers are constantly carrying
news stories of similar occurrences and
of racial problems in the North. East,
and West. Several years ago Sgt. John
Rice, an American Indian who was killed
in Korea, was refused burial in a pri-
vately operated Sioux City. Iowa. Me-
morial Park Cemetery. Burial in that
cemetery is limited to Caucasian only,
and the body of the American Indian
sergeant was finally interred at Arling-
ton National Cemetery.

8661

While I am Ulklng, I want to refute
all the charges which have been made,
either directly or by Innuendo, so far as
they apply to my district and State, that
Negroes are deprived of the right to vote.
The city of Atlanta is in my Congres-
sional District. An analysis prepared by
the Metropolitan Voting Council in At-
lanta revealed that more than 73 percent
of Atlanta's registered Negro voters cast
ballots in the recent city primary as com-
pared to M percent of the registered
white voters. The analysis further
showed that in the runover primary held
about the middle of May, 70.4 percent of
the Negroes voted In the runoff election,
as compared with only 36.2 peixent of
the white voters. There are approxi-
mately 28,000 registered Negro voters in
the city of Atlanta. This information
is carried in a news story In the Atlanta
Constitution of June 3, 1957.

•nie same newspaper carries an article
in Its June 7, 1957. Issue which states that
Negro voting strength increased in 97
Georgia counties last year. According to
this article the records in the Secretary
of State's oflBce in Georgia showed 158,-
000 registered Negro voters In Georgia
in 1058, which was an Increase of about
20.000 over the 1954 figures. White reg-
istration in the 2-year period gained 2
percent, while Negro registration In the
same period gained 15 percent.

Mr. Chairman. If equity is to be done,
we In the South are obligated to carry
one-fourth of the Negro population of
the United States. We have been carry-
ing two- thirds of it.

Instead of maligning and criticizing
the people of the South, let the North,
East, and West now assume their pro-
portionate share of this problem. You
will better understand It. and you can
clear your own conscience by accepting
your own responsibilities, which you have
not done up to the present time.

That is what should be done instead of
passing this bill.

In closing, let me again urge that the
amendment to provide trial by jury oe
adopted. It would be most tragic If by
some evil chance this bill should be
passed and become law without the jury-
trial provision. I would remind you cf
the eagle In Aesop's Fables which had
been shot down by a hunter's arrow. As
it fell to the ground dying, the eagle
noticed that the shaft of the arrow which
had taken Its life was tipped with eagle
feathers. "Alas!" It cried as It died, "we
often give our enemies the means for our
own destruction." To destroy jury trials,
whatever might be the reason, is to hand
a weapon to those who would destroy
free government and Individual liberty.
Mr. CKLLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
such time as he may desire to the gentle-
man from Florida [Mr. Haliy].
Mr. HALEY. Mr. Chairman, when I

look at the so-called civil-rights bill

read It and closely examine the contents
of the bill, and possible effects that it
will have on the people of this country,
I must rise to oppose It.

Before I get into a discussion as to the
provisions of the bill, however, I want to
thank the distinguished chairman of the
Judiciary Committee for allowing the
opposition to be heard in committee. py»r
the first time In over 4 years both sides

til the question were given an omxH*-
tunlty to express their views. Tills is
right and Just, for it allowed the several
governors and attorneys general of the
States to be heard. As I recall It, there
were only 4 days of hearings scheduled
on the pending civil-rlghts bills this
year; but the Judiciary Committee held
hearings for many days, and some of the
opponents were given the opportunity to
object.

Now let us examine some of the pur-
poses and contents of H. R. 6127. As
stated in the committee report, the bill
is "designed to protect the civil rights
of persons within the jurisdiction of the
United States." in order to try to ac-
complish this goal they want to establish
a Civil Rights Commission, create an-
other position of Assistant Attorney
General, and it proposes the enactment
of new laws for the enforcement of the
right to vote. These purposes are stated
in the report. Let us analyze these pro-
visions for a moment.

Part I of the bill will establish a
Commission on Civil Rights. This seems
on the surface to be a simple little thing.
You hear much to the effect that It will
be a nonpartisan Commission which Is to
be appointed by the President and ap-
proved by the Senate. This seems to be
innocent enough. But under part I of
this bill some very broad rules of pro-
cedure are set forth. These rules grant
to the Commission some broad powers
that very few commissions are granted.
And if any person is brought before the
Commission in executive session, the
testimony and evidence submitted could
only be made public at the consent of
the Commission. But getting back to
the Commission Itself and the staff— let
me quote from the report on page 7 : "It
authorizes the employment of a full-time
staff director and such other personnel
as the Commission deems necessary."
This is granting entirely too much power
and authority to the CommissIonT Of
course, there has been no estimate given
as to the cost of this bill. It would seem
to me that the Congress ought to have
some estimate of the cost of a Govern-
ment agency before any money Is appro-
priated to allow the agency to operate.
On last Thursday during the debate
the distinguished chairman of the com-
mittee made this statement:

The purpose of the Commission is to make
an overall study to get the complete picture
throughout the Nation.

As I understand it, it is the purpose of
this Commission to make recommenda-
tions to the Congress for legislation. I
think that it is the duty of Congress to
investigate and legislate, and it would
seem to me that this bill not only has
anticipated the findings of such a Com-
mission but that there is no need what-
soever for the Commission. The Execu-
tive branch of the Government could es-
tablish a Civil Rights Commission if it
so desired. Let us keep separate the
duties of the three branches of this
Government.

Now part n of the bill provides for the
appointment of an additional Assistant
Attorney General in the Department of
Justice. This is absolutely needless, in
my opinion. They have a Civil Rights
Section down there in the Department of

Justice already, but It is apparent that
the bureaucrats Qt this adznlnlstaratioa
want to enlarge Government. I am not
one to stand here and criticize only this
administration, for this whole idea came
from the minds of former administra-
tions. But the inconsistencies of this
administration are so glaring that I am
compelled to cite one or two. Many
times during the past few years the
President has suggested that more efll-
cioicy In government could be attained.
I even recall something he said about
wanting to clean up the mess in Wash-
ington. Well, I am one to say that, if
this bill is enacted into law. this country
will really be a mess, for the very rights
granted to individuals imder the Con-
stitution of the United States will be
taken away.

But when we get to part m of the bill
I truly get upset, for this is the part of
the bill that provides that whenever any
person has engaged in, or there are rea-
sonable grounds to believe he is
about to engage in, some act to violate
someone else's rights, then he can be
hauled into court by the Attorney Gen-
eral. No evidence that a crime has been
coDunitted would have to be shown.
The Attorney General would have the
discretion to determine whether or not
the rights were about to be violated. It
is my opinion that no dictator ever had
such power and authority, and I do not
believe that we should grant this power
to anyone in tliis country.

Then we move on down to part IV
of the bill. This Is the provision that
grants to the Judge the power to legis-
late, prosecute, punish, and execute.
Under this provision of the bill, the ex-
ecutive branch of the Government will
dictate to the individual states who is
to be a qualified elector for any election.
There are many cases in the courts in
former times which have shown that the
right to vote Is derived from the States.
This is clearly a case, I think, of the
Federal Government preempting the
field so far as voting rights are con-
cerned.

From the looks of things we are slowly
but siu'ely coming to the stage whereby
the Individual States of this Nation
are losing their sovereignty, a sover-
eignty which is granted both impUcltly
and expressly since the formation of this
great Republic. This Government of
ours is destroying Itself by relegating
vested authority to various bureaus and
agencies. Give them an inch. They do
not stop at a mile, but continue to
every comer of the Nation. They are
taking away the very liberties that have
made this country great.

Aside from the abominable features
which I have mentioned here, there are
1 or 2 basic, fundamental reasons for
my being vigorously opposed to H. R.
6127. Dtiring the past 5 or 6 months
we have been having the battle of the
budget. It has been parried back and
forth between the Congress and the
Executive. First, we told him to tell us
where to cut. Then he says that it is
our prerogative to cut. Of ooiuve his
team has made some statements abotit
the budget, also. But every time that
he makes a statement in defense of his
budget it Is always with the coimotatim

8662

liMKt the bttdffet nmat Tfwfai m la. or
wir defence and naOoDAl Mcurity will
be wMkened.

OONGMSSKWAL RBGORD — HOUSE Jum 10

^g^,^ ^ f]^ debate on tine pendiiw TbarefoKe, Mr. Chairman, I repeat the

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSB

8663

two basic

thla year lias centered around measure U neither necessary nor desir-
, ehauSes-namely. that this abl«^-4t is objectionable and I want to

SiS^r^'SJSSf^rUS ^^T..^^^J^t>L-Si s^-if^^r.o'asssisj

the PM«. <rf thl. bia so let u. look ,«„»« Md the force o( direction of Uil. "^^^^j^j^ Mr. Chilrman. 1 yield

leoc and closely at this bilL

The lights of the States must remain
ioTtobUe. The rights of the individual
must remain unimpaired. If this bill
wer« to become law by some strange
quirk, this country would no longer be
a free Repuisto. Entirely too much au-
thority has been granted to o\a admin-
istrative agencies of the Govenunent
in the past. It is high time that we do
something about this trend toward the
bureaucracy of government. It is time
lor us in Congress to put our foot down
unri cease this foolishness. It can be
done by an overwhelming vote to kill
this bilL

There is no evidence contained in
tJiese hearings which justifies legislation
«f this kind. If this, the record of these
bearings, is what thie proponents of the
civil rights legislation must rely upon,
then they have presented nothing in
support of the bill.

The men who established our dual
system of government entrusting local
affairs to the State governments and na-
tional concerns to the Federal Govern-
ment were no ivory-tower theorists.
They were practical men of affairs, who
knew that an all-powerful central gov-
ernment is a constant ttireat to liberty.
They knew that the only effective insur-
ance against tyranny is found in strong
local governments functioning under the
watchful eyes of the people from whom
they derive their powers. These prin-
ciples are as valid today as they were
in 1787. Having taken an oath to sup-
port the Constitution, I cannot vote for
a bill such as H. R. 6127. which fiouts
these fundamental truths.

Some Members of this distinguished
body are economy minded. To those
Members I should like to state that I can
see no earthly reason for starting a new
agency in this Government at present.
For you and I know that once an agency
has been authorized by law. then it
grows. And as the agency grows, so
grow the appropriations to carry on the
functions of the agency.

The Attorney General has the FBI
under his jurisdiction at present. If any
criminal conspiracy exists which would
injure, oppress, or intimidate the people
in exercising or enjoying the rights and
privileges secured to them by the Consti-
tution or laws of the United States, the
FBI should and could Investigate.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
such time as he may desire to the gentle-
man from Tennessee [Mr. EvinsI.

Mr. EVINS. Mr. Chairman, as we
continue debate on the pending meas-
ure— an almost perennial consideration
of this controversial legislation — it
should be pointed out that the same bill
in one disguise or aiKther has come
before us in erery 1 of the 6 Congresses
in which I have been privileged to serve.
The repeated defeat of this measure at-
tests to its defaults and shortcomings.

measure— and

Second, that the right of trial by
Jury— jury trial— is denied to our citizen*
under this raeasure — this is an abridg-
ment or denial of a basic right which is
fundamental under our Constitution and
our concept of government.

Beskies these two basic objections to
the bill. I am moved to observe that the
measure is neither necessary nor desir-
able.

One of the first tests as to whether we
should pass any bill, it seems to me. is to
determine whether such a measure is
needed. It is not oin- habit here to pass
unnecessary and unneeded bills. The
most fatal weakness of the pending bill
is simply that It falLs to meet tills es-
sential-needs test.

As we know, the bill proposes to deal
with alleged denials of. or interference
with, the right of citizens to vote.

I venture to say that no one believes
more strongly and sincerely in the free
exercise of suffrage than I do. I have the
honor to represent a State where that
right Is truly enjoyed by all citizens and
where, indeed, the minority, whose rights
are said to be most abridged, Is given the
full right to vote: and it can be said, with
accuracy, that the minority in the most
recent national election In my State de-
termined the outcome of the election.

As all citizens have the right to vote
I cannot, therefore, conceive of any cir-
cumstances which would make this law
applicable to my State.

We have heard a great deal of axpu-
ment and debate that the bin would
apply most pointedly to 1 or 2 or a few
States of the South. The evidence that
has been prodxxced has been of the
vaguest hearsay character or based on
deductions from voting statistics — evi-
dence that could not stand the simplest
test of legal competence.

The second test of need Is represented
by the question: Assuming there is a
problem, are our present laws adequate
to solve it? The proposed legislation also
fails to meet this test. We now have
not only constitutional guaranties of the
rights concerned but statutory laws
which offer methods of enforcing the
right to vote as well as means of redress
for abridgment of these rights.

In short, measured by the two stand-
ards— whether a problem exists and
whether existing laws are capable of
dealing with It — we fail to see any real
need for this legislation.

Besides the lack of need, there is also
a very simple test for measuring the pos-
sible erosion any law might cause In our
basic rights. We should also consider
whether this proposed law would make
it possible for the overeager. the over-
zealous, or the unscrupulous to oppress
any sizable segment of our citizens. The
answer in this instance, as many of my
colleagues have already well pointed out^
is a clear "Yes."

such time as he may desire to the gentle-
man from Ohio [Mr. Ashley].

Mr. ASHLEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point in the Rscobo.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Ohio?

There was no objection.

Mr. ASHLEY. Mr. Chairman. I favor
passage of the civil-rights bill presently
under consideration because I believe
there is a real need to implement the
constitutional right to vote to which all
qualified American citizens are rightfully
entitled.

Those who oppose this legislation base
their principal argument oa the premise
that theie is no violation of the right
to vote and therefore there is no neces-
sity to protect against a danger which la
form but not substance.

All of us, I believe, know better. We
know that there are powerful segments
withm our society whose prejudice haa
been frozen into the conviction that Ne-
groes are second-cla^s citizens, and who
seek to perpetuate the myth that Ne-
groes are indifferent to and even enjoy
this second-class status. All of us are
aware, however, of the malicious and
evil doings of the Ku Klux Klan. white
citizens councils, and other similar or-
ganizations who pose as jury, prosecu-
tion, and enforcement agency in many
communities.

We know, if we look at election totals,
that millions of American citizens in the
South are not exercising their right of
franchise. I. for one. refuse to believe
that this is simply a manifestation of
indifference.

I believe that If effective efforts were
made to encourage rather than discowr-
age large-scale participation in the elec-
tion of our national officials, many dis-
tricts now considered automatic might
become marginal and many of our col-
leagues from marginal districts would
disappear from the Washington scene.
This serves to confirm the suspicion ct
many that In great measure the antago-
nism to this legislation stems not from
a sincere interest in making our elections
truly free and democratic but rather
from an interest in perpetuating the
status quo, and preventing individual
citizens from exercising their right to
vote, as guaranteed in the 15th amend-
ment of the Constitution.

I submit. Mr. Chahman, that the le«ls-
lation before us is needed and that all
of us in our hearts know that it is needed.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Cbalnnan, I yteld
such time as he may deaire to the gen-
tleman from South Carolina £Mr. Sfc-

BllLLANl.

Mr. McMillan. Mr. Chairman. I
have listened with great Interest to nu-
merous speeches on the proposed civil
rights bill now being considered by the
House. I am at a loss to understand how
this piece of legislation ever came before

the national Congress for consideration
when we have pending bimdreds of bills
of great Importance. My colleague.
Congressman MAinzi Diss, hi a speech
he delivered on the floor of the House
last Wednesday, June 6. asked any Mem-
ber of Congress who could name any
Instance In which any person in his
respective district had not been accorded
his full rights as an American citizen to
stand up. He also asked any Member to
stand up who could name any person
who had been deprived of his individual
right to vote in any State or district.

It was quite difficult to understand
why no Member of Congress stood up
and still we have numerous red-hot
speeches demanding this tjrpe of legisla-
tion. I am certain that you will agree
with me that it does not take a master
mind to see that this legislation is po-
litically inspired and certain people in
both parties are doing their utmost to
lure the vote of the colored people. How-
ever, it Is rather difficult to tmderstand
why certain people in both parties would
prefer having the vote of the approxi-
mately 13 million colored people residing
In the United States than to pay some
attention to the more than 50 million
white people residing in the southern
States.

We all know that this proposed legis-
lation is pointed directly at the South.
I am strenuously opposed to the provi-
sion of this bill which abolishes jury
trials. I am as much or more opposed to
setting up a commission to which the
high-ranking NAACP members could be
appointed to administer this act. I am
also opposed to appointing another As-
sistant Attorney General for the puiTX)se
of handling civil rights affairs when no
one on the floor of the House will pub-
licly state that he knows of any person
in his district who has been deprived of
his civil rights. We have a number of
Members of Congress who feel that this
type of legislation will not vitally affect
their sections of the coimtry. However.
I am o: the opinion that if this bill ever
becomes a law, it will sooner or later
vitally affect the people in all sections of
the United States as it will be equal to
any law, rule or regulation used by the
Kremlin behind the Iron Curtain.

I have lived in a section of the country
where there are almost as many colored
people as there are white people and I
certainly haven't heard any colored peo-
ple complain that they haven't enjoyed
the fullest consideration as to their civil
rights or as to their voting privileges.
I know that every person in my district
Is permitted to vote if he so desires. I
further know that before every election
practically all the caiKildates make radio
speeches and other individual drives to
persuade people to go to the poUs and
vote. In fact. In almost every election
the candidates get up a fund for the
purpose of employing drivers and pur-
chasing gasoline to transport people to
the polls free of charge to vote on elec-
tion day.

The pending bill certainly will not pro-
tect any rights that are not already pro-
tected by the ConsUtuUon of the United
SUtes. We certainly have ample sUt-
utes to safeguard the rights oT every

cltlsen of the United States. I think we
should have teamed a lesson from the
old prohibition act which did not have
the sympathy of the majority of the peo-
ple of this country. If a bill such as the
pending civil rights bill is ever enacted
Into law, it will certainly be resented by
all State law enf orcraiient officers and I
seriously doubt if the Govenmient law
enforcement officers will continue to en-
Joy the fine cooperation they have al-
ways received from all State and local
law enforcement officers.

I am extremely opposed to the provi-
sion of this bill which will permit a Fed-
eral law enforcement officer to arrest
and Indict a person who is accused of
thinking of performing an overt act. I
Just find It impossible to believe that 435
able and highly educated Members of
Congress would sit here and pass a bill
with any provision of this type as this
could be used in campaigns in which
some person had become disgnmtled be-
cause he had been defeated or In nimier-
ous other occasions which I could men-
tion. This provision is certain to back-
flre not only in the South but in every
district, every county, and every com-
munity If It Is enacted into law. I cer-
tainly believe that the jiu-ors In my State
consider their solemn oath as a Juror as
a direct edict of honor and trust. I have
never heard of any Jiu-or in the State
of South Carolina being accused of not
performing his duties as a Juror in a
highly respectable manner. I am cer-
tain that we all agree there is no safe-
guard more perfect for oiu- citizens than
the sacred right of a trial by Jury.

Again, I want to call to the attention
of the Members of this House that It Is
absolutely Impossible for any legislative
body to legislate morals and civil rights.
The people in the individual communi-
ties will take care of matters of this na-
ture and the statement of one of our
great statesmen who stated that "The
least governed are the best ruled peo-
ple" Is certainly one of the finest state-
ments ever recorded. I do hope that the
Members of Congress will take sufficient
time to think over the provisions of this
bill thoroughly before they cast their
vote. I trust the entire bill will be de-
feated as it is certainly not needed and
it has been proven on the floor of the
House that it is not necessary since no
Member has stated that anyone in his
district has not enjoyed his complete
civil rights under the provisions of the
Constitution.

Mr. CKTJ.KR. Mr. Chairman. I yield
10 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan [Mr. Dingkll].

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman. I have
been sitting here listening to the debate
for several days. It seems, as the de-
bate goes on, that we seem to be con-
cerned with two points. The first seems
to be whether or not we have the right
to debate it; and whether or not we have
the right to enact it into law if we do
debate it. And the second question is
whether or not there should be a right to
a Jury trial in cases of contonpt arising
under this bilL

Mr. Chairman. I took the trouble to go
to the libranr and get out a copy of the
Constitution of the United States. I

just want to read ttie 15th amendment.
It reads as follows:

Tlie ri^t of dtlsens of tba imitwl States
to VDto ahall aot be denied or abridged by
the United Stotea or by any Stete on ac-
eount of race, color, or prevknis condition
of eenrltude.

Section 2 follows and says this:
The Congress shall have power to enforce
this article by approprUte l^ilslatlon.

To me, Mr. Chairman, and I believe to
the pe<^le of this country, I am sure
that means this

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentlosian yield?

Mr. DINGELL. I am sorry. I cannot
jrield at this time. I shall be glad to
yield later.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. I wish
the gentleman would read articles m
and X while he is at it.

Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, that
means to me and to the people of this
country that we not only have the right,
but we have the duty to enact such legis-
lation as this, and that this \b the barest
mlnimmn form of a bill, i have heard
this bill called a civil-rights bilL It may
be that, and indeed it does touch upon the
fleld of civil rights. But I think this bill
is more correctly characterized as a bill
to guarantee all of our citizens the right
to vote, wherever they may be. I say to
my colleagues and to my friends in the
South that this bill is not a punitive bill.
Indeed, this bill is a good deal weaker
than I and many of the other people of
this country would like to see enacted by
this Congress.

Mr. Chairman, why do I say this? It
sets up a Commission to inquire into
violations of voting rights. It establishes
a Civil Rights Division in the Department
of Justice, and It allows the civil remedy
of injunction. I want you to note that;
it allows only a civil remedy, injunction,
to be used in cases where a citizen has
cause to believe that his right to vote,
his right to cast a vote may be impaired
by action somewhere. Note that we do
not change existing criminal law in such
a way as to place a criminal section in
the law, or a section which would apply
criminal punishment to those who would
deprive our citizens of the right to vote.

Mr. Chairman, I say this and then I
want to go into the subject of injunc-
tions. This Is a very mild, a very easy, a
very gentle bill. Indeed, It Is the very
minimum bill that I think this Congress
could pass that would even be worth the
trouble of bothering with.

The flrst two things could be done by
the President of the United States with
only certain small exceptions. The set-
ting up of the commission to inquire into
the violation of voting rights could be
done by the President of the United
States without any acticm of this Con-
gress. And I must confess that I find
myself somewhat at a loss to explain why
the Congress would have to do this ex-
cept that the committee has done this.
They have provided for the subpena
power so that the President and the Pres-
ident's commission can use this iwwer to
enable them better to get the facts on the
deprivation of voting rights.

OONGBESStOSAL RBCX«D — HOUSE

Jun$ 10

li

of a avU Rights Diviatoa. A« fOH r©-
<^i I introduced a bill of this sort dur-
Uk tly last acinlnn of CoDfrttB. Tba
reaaoo to Jmt ItaiB. B adds • liUte bit <<
dtsnttjr to the dtadslon of the Oepartmeni
of Justice which would enJo»o« chrtl-
rights pnmiWalnts and U offers an oppor-
tunity of a slightly larger budget, a few
more pe<H>le to do this very Important
work.

The last portion — and this Is the por-
tion titat I think to entirely equal and fair
and reasonable to ereryone— it allow*
tbe use of a ctrfl remedy, injunction, to
enforce the ctrtt rights of our people.
Now what is ttila Injunction? Injunc-
tion is an okl ertabUifaed form of equi-
table relief that has existed in equity
since the betinntDf of the comts. Now
I want to try to boll this red herring of
Jury trial in contempt proceedings down
to rtze aad discuss it with you.

First of all. we aaust remember that
when a man is brought into court in
answer to a pleading for injunctive relief
he has all of the procedural rights which
he could have tn any court anywhere.
He has the rJUt to appear and testify
in his own Mitf . He can cross-ex-
amine witnesses. He can use the sub-
pena power of the court to secure wit-
nesses In his own behalf. He has op-
portunity for a full, fair, and complete
hearing and the right of appeal. If the
court decides the party against whom
Injunction is sought is fair and right and
jvat. he will prevail and no injunction
will ever issue from the court. Remem-
ber compliance with the injunction will
prevent contempt proceedings from be-
ing instituted.

I do not believe tn justice to any judge,
and believe me, particularly in the cases
cited by our southern colleagues, that
southern judges, bom. raised, and edu-
cated in the South, would be less than
fair to citizens of the South. I think the
charge that judges hearing these cases
would be unfair is false indictment not
only of the Judges ^ the South but an
indictment of the southern people them-
selves, if it is true, and I say it is noL

Remember, contempt proceedings do
not begin until after the injunction is
violated. Then, the defendant has all
rights which are guaranteed by the due-
process clause of the Hth amendmenL
Compliance at any time with the court
order at any time will lift the contempt
proceedings at any point.

But let us go further. What is this
cry of jury trial and denial of jury trial
that we have heard here for these several
days? I want to read this to you. The
real fact of the matter is this. Never in
courts sitting as courts of equity, has the
Jury trial been regarded as a matter of
risht; never.

We have heard about the founders of
the Constitution guaranteeing our peo-
ple the right to Jury trial. That is true.
But the real fact of the matter Is that
the founders of this country, the authors
cf the Constitution, never intended that
the jury trial would apply to equity cases,
to hearings before a court sitting as a
court of equity. They had never heard
of it. If you had mentioned this to any
of the lawyers who sat tn the conventions
which drafted our Constitution, they

wwiU Iwve been wrprlMtf (e Imm* ymi

evai OMntion juxj trial in connwrUnn
vAUa eouitjr proceedioss. This was a
form af relief, and was a remedy to wliich
)4Ky tiial had never been available
thnutgia the whole history of the Rnglish
^^vteia of iurispnidence.

▲s a last rlt''^*^*''' on this. I want to
cite to you a few cases. Those Members
who come from Southern States wiH And
It perhaps a little bit Interesting. The
courts of the South, like other courts of
the other States of this Union have al-
ways denied jury trial in contempt pro-
ceedings. For example. In Mississippi.
when the question of a contempt jury
trial was raised it was disposed of by the
State's highest court with this language:

We do not think It necessary to dliCUM tlM
error assigned because of the court's action
In denying appellanU the right of trial by
Jury In this proceeding for contrmpt, fur her
than to say that they were not enUtled to
a Jury trial.

The court said that In OFlvnn v.
State (89 Mississippi 850; 662; 43 So.
82).

The same ruling was made In the
controlling case in North Carolina and
in the prmcipal case in South Carolina.
Tennessee, and Texas.

The case in Virginia has already been
cited. And that case is particularly in-
teresting. I would like to make this
one point. An attempt to require a jury
trial in cases involving contempt was
ruled to be unconstitutional by Vir-
ginia's Supreme Court of Appeals. Can
you imagine that,? The Vu-gmia Court
said that an attempt by the Legislature
to tie the right of Jury trial to contempt
proceeding was unconstitutional accord-
ing to the Constitution of Virginia. I
cite Carter's case. 96 Va. 791. That is
an old case, which has never been op-
posed or upset by the courts of Virginia.

So I say this to you : This is the mild-
est form of the bill to be offered to this
Congress or by a Member of this Con-
gress. I myself do not think it goes far
enough. I do not think that any of the
fears of any of the Members expressed
here today have any real foundation. I
think they perhaps err In being over-
zealous through a basic lack of under-
standing of what the real nature of the
remedy In this bill is.

AH I can say again is. a fair hearing
Is offered in this bill. Remember that
when an Injunction Is granted, it is only
granted on fair hearing. If the Injunc-
tion Is \iolated the citizen imder the
order of the court has right to full, fair
and impartial hearing on the contempt.
If the defendant complies with the court
order the couit may lift the contempt
proceedings.

So I say it is a mild, an easy bill, and
T hope the Congress will enact it. It is
not punitive, and is not aimed at anyone
or any part of the country.

At a cost of well over $62 blllkm since
World War U, we have conducted a pub-
lic relations campaign all over the world
to secure our neighbors and allies around
the globe against commxmlsm. Yet, Mr.
Chairman, here In the House we arc en-
gaged in a political tug-of-war which
can undo much of the good our foreign
aid has done. This tug-of-war Is belnc
waged over civil-rights bills.

R^aidleM of the aid we have given
Dft^^irtwM aver the world, we cannot be
sure of their friendship or their con-
fyrjonr^ io iong as they can find In the
conduct of our own affairs reason to
QiMstlon the sincerity of our advocacy of
democratic Ideals.

The situation, simply stated. Is that
while we do speak loudly, our actions
•peak stUl more loudly.

In many countries where we are urging
acceptance of democracy, the people are
being called upon to revolutionize their
thinking in order that they may adopt
the social and political philosophy we
espouse. It is an obvious fact that these
people doubt the effectiveness of such
philosophy when It is not universally ac-
cepted in this country where our history
and heritage present no obstacle to its
acceptance.

In national affairs, we have a respon-
sibility of leadership which cannot be
delegated or assumed by anyone else. As
a part of that responsibility we can no
longer Interpret the needs of our coun-
try in terms of sectional interests. For
all of our thousands of square miles of
wonderful country we are not a divided
people, not a cluster of political or eco-
nomic grouping, we are a nation, molded
and shaped by common problems, com-
mon enemies, common interests, and
common aspirations. He who harms any
of us. harms us all. When any of us
grow, we all grow. When the least of us
falls, all of us are hurt Just that much.

We in Michigan send the products of
our indu-stry to every part of the country.
The people who come to Michigan to
work in our industry and to harvest our
crops come from all over the country.
A Mlchigander today, yesterday was a
Tennessean. an Alabamian. or a South
Carolinian. What happens in Michigan
has just as Important an impact outside
Michigan as It does there. Correlatlvely
we In Michigan are not free from the
effects of that which happens in other
parts of the country.

So it is, Mr. Chairman, that we are
one big family and th? reputation of
our family in matters of social Justice
and democratic government is a proi)er
subject for our concern.

Opponents of the civil rights Wife ap-
pears to feel that democracy within our
country can be conducted on a regional
or sectional basis. They suggest that
there can t)c coexistence of democratic
forms of government within our coun-
try with denial of basic human rights.
With the entire world suffering from the
problems arising from the attempted co-
existence of western democracy and
Russian commtmistlc Imperialism, It Is
hardly logical that we can expect to con-
tinue any satisfactory arrangement
within this country of an attempt at the
same thing. Deprivations of rights t«
any segment of our people are as te-
congmous to the United States as they
are to a free world.

Ifow what of these civil rlghtB MQs?
The imperfectiORs in our laws which are
sought to be removed affect all of tie.
Some of «u birtst on viewing them only
te terms of their applicatloo where oar
Negro ctttEens are affected. Ittsknpoari-
ble to interpret our laws and prlnclplea
•o as to include only part of our people

'.\

1957

€C»KHl£SSIONAL RECC»ID — HOUSE

and the aroHcalton ol kiva and pdzict-
pies on a reitrictcd basia vlll datxow
their validity. Tolerance ta ititrrlrnlna-
tloo In lafvenuBOii to InconaMait witb
democracy in govenMaent. So long aa
this inconsistency exists each oi us Is
in danger of lorttg hia freedom. We
wiU haw. in fact, abrtador k»t that free-
don, and WiU in Usm. Icel llie effect of
the loss. I d» not pretend to be a po-
IKteal prophet or seer, bnt it is not im-
poesiUe that there wiU eonat a day when
those who seek hardest to prerent the
equal appUeation of the law may have
greatest Beed of such equality.

Our history la fUl of exaasplea where
new iBsnicraDtB faced dtscrtminatlon
because they were used to dtf erent ways,
spoke other tcn^ues. or appeared dif-
ferent physleaUy. than did the (M resi-
dents. Oennaas fleeing from war in
their homeland. Irish eseaplng famlOfe.
Wdah. Itallana. Poles, seeking freedom
from foreign oppresaion, SlaTS. OreekSt
Chinese, and Japanese all faced preju-
dice on arrival in America. Rehgloaa
Uas has harmed Protestant, Catholic,
and Jew alike.

I believe. Mr. Chairman, that our
country is mawiag on and that we idxall
have the kind of democracy we espouse.
We shaU leave diaertraJnation azxl seg-
regation, which are relics of ttic past, far
behind us.

This will happen because oar existence
as a country depends on it and on the
existence of oar way of life may depend
the contlnned existence at nuLn^na
We have seen, during our lifetime, how,
during crisis, minorities face the wrath
of the majority when the cauae of the
minority does not appear compatible
with the will of ibe majority. It Is then
that principles of equal protection of the
law come to the aid of such a minority,
to prevent its persecution. We have
only to look at Oermany, at Russia, and
at the other areas of totalitarian rule to
■ee what happens where no such tradi-
tion or law exists.

Congress has managed for many years
to avoid cominc to grips with civil-rights
legislation. On occasion some legisla-
tion has passed the House only to die in
the Senate. It may be that during elec-
tions we can pad our records by flowery
speeches poured out for circulation back
borne. This may deceive the voters.
We cannot, however, by this device or
any other, deceive history. History will
not even accept the assertioos of some
of us that a few of our number thwart us
in passing this legislation. It further
will not accept the womout excuses by
our respective parties that each is pre-
vented by the other from fulflUing our
platform promises. Again I say that
what we da speaks so loudly that our
oratory goes unheard.

I would particularly urge that mem-
bers of my own party take a serious look
at the record. We have commanded the
respect of our people by insuring that
our programs be in tune with their needs
and aspirations. For two decades we
were 9& percent successfuL In one area
alone we failed. We did not pasa cfvU-
r^ghts legislation, yet these measures
were tn complete harmony with the so-
cial philosophy of the New Deal and the
Fair Deal There was sectionalism with-

ba ouc pac^ thai, even aa thcfe la new,
but we were able to get most of our pro-
gram adopted deapUe IL The chaUenge
we ftoe today la to bring all of our par^
beUnd the dvfl-righta legislation. This
la not a problem facing one seetlen of
our country alone. To our people of the
South I aay that we af the North may
well find as many reasons for passage of
legislation of this aort in our own back-
yards as we do in joun. It la a proUem
whoaa solution requires action by all men
working together In all parte of oar dear
land.

It ia not a challenge irtdefa we can let
go unanswered. I am confident we can
meet it. because there are those who have
demonstrated that they have the courage
and the ability to lead those persons In
our party who oppose these measurea.
Real leaders have put over other pro-
grams which may have been biltially un-
p(9ulflur to some of their constituoit^
and I feel that they can do so agabx
History Is often the beat test of good
legWatlfln. Here ia reaUy a vital teat to
our leadership, for we wiU have to step
forth In the faee of varying aaoounta of
unpopularity of this legislation In all cum
districts. Yet I believe that we can kwk
with encouragement on the events which
have transiHred f crowing integrayon of
schools in many communities. Those
who have accepted resixmsit^ty for
leading a community in making adjust-
ment have not suffered politically or
otherwise. They have been recogniaed
for the high character demonstrated by
their actions. You see, Mr. Chairman,
we must not underestimate the true
character of most of our people. A peo-
ple with a heritage founded in religious
faith and tempered by suffering in bat-
tles against wilderness, tyranny, and eco-
nomic disaster can rise above prejudice
and hate if permitted to do so by cou-
rageous leadership.

I appeal to the character of those
whom the people have given a responsi-
bility which only men of great attributea
can and should assume. Let us put aside
delays which hurt our country and our
people. Let us rise above pettiness, sub-
terfuge, and fear, and pass this bllL The
Congress of the United States must be
worthy of Its sacred trust, and in the endL
when history Is all that remains of us.
the Ulilted States, our people, and we
in the Congress will be Judged In the
light of what we do here and now.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
20 minutes to the gentleman from South
Carolina [Mr. Asrmokx].

Mr. ASRMORB. Mr. Chairman, I do
not have time to discuss alt of the rami-
fications of this legidation. It would
take longer than you would Uke to listen
to any one person to discuss them in de-
tail tn the first place. Therefore. I think
it best to try to clarify one of the main
Issues involved tn this proposed legisla-
tion, and ttiat Is the question that re-
volves around the right of trial by Jury.
Listening to the debate last week, con-
vinced me that much confusion exist*
because of Ignorance of the law, incor-
rect interpcetatians of the law. or mis-
leading statements regarding the law.
Ihope my chairman, the gentleman from
New Yo]± [Mr. CxLua] and the minority
leader on our Committee on the Judi-

ciary, the gentkmaat fxam Near York
[Mr. KiATXKe] will remain durins my
few remarks. I want them to bear what
I have to say, and If I make any incor>-
rect statements, I am sure they will cor-
rect me. Also. I have a challenge I would
Hke to make to them near the end of my
remarks.

Hie proponents of this W^^^fttt^n have
made several claims regarding Its real
purpose. First, they say it i» a moderate
bill; that it maJces no drastic changes in
the present law regarding civU rights.
Third, they say it Just stre^thena the
hand of the Federal Ctovemaaeat in en-
forcing cfvil^lghta legidatlon. I admit
that on page 9. part m. the title is:
'^o strengthen the dvil-rigbta statutes.**
That is set out as the purpose of part m;
but there is another clause in the title to
partm. "and for other purposes." We
lawyers realize that phrase "and lor
other purposes" can cover a multitude of
sins. So I ask you to watch for some of
these sins as we go along studb^ing this
matter. The pr(9onents of this legisla-
tUm, and partici^rly the leaders in the
two parties, make these assertions, They
say these changes which are brought
about by the legislation are very simple
and clear, and that they do not hurt
anyone. They teH you they are innocent
of any deception in the bUl; that they
have no ulterior motive concealed and
hidden in the language of tlie bill. Well,
let us look a little bit further into that
as we go along.

Last week my chairman, the gentle-
man from New York [Mr. CellxsI and
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
KxATiNGl both told the House that it
was not one of the primary purpoaea
of this bin to deprive any person of &
trial by Jury when that person was
charged with violating the election lawa.
Let us analyse the bHI and remove the
smokescreen and see what the picture
really is when we search out all of the
truth. The gentlemen from New York
[Mr. CxLLEB and Mr. KxatingI will. I be-
lieve, admit that under the present law
it is a criminal offense to violate ctvU-
rights legislation. If you violate those
rights of another person (x any of them»
particularly their voting rights, then you
have committed a crime under the law of
the land today. In other words, today if
a person is accu.sed of vfolating the civil
rights of another, he must be Indicted
by a grand Jury and tried and convicted
by a petit Jury before he can be punished
for such law violation. Now. they claim
this biTT simply says in such a f^^^ as
this, although It is still a crime under the
law and win be whether this bin passes
or not. that they are simply transferring
these cases that are now criminal cases
ftem the criminal courts over to the civil
or equity side of the court. That. I be-
lieve, is their contention without any
dispute — simply taking what ia now a
criminal act and transferring It over
to the equity court where It can be tried
without a jury.

Mr. CELLER. Wr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Bfr. ASRMORB. I yield.
Mr. CELLER. Imustmostzeqiectful-
ly disagree with ttiat condnslan. WhUe
it is true a violation of the rtght to vote la
a crime, this bill does not seek to punish

QUiUi,

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGfi£SSiqNAL RBCOSJ>— BOUSS

9$ffti

>i

ii

any crime. This bill seeks to prevent the
commission of a crime. In the first In-
stance, where there is a crime, you have
to show willful intent. In the second in-
stance, when you are in an equity court,
you do not have to show willfulness.
You present the facts to a Judge, which
clearly indicates that a crime may have
been committed. The Judge issues an
injunction. They arc two different
things, and they cannot be lumped to-
gether in the way the distingiilshed
gentlemen seeks to do.

Mr. SBflTH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. It seems to
me that the statement Just made by the
gentleman from New York [Mr. Cxllzr]
that certain things had to be proven in
order to send a man to Jail under the
criminal law that do not have to be
presented if you send him to Jail under
this law is an argimient that it is easier
to put a man in Jail under the proposed
law than it is under existing law.

Mr. ASHMORE. I thank the gentle-
man for his comment. That is one of
the reasons why I say they are trying to
take away the Jury trial.

So, to restate what I have stated, this
bill simply says, according to my friends,
that any person charged with violating
the election laws, although it is still con-
sidered a crime — and it is a crime — will
find his case transferred from the crim-
inal court to the civil or equity side of
the Federal court. Now, that is what
they say would happen, and that is what
happens. It simply takes the criminal
case and puts it in the equity court.
Then the Attorney General may do
what? I am going to read from page 10
of this Mil itself, and tell you what the
Attorney General may do if this bill is
passed :

The Attorney General may Institute for
the United States, or In the name of the
VMtad States, a civil action or other proper
pveoMdlng for preventive relief. Including
•n application for a permanent or temporary
Injunction, restraining order, or other order.

Now when you do that you have taken
this man's rights from him insofar as
trial by jury is concerned. They say this
transfer is an innocent act; that It does
not mean very much when you transfer
a case from the criminal court to a court
of equity, but let us see what really hap-
pens when that is done. What is the
result of this transfer? In equity court
you have no grand Jury presentment.
In equity court you have no right, and no
one contends that you have the right, to
be tried by 12 of your peers. So. when
that so-called little innocent, innocuous
transfer is made from the criminal court
over to the equtty court, the person
charged has lost both of his rights that
he would have had had he been tried
in the criminal court. In other words.
he no longer has the right to demand a
presentment by a grand Jury and a trial
by a petit Jury before he can be con-
victed.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. Will the gentleman
get me more time?

Mr. CELLER. I will.

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.

Mr. CELLER. I have before me the
South Carolina statute concerning con-
tempt, civil and criminal contempt, and
the contemner, one who violates a court
order in your States, cannot have a trial
by Jury to determine his guilt or
innocence.

Mr. ASHMORE. Is the gentleman
talking about the Federal law now?
The bill we are debating applies to Fed-
eral law. not State.

Mr. CELLER. I have just mentioned
the situation that exists in your own
State.

Mr. ASHMORE. Well, there are vari-
ous situations that revolve around or
could be connected with a trial for con-
tempt of court. I do not know whether
the statute you are referring to or the
law you are referring to has to do with
contempt of court in the presence of the
court or not. That Is another question.
Nobody contends that a trial by Jury
. should be had in a case of that kind.

Mr. CELLER. Contempts In your
State do not warrant a Jury trial, when
there Is a violation.

Mr. ASHMORE. Let us keep our mind
on this bill here that we are considering
now, the one the gentleman Is trying to
push through, the one he says Is
innocuous, mild and moderate, and does
not lessen or reduce the rights of a man
who Is charged under the law.

Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.

Mr. YATES. Does the gentleman
know of any equity proceedings brought
by the United States where a trial by
Jury is granted?

Mr. ASHMORE. Yes. and I will read
it to the gentleman when I get to that
part.

If they are not trying to evade trial
by jury what is the purpose of making
the transfer from the criminal court to
the equity courf I say, of course, that
Is the fundamental reason for making
the transfer.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I do not yield for
the moment.

Mr. RIVERS. If the gentleman will
yield to me. I say to him, do not yield
to these people who are trying to knock
you off the track.

Mr. ASHMORE. I thank my friend
for his advice.

Moreover, my friend, the chairman of
the Committee on the Judiciary and the
gentleman from New York [Mr. Kxat-
iNG], the ranking minority member of
the Committee on the Judiciary, when
we were debating this matter In the Ju-
diciary Committee, this question of the
right of trial by Jury, we hemmed them
up into such a close comer, we came so
near passing the amendment to grant
the right of trial by Jury, that the gen-
tleman from New York [Mr. Celler]
said — pardon me for repeating the lan-
guage he used: "If you do that you take
the guts out of the bill," and the gen-
tleman from New York [Mr. Keatdjo],
corroborated his statement. That to me
waa admitting what I am saying, that
this is the essence of the legislation they
want to pass, that this Is one of the
fundamental reasons why they want this

law passed, so a man charged with con-
tempt under these circumstances cannot
get a trial by Jury.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield at that
point?

Mr. ASHMORE. Briefly.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Did I un-
derstand the gentleman to state that
this bill would in any manner permit
the transfer of a criminal Indictment in
a Fedn^l court over to the equity side?

Mr. ASHMORE. Oh, no, no; you know
better than that, Mr. Rooms, you know
better than that, goojl lawyer that you
are you know I did not say you could
take a man who has been Indicted for
criminal contempt and try that indict-
ment in equity.

They are going to take him to equity
before he is indicted; he never gets in-
dicted; 18 grand Jurors never pass on his
case; 12 Jurors, his peers and equals,
never pass on his caae. They took that
right away from him when they put his
case in equity court; so the question
never gets to his 12 peers or to the 18
grand jurors, and he cannot have the
protection that the Constitution and
statutes of this land grant* to thoae
charged with crime.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield further
on that point?

Mr. ASHMORE. Briefly.

Mr. ROGERS of Coloraai. No; no
Criminal indictment has bera returned.
He is charged with no crime.

Mr. ASHMORE. Yes. When you vio-
late the order of a judge, the injunc-
tion of a court, you are committing a
crime in those cases where the law
makes it a crime, for instance, when you
violate the election law that is a crime.
The gentleman knows that, does he not?

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. No.

Mr. ASHMORE. The gentleman does
not know that. The gentleman had
better read his Constitution and the
United States Code of laws.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield
further?

Mr. ASHMORE. If I can get some
more time.

Mr. CELLER. I will yield the gentle-
man more time.

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield further to
the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Prior to
the time when injunction is granted —
the gentleman Is familiar with the civil
procedures of the Federal court where
It Is the duty and obligation of the
United States marshal to serve the sum-
mons or subpena to the Individual, call-
ing him into court; the gentleman Is
familiar with that, is he not?

Mr. ASHMORE. Oh. yes.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. And does
not the gentleman know that once a man
is subpenaed Into court the judge has
his opportunity to pass on the question
of whether or not an injunction should
be granted or denied?

Mr. ASHMORE. I am not talking
about injunctions. I will get to that in
a few moments. I am not contending
that you ought to have a jury trial to
determine whether or not an injunction
is going to be granted.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Bvi in
order to get before tke court on con-
tempt of aa inJUBctioii tbe eouri mvat
flrst taave ^uriadictkn^ TIm ge&ilcsMttk
knows that.

Mr. ASHMOBB. Tea. llite taiU glies
the Jurladlclton to the court.

Mr. ROQSR8 of Oolarado. And
vfaere the Jarisdlctian is graated ttm
pemn Is then sunuMoed to oeort and
to show whatber or not an injwictkio
diould k» granted asainst hba. Nov,
that is the procedure that is to be toL-
lowed tone before he will ever be cited
lor ooBtenu>t^ Is not that true?
ICr. AJBHICORC. That is true ; yes.
Mr. ROGERS of Colorada All right;
once he is in eourt he is apprised of
what his duties and responslMllties are,
for instance, say it is an election ofilelal
of a State or any other ofScial who is
accused aad has responsibilities outlbied
in the injunction.

If he does not follow the court's order
in the matter, does the gentleman fed
that the court then should be relieved of
the responsibility of enforcing Its order
and pass It over to 12 men?

Mr. ASHMORE. No; I do not claim
that he should be relieved from enforc-
ing the order; but if a man Is going to
be charged with violating that Injunc-
tion and brought up before the court,
I say that the Jud^e should not act as
a prosecutor, sit as a Judge hearing the
evidence and determining the facts, and
then turn around and sentence the same
man that he passes Judgment on who Is
accused of violating his, the Judge's* own
order. Twelve jurors should pass on that
and that Is the general custom under the
Federal law. They have the right to pass
on that not In injunctions, but in con-
tempt charges. The gentleman knows
the difference.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. The point
I am trying to emphasize is this: In
order for a citation for contempt to
issue there must first be an order based
upon some evidence. Certainly after the
court has heard the evidence and has
entered the order, and then If a citation
for contempt Is thereafter Issued, there
is a procedure, that the gentleman is well
aware of. which would require affldrivlts
and proof to the court before he would
enter any order for contempt; Is that not
true?

Mr. ASHMORK Yes.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Well, does
the gentleman agree that the courts
should be put in the position of enforc-
ing their own orders?

Mr. ASHMORE. In certain cases. ye%
when the contempt occurs in the pres-
ence of the court What about the many
cases where this Congress said there
should be a trial by jury in a charge of
contempt growing out of certain cases;
for instance, labor law violations, whicb.
is the same situation as you have here?

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. What vi-
olations?

Mr. ASHMORE. Injunctions grow-
ing out of violatlonB of labor laws. What
is the difference between that and a con-
tempt growing out of the violation of a
voting law? They both Involve human
rlghta, one the right to work, the other

the right to f«te; Cao the
Make any dletioetlaa tbese?
Mr. ROGBR8 of Cotoadoi Yea.
Mr. AEBMOBM. Wby aboidd tfaer
Bot be an the same paraUei?

Mr. ROGBRS of Ootorada ^r tba
same reason that If you ara geint to
enforce amendments 13. 14 and IS of tbe
CoMtitatton ct the Ihdted States, you
have got to put it wltliitai the eeotnl oL
tbeeaartc.

Mr. ASHMORK Let me ask tha
gentleooan this questioB: If 7«n were
charged with contempt of eoort gravinc
oat of an inJuaeUon in connection with
another person's voting rii^ts. would:
you want a trial kgr jury? Now answer
yes ar na. answer tbe categorical mcs-
tioa. yes or no.

Mr. ROGTillS of Cf^-ado. If I had
been summoned

Mr. ASHMORE. The gentleman is
not answering the questi<m yes or no.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. The an-
swer would be no, and let me explain tha
reason why. If I was an election offldal
la the State oi South Caxtrfina or of any
other State and I were called into Fed-
eral Court and the question of what I
should do or not do as it results in dis-
crimination because of race, color or
creed, and a court order was entered
which enjoined me from doing coiatn
things, ttien if I went out and deliber-
ately violated that court order, does not
tbe gentleman think I am subject to
punishment for violating a court order?

Mr. ASHMORK Yes, if you will come
in and plead guilty to violating the court
order. But what if you said you did
not violate it, you denied the charge,
then it is a question of fact for the jury
to decide. Who should decide questions
of fact but 12 of your peers? You know
you would rather have 12 men decide
that question than a eourt who would
have the power to bring you in and
charge that you are in contempt ot
court. He thinks you are in contempt
or he never would have ordered you to
come in and show cause why you are not
in contempt of court.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Then your
first position is that you are going be-
iote a prejudiced judge?

Mr. ASHMORE. He can be preju-
diced. I do not say they are aU preju-
diced.

Mr. ROGERS at Cok>rado. The gen-
tleman is familiar with the Federal pro-
cediure?

Mr. ASHMORE. I will say it is more
Ukely and more human for one mgn to
be prejudiced than it is for 12 men to
be prejndioed.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Does the
gentleman feel that the judge who is
appointed for a particular district wiB
be more prejudiced than 12 men who
■uiy live in that district?

Mr. ASHMORE. Why, of eoorse. Be
may not even come from the district. I
know of some who do not.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from South Carolina has ez-
ptred.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chainnan. I yield
the gentleman 5 adcHtional mtoutes.

Mr. McCDLLOCH. Mr. Chairman,
will Hie gentleman yield?

Mr.ASBhKJBM, lylddtathe
Inan OfakK

lAr. MoCOLLOCS. I would Uka t»
knov. bsr reaaoQ <tf tbe fact that my coU
leagwe ia aach aa aUa and such a care-
ful lawjcr. iriiethcr or aat I corretfU^
widentoad Ue ntalnamt- that if tha
UBilcd Statea af ftawrlra weta a yartr
ylaimiiff in a case im«l«iac a vieintieii
af tbe hnr under the Taft-Hartley Aet
aad the defendant waa ordered to do
anmpthing, idiieh be did net de^ «mL
then was cited for ooQlen«>t of eoMrW
that the person woaM be entttled to a
trial by jury.

Mr. ASHMC«UB. That tM my under-
standing, yea

Mr. MfTnrjiOCH. I am of the opli»-
lon tbat tb»t ia not the lav,, aad I wiU.
state it positively.

Mr. ASHMORK Eaeuseme. Did tha
gmtlewmn say Taft-Hartley er Norria-
lACMardbi?

Mr. MoCULLOCH. Taft-Hartley or
even the Norris-LaOuardia Act. if tba
United Skates were a party plaintiff.

Mr. ASHMORE. Oh. no. If tba
United States was a party plaintiff, ha
does not get a trial br Jvy in dttier

Mr. McCULLOCH. And be has not
beoi entitled to a trial by lury under
ttmee conditiaBs since 1Mb, or befora
that, ever, has he?

Mr. ASHMORE. I do not think ha
erer was where tbe United States Gov-
ernment was the party pkdntiff, and
that is the reason I say they put ibe
language in this bill which makes the
United States Government a party
plaintiff, which I am trying to lead up
to, so as to keep a man from getting a
trial by jury.

Mr. McCULLOCH. That is not the
reas(xi.

Mr. ASHMORE. But the gentlonaik
will admit, if they take this bill with
that buagaage in there and instttiae a
suit "for the United States"— and I am
leadkig from tbe bill — "or in the name
of the United States," you will admit
and agree with me that then he cannot
and will not get a trial by Jury.

Mr. McCULLOCH. I certainly agree
with what the gentleman stated. And
if the gentleman desires more time, we
will provide every reasonable amount of
time so that we can ^t to ttie heart of
this very difficult technical question.

At the risk of repetition. I want to
again ask this question: Is it not your
imderstanding and belief that whenever
the United States Government is a party
plaintiff under the labm: laws of this
country, which have been in effect sizkce
1935 and before, tbat in such a case as
we have been describing a person cited
for contempt is not entitled to a trial by
lury?

Mr. ASHMORE. Correct, sir.

Mr. McCULLOCH. All right. Now
we have established tbat point, and it la
so Important. If the gpntiomoii ^pjj^
yield further. I would like to say, as baa
so ably been pointed out by our col-
league the gentleman from Colorado
[Mr. RocxRs], that in the first instance
a suit must be brought against a defend-
ant. All witnesses he desires to can lu
his behalf he may call; a court of equity
must make a finding of fact and law and

8668

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

enter a decree which — and I quote from
the Rules of Civil Procedure — shall be
specific In terms and shall describe In
detail that which he Is required to do
before he may even be cited for con-
tempt. And even then he may appeal
to the United States Coxirt of Appeals
If the order or decree, in his opinion,
was Improperly entered. That proce-
dure has been followed, in effect, in ac-
cordance with Anglo-Saxon and Ameri-
can Jurisprudence In equity cases for
more than half a thousand years.

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ASHMORK Briefly.
Mr. PORFIESTER. The gentleman
did not say It, but I want to say It. I
want to say that the Norris-La Guardla
Act makes no exception whatsoever as
to a Jury trial even when the United
States is a party. And I refer the gen-
tleman to the Congressional Rzcord
when that bill was on the floor of this
House in 1932. where the gentleman.
Mr. Blanton. offered an amendment to
that effect and It was defeated by a vote
of 127 to 22.

Mr. ASHMORE. I thank the gentle-
man for his contribution. Mr. Chair-
man. I had several other matters I had
intended to touch on. but we have taken
up so much time discussing this point
that I am going to hurry on and not use
all of the items in my notes.

The proponents of this legislation, as
I knew they would, deny that this change,
this transfer is for the purjxjse primarily
of taking a defendant's case out of the
criminal courts and thus avoiding a trial
by jury. They say that is not the pur-
pose; at least they indicate that, and
some of them have said that on the floor
la.st week. They say the purpose is this:
We want to get it in equity court so we
can get an injunction and stop the crune
before it happens.

I grant that that Is one of the things
they say. that they have no intention
of avoiding the trial by jury. But the
thing they do would avoid a trial by
jury. It sounds all right. Mr. Chairman
until you analyze it and you see what
they are really doing to the man charged
with this law violation. So, for the sake
of argument, let us admit that an in-
junction should be granted in certain
cases when the facts justify it.

In order to get an injunction, you have
a hearing In the judges office. The per-
son complaining would write out a state-
ment saying that. "I have been intimi-
dated in some manner with reference
to my voting rights. I have been coerced
I have been threatened. I have been
mistreated and told that if I would vote
a certain way or if I did not vote a cer-
tain way, such-and-such a thing would
happen to me." The heanng takes place
before the judge and before the district
attorney: before the complaining party
and his lawyer, if he has one, and before
the iiccused or the defendant and his
iawyi>r, if he has one. and before wit-
nesses. If there are any witnesses to be
heard.

As I stated a few moments ago to my

fllfil'^xT^^'l,*'^*^'""'^' ^^^ gentleman
from New York [Mr. Celler]. i do not
say that there should be a jury at that
hearing. The law has never said that

you should have a Jury on the question
of an injxmctlon. We do not demand one
at that stage. So those who have been
thinking that we want a Jury to deter-
mine whether or not an injunction is
going to he granted may just forget it.
Nobody claims that and nobody wants
that.

Mr. Mcculloch. Mt. chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to the gentle-
man.

Mr. Mcculloch. And again I should
like to say that we shall be happy to yield
as much time as we take by these Inter-
ruptions. We are very happy the gen-
tleman is always so courteous.

The Injunction about which the gen-
tleman is now talking is a preliminary
injunction, is It not?

Mr. ASHMORE. It usually comes In
that manner, but It could he a perma-
nent injunction.

Mr. Mcculloch. And in most cases
without any notice whatsoever, is that
right?

Mr. ASHMORE. He Just sends out a
subpena telling John Jones to come In
Monday morning at 10 o'clock and show
cause why he should not he enjoined
from doing .so-and-so.

Mr. Mcculloch And that is usu-
ally a preliminary injunction'
Mr. ASHMORE. Well. I think so.
Mr. McCUTLOCH. Which, under the
rules of the Federal court, remains in
efTect not to exceed 10 days unless It is
extended by consent of the parties or
by Rood cause shown by the plaintiff, in
this case the United States Government.
Will not the gentleman admit to the
Committee that during this tmie there
just would not be any citation for con-
tempt, during the period of the prelimi-
nary or temporary injunction? And if
there were a citation for contempt, would
not the gentleman tell the Committee
that there would certainly be complete
opportunity for the defendant, under
the Rules of Civil Procedure, to defend
him.self with every witness and to any
reasonable length to show that he was
not in contempt of the court for violat-
ing the decree which had been l.ssued'>

Mr ASHMORE. Of course, he could
present witne.s,ses and defend himself

Mr. Mcculloch. Further, would
the distinguished gentleman from our
committee agree that in most instances
this injunctive relief would be sought to
prevent that which would be unlawful
before the overt act was committed ■>

Mr. ASHMORE. Yes ; that is one pur-
pose of the bill.

Mr Mcculloch, is not that one of
the best approaches known to the law
of man. not only in the Anglo-Saxon
system of jurisprudence but in all other
systems '

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from South Carohna has ex-
pired.

Mr. Mcculloch. Mr. chairman I
yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carohna.

Mr. ASHMORE. I agree with the
gentleman, if that Is the extent of his
question, that injunctive relief is for the
purpose of preventing an act from hap-
pening before it does happen. As I
stated a few moments ago. I agree with

the contention of those of you who say
that that is one of the purpoaes, but I
say that that is not the entire purpose of
the bill and that li not the fundamental
purpose that we object to so w«.renuoiial7.
Last week one of the Members, I be-
lieve It was my colleague from Callfoml*
(Mr. HiLLiifcs]. made an argument that
Impressed some of the Members. I am
sure, because I could tell from the reac-
tions of the Members, and from the
questions that were raised. One of the
things he said was that time Is of the
essence in a matter of this nature. I
agree with you that time is of the essence
when you are trying to stop a crime
before it happens. But the gentleman
from California (Mr. HillhicsI left the
impression, whether intentionally or not.
upon many of us that the issuance of an
injunction would be delayed if a Jury-
trial guaranty is put in this bill as we
are demanding and fighting so hard for.
I contend that that is not correct. The
Jury trial does not come into the picture
at all at the time and at the moment
when the Injunction is being considered,
that is. the decision as to whether or not
It shall be granted. I think all lawyers
will agree with me on that.

I would cite you this example of where
time may be of the essence but where it
does not affect the Jury trial for con-
tempt. I cite you the Clinton. Tenn.,
case. There the judge issued an injunc-
tion which covered the whole town, vil-
lage, and everybody around and about,
ordering that they not do cerUin things.
The injunction was issued. It was in ef-
fect. Some time later 16 people were
charged with violating that Injunction,
and it was said, "You are in contempt
of court." The judge in so many words
charged them with being In contempt of
court for violating his injunction. The
injunction still stands, but those 16 peo-
ple have not as yet been tried for con-
tempt of court. They have been granted
a trial by Jury at the will and pleasure of
the court, but if this law. the bill we are
now considering, had been in effect, with
this language in here which says that
the action must be brought in the name
of the United States, and for and on be-
half of the United States, they would
not. and could not. have gotten a trial
by jury. The point I particularly wanted
to make there was as to the time ele-
ment. The injunction was granted. It
is still in effect, as far as I know. It was
granted last September, and no Jury trial
was asked for. No one expected a Jury
trial under these circumstances. The
people who were accused of violating the
injunction a few days later now say. "We
have a right for 12 Jurors to pass on the
evidence and to conclude whether or not
we did violate the injunction, whether
we did what the Judge told us not to do."
Whether we are in contempt of court.
That is where the Jury trial comes in!
That is the only place we have ever
asked for it. and that is the only place
that anyone opposed to this legislation
expects it to be granted.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to my chair-
man if he will give me more time.

Mr. CELLER. In that case, that is,
the case of Joheather McSwain et al.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

against County Board of Education of
Anderson County, Tenn. et al., it was a
private suit. This was not a suit by a
Federal official or anybody connected
with the Federal Government. Certain
Individuals were suing, and it Is interest-
ing to note that a Jury trial tias been
ordered. It is also interesting to note
that part of the injimction is as follows:
Ordered, decreed by the court t! "it the
aforementioned penone. their egents. eerr-
ante, representatives, and attorney and all
other peraons who are acting or may set In
concert, with them be and they are hereby
enjoined.

So the burden of proof is to show that
they were all acting in concert. But the
Important thing to note Ls that this was
not a case brought by either the State
government or the Federal Government
or the Attorney General. This was a
private suit brought against the county
board of education of that particular
county.

Mr. ASHMORE. Yes. and Mr. Chair-
man, these will be private suits if John
Smith charges Sam Brown with violating
his election law rights and voting rights.
The suit will be brought in his name, if
you take this language out of this bill,
which I am challenging you to do. If
you take it out, then a suit can be
brought by one person against another
and it will not make the United States
Government a party plaintiff. If you do
make the Federal Govermnent a party
plaintiff, then the great Government of
this country, being a party plaintiff, the
Individual has no chance of a trial by
Jury. In the case in Tennessee, which
you are speaking of and of which I am
speaking, the United States Government
was not a party plaintiff.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from South Carolina has ex-
pired.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I am
glad to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman.
If he desires additional time.

Mr. BARDEN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.
Mr. BARDEN. I merely want to ask
the gentleman if that horrible illustra-
tion, which the gentleman Just referred
to which took place in Clinton. Tenn.,
was not exactly the type of situation that
brought about the passage of the Norris-
La Guardla Act.
Mr. ASHMORE. It certainly was.
Mr. BARDEN. And at that time the
distinguished chairman here of the
Committee on the Judiciary fought val-
iantly to protect the right of trial by
Jury.

Mr. ASHMORE. He was against a
blanket injunction and was in favor of a
trial by Jury at that time.
Mr. BARDEN. ExacUy.
Mr. ASHMORE. And I want my
chairman to vote today the same as he
did when we were considering the
Norris-La Guardla Act. I cannot under-
stand why he has changed his mind to
save my life. I stand for a trial by jury
in both cases.

Mr. Mcculloch. Mr. chairman,

will the gentleman yield for a comment.

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.

Mr. Mcculloch. I would like, when

this matter comes to a vote either in

8669

committee or before the House, that the
vote not be on the basis of the emotion
which is engendered when a labor bill is
up before the House or, on the other
hand, the raiotion that is engendered
when a civil rights bill is up before the
House. I do hope the members of the
committee or the Members of the House,
as the case may be, will vote in accord-
ance with the best traditions of Anglo-
Saxon and American Jurisprudence.

t/ti. ASHMORE. I certainly agree
with the remarks of my colleague.

Mr. LOSER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman s^eld?
Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.
Mr. LOSER. I want to express my ap-
preciation of the statement made by the
gentleman on the other side, that the
Members of the Hou^, when they come
to vote on this all-important measure
will realize that we are dealing with a
precious right afforded us under the
Constitution.
Mr. ASHMORE. Even a sacred right.
Mr. LOSER. I would like to ask the
gentleman this question. I believe the
gentleman made the statement that ex-
cept for the fact that this bill provides
the United States shall be made a party
that there will be a Jury trial upon the
request of the accused, provided the con-
tempt is a criminal contempt and it is a
violation either of Federal law or State
law.

Mr. ASHMORE. The gentleman is ex-
actly correct.

Mr. LOSER. That is the law at the
present time and it has been the law un-
der the laws of the United States for
more than 40 years.

Mr. ASHMORE. Yes, sir.

Mr. LOSER. A jury trial in criminal
contempt cases is provided as long as the
United States Government is not a
party.

Mr. ASHMORE. Yes, sir; the genUe-
man has clarified that iwint very well
indeed.

Mr. LOSER. Then, again, is it not. if
I may ask this further question, is it not
a fact that in this bill there has been
inserted lang^Iage making the United
States a party in order to deprive per-
sons charged with criminal contempt,
their right to a trial by jury; is that not
correct?

Mr. ASHMORE. The gentleman is
correct. That is what I intended to say
and I thank the gentleman for clarifying
what I was trying to say.

Mr. LOSER. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.

Mr. YATES. The gentleman from
Tennessee [Mr. Loser] correctly points
out that this is a sacred right. If the
gentleman will permit me, I would like
to read from a United States Supreme
Court decision, something which is also
a sacred right. I read from the case of
Smith against Allwright. in which the
Court said :

The United States Is a constitutional
democracy. Its organic law grants to all citl-
sens a right to participate in the choice of
elected officials without restriction by any
State because of race. This grant to the peo-
ple of the opportunity for choice is not to
be nulllfled by a State through casting its

electoral process In a form which permits a
private organisation to practice racial dis-
crimination in the election. Constitutional
rlghu would be of UtUe value If they oould
be thus Indirectly denied.

Mr. ASHMORE. That Is correct.
Mr. YATES. That is a right which is
more particular in this bill than the
right of trial by jury.

Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman jdeld?
Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.
Mr. RIVERS. That same thing about
which the gentleman is asking is now
protected, because everybody recognizes
the Allwright case is the law and is pro-
tected by the statutes of this country
Mr. ASHMORE. Yes.
Mr. Mcculloch. Mr. chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.
Mr. Mcculloch. Lest there be some
misunderstanding of what my position
is going to be, I wUl clarify it right now.
Unless there are factors that develop
that I cannot think of at this time, fac-
tual developments and constitutional de-
velopments. I am not going to support
an amendment to provide for a trial by
jury, to determine whether or not a de-
fendant in such a case has violated an
order or decree of court, in which the
United States is the party plaintiff.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from South Carolina [Mr.
AsHMORE] has again expired.

Mr. McCULLOCH. Mr. Chairman. I
yield the gentleman 5 additional minutes.
Will the gentleman yield further?
Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.
Mr. McCULLOCH. I appreciate what
one of our colleagues said after I had
said something about the test that I
wished would be applied here.

I cannot agree with the statement that
the Constitution of the United States
guaranteed a trial by jury in such cases.
It is my studied judgment that the Con-
stitution of the United States did not
provide for a trial by jury In this kind
of an equity case, whether the suit was
brought by an individual or whether it
was by the Government.

Mr. ASHMORE. If I may Interrupt.
That was a criminal case, and in this
case they are trying to make it equity,
so that they will not get a trial by jury.
Mr. McCULLOCH. But the case in
chief, out of which a contempt could
occur, is still an equity case, which has
long been chartered in the kind of juris-
prudence I have been talking about.

Mr. ASHMORE. Of course, it grew out
of an equity case, but it is a criminal
case.

■ma! by Jury would not in any respect
Interfere with the prevention of a wrong
before it occurs. If a person Is cliarged with
the violation of an order or injtinction that
.% Judge has handed down, then he wo\iId
be charged with contempt of court.

That is where we say the right by trial
by jury comes in, for many reasons, but
particularly for this one. I refer to
section 3691 of the United States Code.
UUe 18. which is entitled:

Jury trial tA criminal contempt : Whenever
a contempt charge shaU consist in willful
disobedience of any lawful restraining proc-
ess, order, rule, decree, or command of any
district court of the United SUtes by the

i '

I

!

8670

CONGRESSJONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Juns 10

1

doing of or omitting to do any act or thing
to Ttolatlon thereof, the act or thing done or
omitted alao constitutes a crtmlnal offense,
imder any act of Congress, or under the laws
«f any State tn which It was done or omitted,
the accused, the defendant upon demand
therefor, abMii bs snUtied to trial by Jury.

That Is the l«w (tf the land. The
United State* Code Is the lawyer's bible.
I am reading from It You cannot get
•round U: "Which teial by jury shall
conform as near as may be to the practice
In criminal cases."

Now, here is where the gimmick comes
that was referred to by the gentleman
from Louisiana [Mr. WtllbI the other
eJay, here Is where they ha¥e rigged the
law:

Thla bill —

This section says —

Sb«ll not apply to contempt committed In
the prsBcace of the court.

Of course not; no lawyer would con-
tend that —

Or so near thereto as to obstruct the ad-
ministration of Justice.

Of course, that is axiomatic.

Nor to contempts committed In dlsobedl-
•nce of any Uw. writ, process, order, rule.
decree, or command entered In any suit or
action.

I call the attention of the gentleman
ft-om New York [ Mr. Ciller ] to this :

Trial by fury shall not be granted when
the action Is brought or prosecuted In the
■ame of or on behalf of the United States
OoTemment.

Now. let us turn to page 10 of the bill.

Mr. Mcculloch. Mt. chairman, will
the gentleman yield again?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to the gen-
tleman.

Mr. Mcculloch. So there may be
no misunderstanding of what I said
about the basic and constitutional law
of the land, and notwithstanding section
3«91 of title 18 of the Code of the United
States which the gentleman has read. I
repeat the statement I made, that there
is no fundamental guaranty of a trial by
Jury ta this kind of case by the Consti-
tution of the United States. This is stat-
utory law with which I have no quarrel IX
It be understood that that is the case

Mr. ASHMORE. It is the law. is It not.
Mr. McCCTiLocH?

Mr. Mcculloch, it is the law

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gwitleman from South Carolina has
again expired.

Mr. CKLLKR. I yield the gentleman 5
additional minutes.

Mr. WIIiJAMS of Mississippi. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield''

Mr. A3HMORE. I yield to the genUe-
raan from Mississippi.

Mr. WTLUAMS of Mississippi I
would like to read to the genUeman from
article in of the ConsUtution of the
United States.

Mr. ASHMORE. Yes; but read It to
the gentleman from Ohio; he Is the one
who needs it; he Is confused: I am not.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi, j read :
The trial of all crimes except tn cases of
Impeachment (hall be by Jury; and such trtal
shall be held In the States where the said
crimes shall have been committed: but when
not committed within any State, the trial

shall be at such place or places as the Con-
gress may by law have directed.

I leave it to the gentleman's Judgment
whether article HI makes any exception
to the right oX trial by Jury in any crim-
inal case.

Mr. ASHMORE. It does not In my
way of thinking.

Mr. McCULLOCH. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield further?
Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.
Mr. McCULLOCH. Notwithstanding
the section ih&t has been read, I leave
judgBsent of the constitutional question
and the statement that I made to a time
when there is less emotion than there is
on this particular question right now.
and the kind of case especially for pre-
ventive injunctive relief. That was not
defined as a crime, nor is it of that
nature.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. I
challenge the gentleman or anyone else
to show me any exception made In the
United States Constitution to the right
of a trial by a jury of his peers of any
person accused in a criminal case.

Mr. McCULLOCH. If the gentleman
will yield fxirther.

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield.
Mr. McCULLOCH. I reply again by
saying that the case which we just dis-
cussed is not a criniinal case.
^ I can join with the distinguished gen-
tleman from Mississippi in making such
statement any time; but that is not at
point here.

Mr. KEATINO. Mr. Chairman, will
Uie gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I will yield if the
gentleman will give me sufficient time
to complete my statement.

Mr. KEATINO. I will give the gen-
tleman additional time.

Mr. ASHMORE I yield to the gen-
tleman from New York.

Mr. KEATING. Let us see what
there Is In the Constitution in addition
to what the gentleman from Ohio said.
It provides that in a criminal case or In
a civil case where the amount involved
is over $20 the defendant shall have the
right to trial by Jury.

At the time the Constitution was
adopted, it was well established In the
cotmnon law. which we adopted here,
the dliference between suits at law and
suits In equity. In suits in equity ther«
was never a ryjht to a Jury trial.

We are dealing witii suits in equity for
injunctions to restrain crimes, or to re-
strain acts which are wrong, whether
they are criminal or otherwise. The
courts have repeatedl. held, in a case
such as this, that a defendant Is not en-
titled to a Jury trial. There is not even
a claim here on the part of the Jury trial
proponents that there Is any constitu-
tional right to a jury trial.

I: has been consistently held by the
courts that because of this distinction
between suits in law and equity, the con-
stitutional provision relating to a jury
trial does not apply to an InjuncUon
suit resulting in defiance of the court*
order, and consequently a contempt

Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman. wiU the
gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to the gentle,
man from South Carolina.

Mr. RIVERS. By what right, by what
stretch of the Imagination — I am not
talking about common law, I am talking
atxiut the constitutional law of this
country — have you or anyone the right
to put a man In Jail If he has not com-
mitted any crime? We have abolished
putting him in jail for debt. Then you
say you will put him In Jail for equity.
When you put him in jail. Mr. Chair-
man, he is in J alL You can Interpret that
In any way you want. But if he has not
committed a crime whit business is he
doing in Jail? I refer you respectfully
to the third article of the Constitution.
I refer you to that most respectfully.

Mr. McCULLOCH. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to the gentle-
man from Ohio.

Mr. McCULLOCH. The punishment
Is for the violation of an order. If there
be a violation.

Mr. RIVERS. That Is not the law to-
day.
Mr. McCULLOCH. It Is the law.
Mr. RIVERS. That Is not the law
today. You want to write In here some-
thing making the United States a party
to the original case, like In a criminal
ca^e. Then you got him. You have
him then.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from South Carolina has ex-
pired.

Mr. KEATINQ. Mr. Chahroan, I yield
the gentleman 5 additional minutes.

Mr. McCULLOCH. I want to say that
even in South Carolina, the home State
of my good friend I am advised there Is
no provision for trial by Jury and you
cannot have a trial by Jury If a person
is cited for contempt for violating the
decree of a court of equity. I would be
glad to be corrected if I have been Im-
properly advised as to the law of the
Slate of South Carolina.

Mr. RIVERS. We are not talking
about the law of South Carolina. We
are talking atxjut the law that you want
to put on the books here to let a Federal
judge try him. a Federal Judge who Is
looking for promotion to the Court of
Appeals and from there he Is looking for
promotion to the United States Supreme
Court. We want to get away from that.
We want to let a man be tried by a
jury of his peers before you Incarcerate
him In that Jail where you have the
Judge, and Jury and the man with the
key to the Jail. We do not believe In
that.

Mr. McCULLOUOH. I am pleased
that this argument should come from
my very, very good friend, a distln-
gnished and able genUeman (Mr.
Rivers 1 from that great States' right
State of South Carolina. I am willlxig
to forego any further request for further
time on this particular question

Mr. RIVERS. The gentleman knows
I have great affection for him and I
would never Impugn his motives, but I
say to him when a man is in Jail, he Is
In Jail. You try to get him out under
this Injunction relief and I will eat your
hat.

Mr. LOSER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Tennessee.

Mr. LOSER. I am wondering if the
distinguished gentleman from Ohio will
yield a minute to me

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to the gen-
tleman.

Mr. LOSER. I Just did not want to
be mlsimderstood In my discussion here
with reference to a trial by Jury. I thor-
oughly understand that in equity there
is no right to a trial by Jury as a matter
of right in contempt cases. But. does
not the gentleman from Ohio agree that
the Norrls-La Guardla Act and the Taft-
Hartley Act are wholly Immaterial and
collateral and shed no light on the ques-
tion that Is now before the House for
determination?

Mr. McCULLOCH. I think generally
one might say yes.

Mr. LOSER. You say that is a correct
statement, do you not?

Mr. McCULLOCH. OeneraUy, that la
a correct statement, except as to give a
backdrop to many other things that
have been injected Into this discussion.
Mr. LOSER. WeU, there Is no back-
drop about It.

Mr. McCULLOCH. Well. I would Oot
agree to the gentleman's statement if It
is unequivocal.

Mr. LOSER. Well, what Is the excep-
tion, please?

Mr. McCULLOCH. I said whenever
the United States of America Is a party
plaintiff in a suit growing out of such a
violation.

Mr. LOSER. Mentioning the United
States is the point I wanted to bring up.
You will agree, I believe, that under sec-
tion 3691 of the United SUtes Code,
title XVni, In contempt cases the ac-
cused is entitled to a Jury trial upon bis
request provided the contempt is a
criminal contempt and the act com-
plained of Is a violation either of the
State law or the Federal law and the
United States is not a party. You agree
to that?

Mr. McCULLOCH. You say that the
United States Is a party?
Mr. LOSER. Is not a party, I said.
Mr. McCULLOCH. Why. certainly,
because we are talking about a case here
where the United States Is a party.

Mr. LOSER. So. secUon 3691 of the
United States Code presently Is the law.
Mr. McCULLOCH. Where the suit Is
between private individuals.

Mr. LOSER. Do you agree I made a
correct statement of the law?

Mr. McCULLOCH. Well, as a matter
of fact, I am advised that there are no
such cases imder the Norrls-LaOuardla
Act.

Mr. LOSER. Now. would the gentle-
man answer that question?

Mr. McCULLOCH. Yes, If the gentle-
man win not Interrupt me when I am
answering.

Mr. LOSER. All right, sir.

Mr. McCULLOCH. In the first place.
I know of no such cases imder the Nor-
rls-La Ouardla Act which you described,
and I do not say that to try to avoid an
answer to your question. I am giving
you a factual answer. If any(xie does
know of any case which would answer
your question contrary to any Inference

8671

I may have left. I would be very happy
if they would say so.

' Again at the risk of repetition, when-
ever the United States of America is a
party plaintiff in any of these suits
growing out of labor legislation, cer-
tainly since 1935, if not always before,
there has been no provision, to my
knowledge, for a trial by jury on a cita-
tion for contempt for violation of a de-
cree in equity. Now, members of the
committee, I just cannot make a state-
ment that is plainer than that. I am
sure that every lawyer in the committee
and most, if not all, of the laymen of the
committee will understand that state-
ment.

Mr. LOSER. The gentleman fnxn
Ohio has failed completely and miser-
ably to answer my question. I am won-
dering if the distinguished genUeman
from New York [Mr. KkatincJ would
give us a categorical answer to the ques-
tion propounded.

Mr. KEATINO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to the genUe-
man from New York.

Mr. KEATING. I wiU be very glad to
deal with this Norris-La Guardla ques-
Uon.

Mr. LOSER. I am not inquiring
about any labor law.

Mr. KEATINQ. The gentleman has
asked what, if any, bearing that has on
this matter here, and the bearing is
only this, that it has been contended for
some months, since this issue arose, that
there is a right to a jury trial in cases
involving labor disputes. And. it has
been asked, what is there about defend-
ants in such cases that is any more
sacrosanct than the elecUon officials who
might possibly violate an order here and
be brought to book?

That is a reasonable question and the
answer to it is that there is no right to
a Jury trial in labor disputes today.
There has not been, not only since the
Taft-HarUey Act, but since the Wagner
Act, any right to a jury trial in cases
involving labor disputes.

I cited in my remarks the other day
a case so holding, and I have here a very
helpful analysis, which I want to put in
later in the day. from the brief of the
NaUonal Labor Relations Board in that
case. There they dealt squarely with
the question of whether there was a
right to a jury trial. It was held in that
case that there was no right, and that is
the only case that has come to my at-
tention.

I recently propounded an inquiry to
the National Labor Relations Board as
to why the question had not been raised
more frequently. They explained to me
that all of the lawyers dealing with such
disputes, the defendants' lawyers repre-
senting unions, understand now and
agree that there is no right to a jurf"
trial in such cases.

It is only in that connection that the
question has arisen. Otherwise, if the
contention of the proponents of the jury
trial amendment were correct, there
would be one situation where, in our
Federal Jurisprudence, there was a right
to a Jury trial today. It does not odst.
It does not exist when a businessman is
brought to book under the antitrust

laws. It does not exist in any other field
of Federal Jurisprudence. My position
is. why should we single out this partic-
ular legislation to put into our Federal
jurisprudence something which has
never been there before?

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from South Carolina [Mr
AsHMOEE] has again expired,

Mr. KEATING. Mr.Chahman.Iyield
the genUeman 5 additional minutes

Mr. IXDSER. Mr. Chairman, if the
genUeman from South Carolina will
yield further, I enjoyed the discourse of
the distinguished genUeman from New
York [Mr. Keatxnc] on the labor law
but I was Inquiring about civU law, and
not the labor law. I only inquired
whether or not an accused charged with
contempt was entitied to a Jury trial
under the law of the United States sec-
tion 3691, when the charge is a criminal
contempt and the act is a violation either
of state law or Federal law, and the
United SUtes is not a party. Is he
entitled to a jury trial in that type of
case?

Mr. KEATING. I will say to the gen-
Ueman that Uiere cannot be any such
type of case, so I cannot answer the
question. There could not possibly be
any such case under the Norris-
La Guardla Act today.

Mr. IXDSER. I am not talking about
the Norris-LaOuardia Act. I am talking
about some fellow charged with violat-
ing the election laws and an injunction
has been issued in the Federal court. I
have made a correct statement of the
law, Mr. Chairman, and I defy any
Member of the Congress to dispute that.
It is Indisputable. It is the question
that was very ably debated by the gen-
tleman from Louisiana [Mr. Wnxisl

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentieman yield to me?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to the gen-
Ueman from New York.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, what
the genUeman has stated is correct
where the United States is not a party*
in other words, where the ctrntemna*'.
the man who violates the Injunction, is
also guUty of a crime of the State or of
the Federal Qoyemment. he is then en-
titied to a jury trial. But that is not the
case where the Government brings the
suit or the Government ia a party.

Mr. COLMER Mr. Chairman, will
the genUeman yield?

Mr. ASHMORE. I yield to the gen-
Ueman from Mississippi.

Mr. COLMER. When it is all said and
done, and following the statements of
the two distinguished genUemen from
New York, the fact remains that this
bill was drawn purposely to avoid a jury
trial, was it not?

Mr. ASHMORE. Tliat is what I have
been contending in the hour or more I
have been up here.

Mr. LOSER. If the genUeman from
South Carolina will let me make this
concluding statement. I want to express
to the very distinguished chairman of
the Committee on the Judiciary, the
genUeman from New Yoi* [Mr. CKLLHtJ,
my thanks for having categorically an-
swered my question, when there has been
so much evasion on the other side. X
thank him so much.

8672

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Jiine 10

i957

»♦

Mr. ABHMORE. I thank the gentle-
man from Tennessee for his contribu-
tion.

Regardless of what the omx}nents of
my contention say, about the right of
jury trial being guaranteed in the Con-
stitution, let me remind you that article
HI of the Constitution has been read
and it does grant a Jury trial. Also the
United States Code which I hold In my
hand, in section 3691 provides for trial
by jury in contempt cases. This code
Is the lawyers bible. It is in there in
plain langiiage. Every man who is
charged with committing a criminal
contempt shall have a jury trial unless
the United States Government is a party
plaintiff to the action. I contend that
this language. "The Attorney General
may institute for the United States, or
in the name of the United States, a civil
action," if kept in the bill, does take
away from a man the right of trial by
jury, guaranteed by United States Con-
stitution and section 3691. United States
Code, llieref ore. I challenge my friend,
the Chairman of the Committee, Mr.
Cuj.xa. and the ranking minority mem-
ber. Mr. Kt^TiNO. to strike these 12 words
from this bill, if that is not the main,
fundamental, basic reason for putting
them in the bill. Take out those 12
words, "for the United States, or in the
name of the United States." It will not
keep you from getting an injunction and
it will not interfere with the time ele-
ment. It will just prove that a man
charged with a violation of an injunc-
tion can have the right of trial by jury.
If you want to do what you say you
mean, if you are sincere. I say strike
those words out. If you do not strike
them out. I say. as Emerson sai<l. 'The
things you do speak so loud that I can-
not hear what you say."

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
such time as he may desire to tlie gen-
tleman from Texas [Mr. KjldayJ.

Mr. Kn.HAY. Mr. Chairman. I am
fully conscious of the fact that this Is an
emotional issue. In the minds of those
who support this bill, all who oppose it
will be cataloged as segregationists and
promoters of racial and rehgloiis dis-
criminatioa Further, that any Member
from Texas who opposes will hereafter
be denominated as a •reactionary south-
erner." However. I cannot refrain from
epeaking at this time.

The easy course for me would be to
remain silent and vote on this bill. The
hard course is the one I am taking I
do so because of a very deep personal
feehng that this legislation is contrary
to the letter, spirit, and intent of the
Constitution I have sworn to support
and defend. I am equally convinced
that this proposal will aggravate, rather
than eliminate, the condition which
confronts us.

LSCISL.ATION WILL AGOHAVATS CONDITION

Texas has been my home all of my life
Fortunately, my city of San Antonio has
throughout the years been remarkably
free of ill will generated by religious or
racial differences. Unfortunately, some
years past this was not true in some
other parts of Texas. Too weU do I re-
member the days during the early 1920 s
when the Ku Klux Klan achieved a de-

gree of ascendancy. Those were dark
days for many in Texas. Baaed upon
prejudice against Negroes. Catholics.
Jews, and the foreign born. It seemed for

a time that organization would aceom«
plish its nefarious purpose In many
areas all but their membership were
driven from public office, public employ-
ment, and even private employment.
Threatening parades of men wearing
masks, burning crosses, floggings, and
murders were rampant.

Who put a stop to Ku Klux Klan as-
cendancy in Texas and the South? I
assure you the objects of their prejudice
djd not do it. The decent native bom
white Protestants of Texas and the
South did. They were the only ones who
could have done it. The majority of
them being of good will, right triumphed.
The influence of the Ku Klux Klan was
broken. They were drivers from their
parades, their murderers and Coggers
were convicted. They were isolated to
the pastures. They lost thetr respect-
ability.

No legislation accomplished that. No
Injunctions, no trials for contempt of
court could have accomplished it.

We, in Texas, thought that religious
prejudice had been eliminated for all
time. But then, as today, the politicians
intervened to revive it. Al Smith was
nominated by the Democrats in 1928.
Religious prejudice then had its greatest
day in the South and other places. The
purveyors of hate who had been run out,
who had lost their respectability, were
brought back to positions of influence.
For whose benefit? For the benefit of
the Republican candidate for President
of the United States. I would like to ask
those members of the minority party
who bleed here today about discrimlna-
t:on and prejudices: Where were you in
1928? When I was being beaten over the
head in 1928. where was the great Re-
publican Party which is so solicitous for
minorities? You know where you were.
You were sitting back with great satis-
faction profiting by my discomfort.

Prejudice was then in Its greatest as-
cendancy. It then looked as if U could
never be dislodged again. As I have
said, the majority of Americans are peo-
ple of good will. The campaign of hate
and prejudice of 1928 brought a con-
sciousness of the inju5:tlce of the situa-
tion to many people of good will. A re-
action began which condemned the pur-
veyors of in will to oblivion. There fol-
lowed in Texan a long perkxl in which
prejudice progressively disappeared and
was well on Its way to elimination, until
the current bitter feeling on the ques-
tion.

This type of legislation, and debate
such as we have had and are having on It,
serves to add fuel to the flames.

It has been said that the legislator who
does not know history is likely to repeat
it. Let us recall the history of the times
immediately before the ClvU War. When
I recall those happenings and compare
them to what I see gotng on around me
now, frankly, I am frightened. I am
frightened because of the similarity of
occurrences in the two periods.

The Dred Scott dectsion. to my mJnd
a fantastically erroneous one created
bitterness m the United States. Tbera

foUowad hotheaded and acrimonious <le-
bate and charges which did not end until
secesstoD and civil war resulted.

The antisegregatkm decisions of the
Supreme Court have created Uttemess,
debate, charges, and countercharges such
as have not torn our country since the
Dred Soott decision.

We are bound to wonder If cooler
heads In this very Chamber might not
have prevented the horrible Civil War.
We must wonder if that bitter conflict
oould have been avoided if politicians
had not sought to take advantage of the
feelings of the times for their own ends.
We wonder whether those who bring
legislation such as this to this floor ever
read the history of the period from the
date of the Dred Scott decision until
VoiX, Sumter.

This is no time for the consideration
of divisive issues. This is a time for calm
judgment and cool heads. Those who
complain of recent Supreme Court deci-
sions, proclaim them erroneous, seek
means of circumventing and talk of hi-
terpositlon, should remember that Lin-
coln, who proclaimed the Dred Scott de-
cision would be reversed, was elected
President: 4 years of bitter war deter-
mined the Issue contrary to the holding
of the Supreme Court and still three
constitutional amendments were neces-
sary to remove its construction from oxir
Constitution. Those who are critical of
those who disagree with the Supreme
Court should remember that no less an
American than Abraham Lincoln did the
same at another time.

Passage of this legislation at this time
can do nothing other than create 111 will,
disunity, and division. Those sought to
be protected by it will, instead, be the
objects of increased Injustice.
aimurK cox7*r decision
I do not agree with those members of
the legislature of my own State who are
advocating new laws for racial segre-
gation and racial discrimination. I
point again to the fact that the decision
of the Supreme Court, even if erroneous
is still the law of the land. Just as re-
crimination, intemperate debate and
even, civil war could not remove the
Dred Scott decision from our law. those
actions of the legislature are ineffectual
and can only aggravate the situation.
The decision of the Supreme Court can
be set aside by one of two actions, and
none other. They are, first, reversal of
the decision by the Supreme Court it-
self; or second, an amendment to the
Constitution.

COMMISSION IS INQmsmON

This bill would create, in the execu-
tive branch, a CQmmissk>n on Civil
Rights. It would have power to Issue
subpenas and be the sole judge of perti-
nency of testimony and evidence adduced
at Its hearings. There Is, therefore, no
limit to the range of the Inquiry other
than the decision of the Commission that
It is pertinent Lawyers talk about "com-
petent", "relevant", and "material" evi-
dence. Those are words well known and
well understood by lawyers. Without
guldeposts, this CommisBion. whose
members need not be lawyers or Judges,
hat DO limitation upon them. Once

CONGRESSIONAL RBCX)RD — MOUSB

layMeii ^determtaie iertteMiy

M7S

. Is

perttoeat ail ottaer rules ot e«kl«Me ave
«otie. Hearsay can be admitted: or caa
it? C<mfldeDtial /«MT>i»ii»»Vfatit?ng be-
tween husband and wife, lawjwr »^4
client. physlelaB and patient, aad peni-
tent and ooofeasor. if deemed pMtinent;
in the sole Judgment of the CommlKloq.
«o into the record.

And this Commisskm may accept and
utilize the services of voluntary and ub-
compensated persomiel to the extent of
15 at any one time. Is it hard to Imaclne
the type of individual wko will TiriHtaeT
lor this service? Only sealots adi«ru-
caders who will find at last an oppor-
tunity, while the Government Is paying
the expense of travel and subsistence, te
Tent their spleen upon those with whom
they dlflei.

The bill provides that witnesses may
i)e accompanied by counsel, for what
purpose? "For the purpose of advising
them concerning their constttutioaal
Tights." That is all. Even though the
Commission or its own counsel develt^n
t)nly a portion of a transaction, and that
adverse to the witness, his lawyer can-
not ask a single question to develop the
remainder of the transaction or the por-
tion favorable to hhn.

However, the subsection immediately
following the provision of counsel te
probably more Illuminating than it was
Intended to be. For ttiere the Chairman
Is anthorijed to censure and exclude
trom the hearing any counsel the CSialr-
inan determines has been guilty of
TJreaChes of order, or decorum, or unpro-
fessional ethics. In addition, the Chair-
man may punidi any such conduct.
"What punishment? Pine? How much?
Jail? How long? What the section ac-
tually says is that the Chairman can kick
counsel out whenever he so desires, ptft
liim in Jail, fhie him. or what not. The
Chairman does tt, not the court, as in
the case of contempt or failure to
Appear.

he caa aaowe tbe mtlsadaace «f «i^
nesoos t» settew jiim ef thr ^prwhi Iimi
eaijf if the OoBMBiasloa aeea fii; to cxaat
litore«veat.

lie iaqaiaittoa ever eneeded the poi^
MUtiee of wiiat is propoeed here.

JPITT

wb:

•OBB THK COMMaUOH BTT

The CoDDamiasloB sits wherever It
wants to sit. Subpenas may requine
the attendance xA a witness at any plaoe
In the Judicial circuit in which he is
loimd. resides, or transacts business.
What can that mean? Let us take the
fifth drcutt. In which I live. The fifth
-circuit inclades districts in Oecu-gia,
Florida, Alshema, Mississippi, Louisiana,
an of the State of Texas and. get this,
the Paaama Canal Zone.

Leaving out the Canal Zone— even
though the OonHnlseien could dt there
and ootnpel the attendance of a witness
from aay of (he States I have named —
witnesses can be loreed to travel as much
-as 1,500 to 2,000 miles. Freoi El Pase,
Tejc.. or BrownsvHle, Tex., to aorth-
•em Oeorgia, is as far as from New Yortc
to Minneapolis or 8t. Pa«l, or farttwr.
Witnesses can be dragged across the
cotmtry Into a strange neighbarhood,
away from friends, to be xiuestioned In
open or executive session about any sub-
ject the Chairman deems to be "perti-
nent." His expeases and leei will he
paid, hut not his counseL If serious re-
flection is cast upon him or 1/ ke is
charged with the oommission of a crime,

cm 646

or XAW

Every lawyer knows the liistory of the
devek^ment of courts of equity. "Dm
formed actions of the common law were
corapletelF inflexible. Whether Justice
be done or not. aU cases at law were de-
termined by the rigid rules of law. The
Chancellor, as the "keeper of the King's
Conscience," gradually granted relief de-
eigned to give justice, notwithstanding
the rigid rule of law. Courts of equity,
from their beginning in England down
to and including today, have always
been the forum in which to soften liie
rule of law dispensed In courts of law.
But not under this proposed law. For
the first time, equity will be as harsh
■and worse than law courts.

It is shocking that the great Com-
mittee on the Judiciary would report to
the House a proposal to reverse the
course of legal history.

TBIAI. BT JXJBT

This bill does deprtvethe citizen of the
Tight of trial by Jury for alleged actlans
for wfaidi he has heretofore had that
xigfat. When this question was first
raised. I doulited its sincerity, dose
atixiy has conwiiiued me the denial Is
real and asbstaatU.

Injunctions bave been auttwrleod by
statute In a variety of cases la which
they were not formerly IssuaMe. How-
ever. I know of no instance in wWch a
code of coBduot has been prescribed
which is enforceable by 4njuncti(m. Vio-
lations of law are enforeeable by fine
or Imprisonaient after ocmvictions by a

JUttT.

The right of trial by jiuy existed long
before Magma Carta, "nwt charter rec-
•ogniaed Its existence, and ratified and
confirmed it. Prior to our Declaration
■of Independence, trial by Jury existed in
the Colonies. Even George m did not
abolish trial by Jury in the Colonies.
The Declaration of Independence com-
plained:

l^jr fleprtvtng ub. in many cafies, of tlie
feenefttB of trial by Jury.

Not in all cases, but in "many cases."
What happened was that the admiato-
tratioa of GecHse HI deterailned that
the American Cokmies tiiould pay tl»
expense of their admmtstratlop waA mil-
itary protectkm. andpro&ice a return to
the mattier oonntry. England was
afraid that excise and stanu) taxes w>oukl
be «o unpopular in the Colonies that
juries would not convict. Tberefore,
she made a violation of those laws triable
in courts of adnfli^^ty where trial ty
Jury did not exist. In other words, re-
sort was liad to a stratagem to eliminate
the right af trial by Jury.

That Is exactly what we have in this
bill, a strMtagem for the purpose af de-
pririag dtiaens of the right -at tna^ ^
Jury. Any petaoa «uilty of tbe wrcrngs
aoagfat to be reached ^ this MU la, and
tftoold be, guiUj of a dolatian of tbe

'iihMliisl lawi af 4iM states «r af the
Qaiied fitetea.

Ttte sole fNrpose 4tf the i^unotiac au-
thoized la \3a^ biU Is to brine these
riolations of the law artthla the general
rule ttaat a Any Mai tiiall not be had
sou ^ A ocmteaopt case to which the United
States is a paitir. That is the only
season for ^peoiflc legislative authority
<or the institution of a civil action for
Injunction for the Doited States, or in
the name of the United States.

I say that Is a stratagem to avoid triaX
by Jury just as QeotgR UL resorted te a
Gtrategem to deprive the colonists of that
sao-ed right

This is a most dangerous po-ecedent.
Grant, if you will, that there be minority
groups In the United States who need
protection. Still this is not the way to
five it to them. If you can ciroumvent
our anc::ent institutions to protect a mi-
nority, it is much easier for a maJorltF
to persecute a minority by the same
character of action. Minorities require
the {H-otection of those aadent and tried
Institutions. If this Congress estabUshea
a precedent that today we can cicum-
vent trial by jury in the supposed inter-
est of a minority, a succeeding Ooogress
can do the same thing to oppress thent.
Only by the maintenance of our con-
ctitutional processes and raaintalninc
them inviolate can all our people be
aecure.

This is bad legislatioa. It will aggra.
vate a situation it purports to eliminate.
It permits an inquisition which ^'p" AT>d
will be used now and in the future to op-
j}ress the humble citiaen. It violates the
right of trial by jury. It should not be
Adopted. If this proposal becomes lawb
many will long regret that it did.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
^ucb time as l>e amy desire to the gentle-
tnaa from Texas [Mr. BogbssJ.

Mr. BOGER6 of Texas. Mr. Chair-
jaan. I rise in oppo^tkm te H. R. «127.
This proposed legislation has been widely
j^uUlciBcd as a civil-rights bilL Many
ptovAR have fallen for this iaoorreot ref-
«rence, as denoting t^e nature of the
proposed. Many ane supporting the k^
An the sincere be^f that it is designed
ior t^e protectk)n aad preswation of
^certain existing constitutional guajran-
ties, and to afford any person who feeks
liimself or herself aggrieved, a aaode or
method of insuring their free eaerclse
«f tbeae oanstitutionai Tights. I ^lasten
to point out to these -unsuspecting indi-
viduals ikMt sucti is tnt the case. Per-
aonally, I yield te aotme in my desire %>
preserve and perpetuate tiie basic God-
«iiien rights of mam and those lighls and
cnaranties provided in the OcsKtlttttkm
«f this great Hnltod Stalea. if this bin
haA such a nobie purpose, it sraold tiave
mxj fuHand vigorous sopport. mm smU as
iiie support of maiqr otfaers win have
xalsed their voices la oppoaltton.

I beg Iftiaae of jou. who have mceepted
MS gospel Qie geaeal atataaaats -which
Inve keen amde la ai^jpml of ItfalB lagla-
ialtoa, to aead and laad careWUy

Carrful^

and aaoli aedtei of tUs hflL
actutiaiie the fftxrases, tkt
«eU as tbe paaetuatkai •Hriu, so that
yon ner toUy, dearly, joal disttnetlir VD-
desstBOd sdiatls being sauglit.

8674

CCiKGH FSSTONT ATP Fmu D MOT TQF

'Til VI a i f\

■t n r rv

8674

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

t957

Please do this, because, in my humble
opinion, the passage of this type legis-
lation will carry this country across a
political threshold and into an area from
which there can be no retreat. The time
has come to cast aside the heavy wine
of emotionalism and to exercise our Ood-
^ given thought processes with the high-

\ est degree of soberness and rationalism.

I Otherwise, we, in our own lifetime, may

I have the occasion to wonder what hap-

pened to our constitutional, as well as
j our God-given rights.

I first call to your attention that the
bill begins by providing for the creation
of a body politic that is completely for-
eign to, if not in violation of, the basic
I H principles of a democratic form of gov-

' w emment — a misnamed agency referred

to in the bill as a "Commission on Civil
Rights." Misnamed, I say. because this
Commission of questionable political an-
cestry is clothed with the powers and
the duties to violate civil rights. This
Commission is to be composed of six
members, to be appointed by the Presi-
dent and confirmed by the Senate.
Their only qualification is that they
must belong to some political party.
Yet, this Commission will be vested with
powers quasi-judicial, judicial, and ex-
tra Judicial; and, it is provided with a
license for a period of 2 years and 2
months to run rampant across the
breadth and length of this Nation, its
Territories and possessions, prying into
the personal and business affairs of all
and, especially, those unfortunate vic-
tims who may have been marked in ad-
vance for political, if not physical, de-
struction— a Commission so powerful
that it was not considered necessary by
the author of this bill to vest it with
rulemaking powers. It was apparently
assumed that the creation of this omni-
potent body carried with it unlimited
rulemaking powers for the exercise of
whatever functions it might desire to
undp-take. Therefore, the only require-
ment concerning rules of the Commis-
sion seems to be that such rules shall be
made available to a witness before the
Commission. Please keep in mind that
this Commission is granted additional
powers to enforce its edicts regardless
of how unreasonable or irrational those
rules or regulations might be. The
Chairman is clothed with the authority
to determine when a person, whether he
be the witness or counsel, is guilty of
breaches of order, decorum, or profes-
sional ethics, and has the power to ex-
clude individuals from the hearing at his
own discretion. The Commi.s.sion has
the power to classify Information evi-
dence, and testimony coming into Its
hands and Is answerable to no one for
Its actions. It has the power to sup-
press evidence and testimony on the one
hand, yet on the other it is the sole Judge
of the pertinency of testimony and evi-
dence adduced at its hearings. The
latter means that this Commission
composed of men who do not possess any
particular qualifications, wiU be vested
with the power to arbitrarily and capri-
ciously demand and require any and all
information concerning an individual a
group of individuals. assoclaUon. part-
nership, corporation— municipal or pri-
vate—or other entity, no matter how

unrelated or remotely connected with
the issue at hand such evidence or in-
formation may be. Mind you. this may
be done with total disregard for the
laws and the rules of evidence that have
been used in our Judicial system in the
protection of constitutional rights for
many, many years. The Commission
may sabpena witnesses and require
thjir presence at any hearing to be held
inside the judicial circuit of the United
States, as defined in section 41 of title
28 of the United States Code, wherein
the witness is found, or wherein the wit-
ness resides, or wherein the witness
transact business. I beg of you to weigh
carefully the meaning of this power.
The act itself, in .subdivision K of sec-
tion 101, is cleverly drawn so as to in-
dicate to the casual reader that the
Commission is limited in its right to
subpena witnesses; that it cannot sub-
pena the witness to a hearing outside
the Judicial circuit in which the witness
is found or in which he resides, or in
which he transacts business. Let me
point out that this does not mean the
witness can only be called before a hear-
ing in the judicial circuit in which he
ordinarily conducts his business and in
which he resides. It simply means that
If he wants to protect himself so that
he will be hailed before a hearing in that
particular area, he must remain within
the confines of his Judicial district.
Once he sets foot out of that district for
pleasure, for business or for anything
eli^e, he is fair game for this Commission
or one of its subcommittees.

The members of the Commission are
to receive the sum of $50 per day, plus
a per diem allowance of $12 for subsis-
tence, or their actual expenses, and all
necessary travel expenses. It has the
power to employ each and every person
it wants. The only limitation on this
power IS the control in Congress of the
purse strings. If the Commission can
get the Congress to appropriate $10 mil-
lion they can hire people until that
amount is committed. In addition, they
have the riKht to utilize the services of
voluntary and uncompensated personnel
They can pay these people their actual
expenses for subsistence and travel al-
lowance or can pay them $12 per day in
lieu of subsistence, plus travel. This
simply means that statutory approval is
placed upon the employment of inform-
ers, stool pigeons, and professional gos-
sip mongers. It will be remembered that
It was this weapon which served Hitler
so well in centralizing the power in Ger-
many and in searching out and annihi-
lating those who had the temerity to dis-
agree with his infamous policies. It may
also be remembered that it is this method
of operation which has so well served the
Communists in their rise to power Let
us ask ourselves these questions: Are we
in this country, so devoid of honesty'
Integrity, and ability that we must resort
to the questionable tactics of totali-
tarianism? How can the adoption of the
method of communism and facism save
or perpetuate a democratic form of gov-
ernment? Are we so blind that we are
permitting ourselves to destroy that
which we cherish and hold so dear'

So very much more could be said in
the nature of a warning as to what can

and probably will happen should this In-
iquitous piece of legislation be placed
upon the lawbooks of this country. But
let US hope that we. our children, and
our grandchildren may be spared the
sad experiences that could result from
such action. Let us hope and pray that
the Representatives of the people of this
land, elected in a true and democratic
way of life, will assume and execute the
responsibilities placed upon them under
the Constitution and the laws of this
great Nation, and will not meekly submit
to the clamor of those who would de-
stroy us; nor surrender the powers and
responsibilities with which we have been
entrusted to an undemocratic and totali-
tarianism group, vested with the powers
to destroy, and with responsibility to no
one, and for which there is no precedent
in the history of our Nation.

Let us move on to part 2 of this pro-
posal. We find that not only do the pro-
ponents propose to set up a new Bureau
to further burden the already sorely
overburdened taxpayers, but also to cre-
ate more Federal employees in the De-
partment of Justice. In fact, the bill
provides for an additional Assistant At-
tornel General, to be appointed by the
President, to receive compensation at the
rate prescribed for other Assistant At-
torneys General. This appears on its
face to be of little consequence because
of the innocence of the language. But
we must not lose sight of the fact that
the creation of this office is for the pur-
pose of affording a:nother agency inside
the Justice Department to enforce trans-
gressions upon the rights of the individ-
ual, both constitutional and God-given.
We must presuppose that the Depart-
ment of Justice will be before this Con-
gress seeking vast additional appropria-
tions with which to pay personnel to
serve under this new Assistant Attorney
General; personnel to aid and assist the
vast army of personnel employed by the
Commission in extending the tentacles
of a strong central government into
every bailiwick in this Nation and into
the home of every American citizen, to
seek out and promote unfounded litiga-
tion, to turn one section of this country
against another, and to create suspicions
that will pit neighbor against neighbor
and brother against brother. Is anyone
so naive as to think that the employees
of the Commission will not be shifted
over to the Justice Department, when
and If the Commission ceases to exist?
Let us pay particular attenUon to part
3 of the act which speaks of strengthen-
ing the civil rights statutes. It is this
section which denies to the Individual in
America, three, if not more, or his most
precious rights. First, as was pointed
out previously, this bill actually author-
izes the promotion by Government em-
ployees of htlgation between citizens.
Yet. once the lawsuit Is promoted the
complainant or aggrieved person
whichever you want to caU it. is denied
the right to proceed in his own name.
He is denied the right to say whether
or not he will proceed with the litiga-
tion or that he has satisfied himself he
is not aggrieved and does not care to
proceed further. He becomes the ward
of the Federal Government, and the
Attorney General of this Government

<X»^G«£SSiONAL RECORD— HOUSE

becomes ills Alter ego vested with the
power to lise him or misuse hlia as a
pawn, as the Attorney General may de-
sire. The loss of this right to the alleg-
edly aggrieved person creates a ^ua-
tion thAt destroys in the defecidajat tb«
most precious right every Ameilcaa
citizen enjoys. I speak of the right ol
trial by Jury.

Whether or not the framers of this
bill were purposeful in the language
used in the bill is a matter on which
the minds of men may differ. What-
ever might have been in the minds of
those who wrote the bill, is, in my opin-
ion, of little consequence. No matt^
what was intended or what may not
have been intended, the language of the
bill is misleading to the average or
casual reader who Is unversed in the
Intricacies of the legislative processes
and in the rubrics of the law. It is my
opinion that the provision in the biH
authorizing the Attorney General of the
United States to institute a civU action
for preventive relief was intended to
lead the people to believe that this was
a cloak of protection being thrown
around them by the great and all-power-
lul Federal Government. The truth is
that the language contained in this bin
creates a situation whereby the Attor-
ney General of the United States may
proceed with or without the consent or
agreement of anyone whomsoever,
agahist any and all persons whom he
may choose, and such persons may be
tried and subjected to punishment in-
cluding confinement In prison, without
having the right to present their side
of the story to a Jmy in accordance
with the guaranties of the Constitution,
If it was not the purpose of the framers
of this legislation to bring about that
result, they why did they cut off the
right of the Indlvidnal to proceed un-
der this act? The reason is very slm-
rle. If they permrttted the Individual
to proceed under this act, a jury trial
could not be denied the accused. In
other words, the Attorney General
▼ants the power to take that individual,
^hom he desires to victimize, stftject
liim to trial before one man, and be
Able to send him to Jail as a virtual
poMUcal prisoner without being required
to meet the standards of proof neces-
sary. tintJcr the hiws trf this Nation and
the several States, to take away the
Ireedom of an individual.

The granting of such power woifld
place hi the hands of the Attorney Gen-
«^1 of this Nation powers far beyond
those enjoyed by the highest office of
this land, the President of the United
States.

In conclusion, I point out that one of
the most important guaranties in the
Constitution is repealed by this legisla-
tion, I speak of that portion erf article
* of the Constitution which reads as
follows:

8875

upan 2Us guilt <jr inxuicenee. In the
other, he is xlenied that constitutional
right In other words, a citixen of the
United States of America could be «4>nt
to jAfl at the discretion of a Pederal
Judge lor the jsame identical oBense of
wliich he had been previously acquitted
by a Jury of his peers. In fact, he could
be acquitted by a Jury of his peers in the
morning, yet be tried for the «>tti«.
identical offense that afternoon. And be
sent to jail by the same judge who pre-
sided over the trial At which he was
Acquitted.

I chAllenge the proponents of this
legislation, or anyone else, to deny that
such result ceuld occiu:.

This proposed legislation is. In my
opinion, the most dangerous proposal
that has been brought before the Con-
gress. Its destructive potentialities can-
not and must not be underestimated if
the United States of America, as a sover-
eign Nation dedicAted to the democratic
principles of its own Constitution, is to
survive. To sturender to the philoso-
phies underwritten by this bill Is to yield
to the principles of totalitarianism with-
out a fight.

I cannot urge you too strongly to act
with the greatest caution. Do with your
own lives as you please, but do not
shackle and burden the bodies and lives
of future generations with political
chains that, to remove, may well require
bloodied.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
such time as he may desire to the
gentleman from Oregon [Mr. Pobteb].

Mr. PORTER. Mr, Chairman, an
observant and painstaking man wrote a
book entitled "An American Dilemma"
in liW4. The documentation presented
then by Gunnar Myrdal stands today.
And our American dflemma stAnds with

Nor *han any perron be subject for the
«ame oflFetise to be twice put to Jeopardy of
iUe or Iknb.

I say to you that if this bm becomes
the law of the United States it will be
pofisitUe ior a man 4o be -twice tried for
the same identical offense. In one trial
he CAn have the right of a jury to pass

us.

The United States which would have
All nations equal — and condemns suffer-
ing and inequality in other lands, has
not resolved its own dilemma.

I find it hard to easwer the friend
from another nAtion when he ft-Oc«r me
why vajf country has so long dragged its
feet on this issue of civil rights. There
Is a great gap between our ideals and
realizations. It is an luinecessary gap.

We say one thing. We live by another.

Recentiy I was proud to Join with 82
of my Democratic colleagues in a Joint
stAtement in which we i^edged All-out
■support for the civU rights bill, H. R.
€127. I repeat our statement that it is
obvious Democrats Alone cannot pass
Any £ivil-rights legislatioa. and. in-
deed, it should not be Democrats alone.

Bipartisan suppcMt from all comers of
this laad should raUy in suMxnl; of this
minimum piece of legislation. Crippling
amendments must not be allowed to kiU
what is before us.

Obviously civil rights apsily through-
out the NatifOn. not just in one cectoc
Regardless of race, oalor. creed, or ua-
iioDAl origin, ^temocracy And its Uessii^ES
belong to every AmeriCAn. I offer these
comments not as meaningless platltudccL
but as Allegedly true stAtemeDts whiot^
until now. hAve not been true. Itishigb
lime thAt we intexpret dfmoOTacy in its
true meazdng.

NoAdy 100 years ago -Ahea>i|ma TJn/.ffhi
said "let us have faith that ri^t faVo*

mi«ht; And ^ ibAt/Aith tet us to fcbeend,
dAre to do oiu* duty as we unAi^ret^r^ ^>'

Lincoln's words point up our vuAndAry.
What is "duty as we imderstand Jt"?

I beUeve duty first means equal justice
lor aU under the laws of our land. It is
the long overdue duty of Congress lo in-
sure equal Justice.

Iiong before Lincoln spoke a m^n
DAmed Thomas Jefferson drafted a docu-
ment we know as the DeclAration of In-
dependence. Jefferson wrote, in part.
*'that All men are created equal And
Independent, that from that equal crea-
tion they derive rifiilits Inherent And
inalienable, among which are the preser-
vation of Itfe, and liberty, and the pur-
suit of happiness."

It is high time, I think, for us to re-
member we live in. a world that is three-
quarter colored, that we are the minority,
and that. Indeed, it soimds fantastic to
oiir friends abroad -when they hear of oiir
reticence to grant equality to the ma-
jority we Insist on terming the minority.
Our moTAl leadership In the world can
rise no higher ttian our moral accom-
plishments St home. Tlie American
dilemma is before us. We x»nnot solve
It by this legislation, but we can take a
long stride in the right direction.

Mr. CEILER. Mr. Chatrman, I yield
such time as he may desire to the gen-
tleman from Alabama [Mr. EluottI.

Mr. ELLIOTT. Mr. Chairman, I rise
In opposition to the civil rights bill, H. R.
^127.

In the first place I am opposed to the
creation of the Civil Rights Commission
that the bill attempts to set up.

In J:he second place I am oiqxMed to
the appointment of an additional Assist-
ant Attorney General to head up a Clvfl
Rights Division in the Department of
Justice.

In the third place I am opposed to the
broad CTant of powers with which this
bill attempts to invest the Attorney Gen-
eral.

In the fourth place I am opposed to the
manner in -w^ch this bin overlooks, or
slights, or fails to recognize the rl^ts
of the States.

In the fifth place I am opposed to the
■mamier In which this bin deprives the
citizen of his right to trial by Jury ia
contempt cases.

There are many other legitimate ob-
jections which I could recite to O^ bilL
However, I have indicated. I believe, to
A sufficient degree the shortcomings of
this so-called clvn-rights bin. So.lstwll
return now to the objections I have listed
And discuss them as best I may in the
limited time at my ftispnafl]

Let us see About this Civil Rightfi<Com-
mlaalon. As i approach this subject, I
must SAy that the field of civil rights hAS
'been worked recently about aU it will
stand.

A Commls^on coi CI>«11 Rights would
open the floedgAtes, «Bd OBOotWBBe dis-
gruntled persons. ajmL proitniloBal civil
rights otSAniZAtioBs like the NAACP t«
fWUr out AD iiiWMVUTg vtBCAm of AU4(A-

tioQs of civil-rigbts vlg}atiQBs. Theas
allegations would be heMtl by tlM Oom-
aitslon. Ttieg would be pubtteized and

8676

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

iory

8676

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

I

played up by those who had axes to
grind.

What woiild these allegations of clvll-
rlehts rlolations cover? The bill says In
section 104 that:

The CkjmmiaBlon shall (1) Investigate al-
legatlona that certain citizens of the United
States are being deprived of their right to
vote by reason of their color, race, religion.
or national origin.

What would be the substance of the
allegations that the Conunlssion would
hear? History indicates that most of
the allegations would be without basis
of fact. Thirteen thousand civil-rights
complaints in 1947 netted 4 convictions.
In 1940. only 12 prosecutions were rec-
ommended out of 8,000 civil-rights com-
plaints.

By the same token, why should we
create a civil-rights division in the De-
partment of Justice, and appoint an-
other Assistant Attorney General to
head up the division? I ask the mem-
bers of this House whether or not the
civil-rights violations in this country
are so much worse than any other ex-
isting category of violations as to war-
rant the creation of this new division?
And. then, may I ask why should the
Attorney General be given the broad
grant of new powers outlined in this
bill? As I understand it. the United
States Attorney General would be au-
thorized to bring a lawsuit and obtain
an injunction against a citizen, if com-
plaints were made to the Attorney Gen-
eral that a particular citizen was "about
to engage in acts" that would violate
existing law. The complaining person
would not be required to use the State
courts, but could go directly to the At-
torney General or his assistants, and
thence into the Federal courts

Further, the bill would give the At-
torney General of the United States the
right to brmg a lawsuit against anyone
for "bemg about to interfere with the
right to vote of another."

Furthermore these lawsuits would be
brought m the name of the United
States. Therefore, any charge that a
citizen was m contempt of court for
failure to lawfully comply with an order
of the court in one of these cases would
be tried before the court without a jury
Now. about the bill as a whole my
feehng is that the bill and the machin-
ery It sets up will serve as a sounding-
board for agitators, however well inten-
tioned. and the result of the bill will be
greater difficulty in commg to and main-
taming a state of harmony and good
relations, so much to be desired by both
races.

!r*'!nrh''H''*'u ^^^' ^^" ^^-^^ together
L i'°'''^ harmony and understand-
ing and mutual respect, as have the
white and colored races of the South in
recent years. While the pattern of
southern living has been se^reSted
there has nevertheless been mutual un-'
derstanding of and respect for the prob-
lems of each race on the part of the other
Tliere have been enough people of both
races desu-ous of mutual goodwill that
the problems which arose could be and

carried on by people who do not under-
stand the problem, or by people who
want to exploit the problem for every
possible selfish advantage. Now, unfor-
tunately, the day has come throughout
the Southland, when there is a growing
distrust, a growing feehng of agitation,
and a lack of harmony and good neigh-
borliness In the dally relationships l)e-
tween the races. The NAACP seems to
have taken upon Itself, and I might say
from all outward appearances seema
gladly to have assimied. the burden, and
the responslbihty of keepmg the Issues
stirred throughout the South, and
throughout the country. The result has
been that the art of good relationships
between the races in the South has in
the opinion of many been set back for at
least a generation.

Recent events in the South. In alto-
gether too many instances, have as be-
tween the white and colored races re-
sulted in distrust where there was once
trust; confusion where there was once
harmony; bitterness where there
was once friendship; misunderstanding
where there was once mutual respect.

These are the thinss which I worry
about in connection with this bill. One-
third of the people of Alabama are
colored.

I want to see both the white and
colored races make progress, in my
State, and throughout the country. I
know they cannot make progress under
this bill. I know it is a bad bill. I hate
to see the majority of this House at-
tempt to foist It on people who do not
want it. and on people whom it will do
no good, on people who cannot possibly
benefit by it.

Of course. I hope the House will not
pass the bill. If it does pass it. I trust
that It will do so only after it has been
Rreutly improved by the amendments
which will be offered tomorrow and the
next day. I hope the amendment
guaranteeing the jury trial will be
adopted.

As a lawyer. I know that juries are

human, and fallible, but. Mr. Chairman.

I have great respect for their Integrity

and sound judgment overall. I would be

for a jury in almost any situation where

facts man be investigated into. Had I

been in Congress when the Norris-La

Guardia bill was before the House I

would have voted for it. and would have

voted for the provisions which extended

the benefits of a jury trial to laboring

people who were charged with violating

injunctions in labor dispute cases I am

not afraid of jury trials. I know that

When dictators have sought to arrogate

unto themselves absolute power one of

their fir.n acts has been to usurp, abolish

or destroy the jury system of their

country.

Mr. Chairman. I resent the imphcatlon
that southern juries will not convict in
proper cases. I wish that time per-
mitted me to draw on my own experience
as a lawyer to cite specific cases where
juries have rendered Just verdicts In
cases involving disputes between mem-
bers of the separate races. Southern
Jur es are just as fine, just as honorable
Just as honest, just as sincere, just as able*

UnUedSUtiS '°"^^ "^"^^^" ^ '^*

When I appeal to you to grant Jury
trlala in these injunction caaes, I appeal
to you not as a southerner, not as a par-
tisan in the political field, not as a par-
tisan in the field of civil-rights legisla-
tion, but instead I appeal to you as an
American. Let us not say to the world
that we do not trust the Jury system, or
any of the people that make up the Jury
system. Let us realize that one of the
greatest civil rights of all Americans,
whether white or colored. Is the right to
be tried by a Jury.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chahroan. I yield
such time as he may desire to the gen-
tleman from South Carolina [Mr. Rn.m.
Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman. I am op-
posed to this bill because I believe it to
be an assault upon the inherent rights
of the individual. I believe it to be a
restriction of civil rights rather than
an extension of such rights. The legal
objections to this bill have been well
covered both in the minority report and
on the floor by those of the legal pro-
fession, but I wish to emphasize some
of my reactions as a layman.

In the first place, the bill is unneces-
sary. Adequate remedies already exist
both In the Federal statutes and In those
of most of the States. Negroes vote
freely In my State and I know of no
recent Incident wherein any member of
that race has been denied this right.
As a matter of fact, the principal difll-
culty that the NAACP and other agi-
tators, that come into my State have,
is In getting them to register, ani to
vote after they register. Acting on our
own IniUaUve. we have made much prog-
ress in the improvement of relations
between the races. If left alone this
progress will continue. Race relaUons
are improved only by mutual cooperation
and understanding. This bill will drive
a wedge between the races so as to make
such cooperation and understanding
virtually Impossible.

Of course, as everyone knows, this bin
Is politically Inspired. It Is designed to
capture the Negro vote hi the metropoli-
tan centers of the North. If enacted,
and I realize that only a miracle can stop
It. addiUonal proof of this wlU come
with the propaganda from the head-
quarters of both major parties, super-
charged with claims of credit for lU
passage.

This bill will give aid and comfort only

to those who seem to beUeve that the

10th amendment was repealed by the

14 Lh Every new assault upon the rights

of the States seems to sail under the

banner of the 14th amendment, the scope

of which is ever being Increased by the

legislative decisions of the Supreme

Court. Today we are witnessing, in this

body, another step in the emasculation

of our Constitution, led this time by the

President and his Attorney General, and

backed by the assurance that such will

be upheld by the Supreme Court It Is

heartbreaking, indeed, to see these high

officials not only condone, but afJlrma-

tively demand, that which Is so foreign

e?n^ent * ^^^^^an form of gov-

i^Tk^u^!.'''^ ^^^^^ Commission created
in the bill purports to have a life of only

J^^^\ ?""' ^ ^°P* '*^*' ^hat deceives no
one. It is the old foot-ki-the-door tech-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

nlque with which we are all familiar.
Once enacted we will be swamped with
bills providing for its extension and for
the enlargement of its powers. And I
must add that I have never heard of
creating a commission to investigate
conditions to recommend legislation,
and in the same bill propose legislation
along the lines which the commission is
supposed to investigate.

The recently added requirement that
allegations made to the Commission must
be In writing and under oath is an im-
provement, but it stiU does not require
the consent of the party allegedly In-
jured and apparently may be done over
his objection. This Is certainly depriv-
ing an individual of his basic right— the
right of a free American to decide his
own course; the right guaranteed him
under the Constitution. The same is
true of the civil action for injunctive re-
lief which the Attorney General, under
parts in and FV. may seek in the name of
the United States but In reality in be-
half of one individual against another
Individual, bypassing all administrative
or other remedies available to the in-
jured party. I do not believe that this
has any precedent in Anglo-Saxon Ju-
risprudence.

The power given the Attorney General
by parts m and IV are to be enforced
by a staff of unknown size under the di-
rection of a new Assistant Attorney Gen-
eral provided for in part II. This staff,
plus that of the Commission, will com-
prise a new Federal Gestapo unlike any-
thing this country has ever known. The
concentration of power in the hands of
a few is always dangerous. The con-
centration of power in one man is even
more so although that Individual may be
of a fair mind. In the hands of a po-
litically minded Attorney General, the
dangers are overwhelming.

This bill strikes at the very heart of
the 6th amendment which is our guar-
anty of trial by Jury. Its proponents
are too clever to make a direct or gen-
eral assault upon that amendment and
too timid to propose its repeal. Instead,
they attempt to come in through the
back door with a new approach which
will circumvent this precious constitu-
Uonal right. Unfortunately, we can ex-
pect no help or recognition of this fact
from the present Supreme Court.

Much has been said to the effect that
this injunctive process is not new and
that some twenty-odd statutes now au-
thorize the Government to seek injunc-
tions in cases wherehi the acts sought to
be enjoined are also crimes. As ques-
tionable as this procedure is. It must be
pointed out that it has never been ex-
tended to cases involving alleged wrongs
by Individuals against individuals, but
has been restricted to the regulation of
bushiess activities or Government con-
tracts—activlUes falling generally with-
in the commerce clause of the Constitu-
tion. None of the activities which may
be enjoined under present law neces-
sarUy involve moral turpitude, whereas
this U very definitely involved in a charge
that an hidlvidual has deprived another
of his rights. It was held by the Supreme
Court in the case of Cattan v. Wilson (127
U. 8. 540) that a conspiracy to invade

8677

the rights of another Is a grave offense
which must be tried by a Jury. The con-
spiracy, charged there, was to prevent
an individual from earning a livelihood.
I fail to see how those of you who are
lawyers can go back to your homes, face
your feUow members of the bar, and teU
them that you voted to deny to fellow
Americans the right of trial by Jury. But
evidently you can. While you are boast-
ing to them of substituting the Injunc-
tion for the Jury, be sure to tell them
that, while the Department of Justice
has not been able to deport Harry
Bridges because the Supreme Court has
wrapped him In the Constitution you
have given that Department the power
to ignore the Constitution to proceedings
against my people, most of whomare de-
scendants of our Pounding Fathers and
who have answered the call to arms by
this country in every case save one.
Nearly a century later you are still ex-
acting your pound of flesh for that War.
If this injunction Is a new panacea to
prevent all evil, why was the right to
vote honored by Its creators? Is this
more important than the right to life,
freedom of speech, freedom of reUgion'
or the right of a trial by jury? If this
method can prevent wrong in one case
presumably it can in another. Appar-
ently we are on the threshhold of a new
discovery which will make murder, rape,
burglary, and robbery things of the past'
All we have to do. we are told, is to sub-
stitute the injunction for the trial by
Jury.

My answer Is simply this: Take care
that you are not hanged by your own
noose. The problems of human relations
are not solved by depriving one element
of our people of their constitutional
rights. AU the laws enacted will not im-
prove such relations one iota. They may
temporarily win a few votes. But such
laws wiU destroy the foundations of the
greatest government mankind has ever
devised.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chahman, I yield
such time as he may desire to the gen-
Ueman from Georgia [Mr. Landrum].
. „Mr. LANDRUM. Mr. Chahroan, this
bill is the only legislaUon considered by
this body since I became a Member five
years ago for which absolutely no need
Is shown. No evidence, in committee or
In general debate, has been offered to
show that the welfare of our country
requires Its passage. Rather Is it shown
by a careful reading of the committee
hearings, and from the debate of three
days here in the House, that this bill Is
brought for political reasons only.
Moreover, It Is obvious that the pro-
ponents of the legislation are so bent on
reaping political gain they are bUnd
to the consequences of lodging such
power as the bill proposes hi one man—
an Attorney General. Furthermore
there is callous disregard for the rights
of States and their chosen officials as
well as a complete lack of respect for
the 10th amendment to the Constitution
of the United States.

Distinguished lawyers in this body,
and many who are not members of the
legal profession, have iwlnted out weak-
ness after weakness and danger after
danger In this bill yet those who support

It chaise on with reckless abandon to-
ward tlie destruction of the very founda-
tion of this Government, the rights of
our States to manage local and State
affah^. But. despite these legal analyses
of many able attorneys, who are mem-
bers of the Committee on the Judiciary
pomting out the inherent dangers and
notwithstanding the warnings of history
against the substitution of government
by man for a government by laws, and
regardless of the unmet challenge to
show a single instance supporting the
need for this bill, supporters turn a
deaf ear to reason and join the clamor-
ous music of pohtlcal emotions.

Time after time, from member after
member, I have heard for the three days
of this debate the challenge to show one
single instance of a person being de-
nied the right to vote by reason of his
color and no one has answered. Through
page after page of testimony I have
sought one single reference establishing
that one has been denied the right to
vote because of his color and I have seen
no such statement.

On the other hand what are the facts?
Prom aU States of the South, the sec-
tion at which this bill Is aimed, there
Is abundant evidence to support the
fact that the Negro is being protected
in his right to vote. The gentleman
from Georgia [Mr. Davis], pohited out
earUer some of the results of a recent
election In Atlanta, Ga., for mayor and
councilmen. Seventy-six percent of the
registered Negro voters voted in that
city election while only 36 percent of
the registered white voters voted. More-
over hi that same election a Negro can-
didate contested for councilman from
1 ward against 2 white candidates and
a runover between 1 white candidate and
the Negro was required. In that run-
over the Negro received more than 22,000
votes out of approximately 53,000 total
votes cast. Does that evidence any de-
nial of the right to vote?

Furthermore no poll tax is required for
registration. Throughout our great
State of Georgia the registration laws
are universally applied to white and
Negro alike. In my own district in
north Georgia, records show that the
majority of the Negroes eligible to ro-
ister for voting purposes are registered
and in all elections moi-e than 50 per-
cent of those registered come to the
polls and vote.

So, while we who (H}pose this effort to
further usurp State powers and respon-
sibilities cite facts and figures to prove
the absence of any need whatsoever for
this legislation, those who sup]>ort it con-
tinue to ignore the challenge to offer one
instance proving the presence of need.
And, while we aw)eal only to reason in
our effort to preserve the integrity of
our States, supporters of this Iniquitous
bill succumb to political emotion and
clamour and march blindly ahead Into
certain trouble, and, I fear, disaster.

This Is no time to point the accusing
finger at any section of our great coun-
try. Certainly that is true when not a
single evident fact is advanced to at-
test to the accusation. This Is a time
rather to truthfully appraise the prog-
ress we In the great Southland have
made, noting as we appraise that

8678

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Jiuie 10

I

I

throughout our history the only ob-
stacles to true harmony and respect be-
tween whites and Negroes in the South
have been the legal obstacles thrown up
by unwise legislation from Congress, and
unsupported, unwarranted, and un-
American decisions by an injudicious
Supreme Court.

I shall not burden the committee with
repetitious statements addressed specifl-
caliy to the legal aspects of this bill ex-
cept to say that I concur especially in
all that the gentleman from Louisiana
[Mr. WiiLLsl. and the gentleman from
Virginia [Mr. Pcrr). have so ably said.
Nj lawyer can study those arguments
' and not be profoundly moved and no
laymen can hear or read the same with-
out entertaining profound fear of the
consequences of such leuialation.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
such time as he may desire to the gentle-
man from Georgia [Mr Vinson]

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, the
basic issue before the House tod.-^y in-
volves the blood stream of America.

The question to be decided is whether
we continue this Nation as a United
States of America composed of 48 sover-
ci?n States, or do we surrender to com-
plete, absoluie. Federal bureaucracy?

Is the Constitution of the United
States to become the weapon of our own
destruction or will it continue to be the
cornerstone of the form of Rovemment
that has withstood the test of time, the
trials and tabulations of a growing na-
tion, the onslaught of wars, and the
tragedy of depressions?

Are we to continue as the shining hope
of mankind, or are we to fade into the
twilight of mediociity?

We have before us today a bill
spawned in the nest of politics, and
dedicated to the proposition that all men
and women have one valuable asset that
must be obtained at all costs— their votes
Here we have a bill which establishes
a 'Federal snooping commi5slon- to In-
vestigate the allegations that certain
citizens of the United States are bein-
deprived of their right to vote by reason
of their color, race, religion, or national
origin.

^ In addition, the Commission would
study and collect information concern-
ing legal developments constituting a
denial of equnl protection of the laws
under the Constitution, and appraise
the laws and policies of the Federal Gov-
ernment with respect to equal protection
of the laws under the Constitution "

But having established the Commis-
sion to determine whether or not citizens
have been deprived of their right to vote
the bill then proceeds to beg the question
by amending existing law so as to give
the Attorney General the right to bring
a civil action in the name of the United
States for preventive relief. Including in-
junctions, restraining orders, or any
other orders that may be necessary even
before any proof has been offered or
established that individuals have been
denied the right to vote.

And to do this we must create a new
A.ssistant Attorney General, together
with an unknown number of assistants

„i!l?^^*^'' ''°^^^' ^'^ ^'■^ ^^^S asked to
meekly acquiesce in the assumpUon that

the States of the United States of Amer-
ica do not have the competency, or the
desire to protect their own citizens. It
must be done under the all-seeing eye
of a Federal appointee who may proceed
"without regard to whether the party
aggrieved shall have exhausted any ad-
ministrative or any other remedies that
may be provided by law."

Never before has this body been called
upon to make a decision so far reaching
in its effects.

EJo you suppose for 1 moment that this
will be the end of Federal infiltration
into the reserved powers of the States?
Can you not see that this is the begin-
ning ( ' the end for State government*
as we know them?

Can you not see that as a result of pass-
ing legislation of this nature the next
step will be a commission to pass upon
the qualifications of any mdividual to
hold a Federal office?

Can you not see that this bill destroys
once and for all the concept that an
American citizen is not only a citizen of
the United States, but of the State in
which he resides?

Do you believe for 1 moment that this
Commission will go out of existence after
a period of 2 years has passed? Can
anyone in this House be so naive as to
believe that this CommLssion is a tem-
porary thing to do its work in 2 years and
then disappear from the scene?
Stop and think what you are doing.
You are giving a commission the au-
thority to Sit a.s a roving Federal grand
jury to investigate allegations in writing
under oath that citizens of the United
States are being deprived of their right
to vote by reason of theu- color religion
race, or national origin.

Henceforth, no board of elections no
county clerk, no county ofDcer or State
ofBcial connected in any way with the
voting process will be safe from the wild
unsubstantiated charges of discnmina-
t:()n. If the 'lection board fails to regis-
ter an individual for any number of valid
reasons, it will be subject to subpena by
the Commission to answer imagmarv
ch.ir^ps that on ir,w,-.,i^..„i W-- f"****/

char-es that an individual has been de-
prived of his rlsht to vote by reason of
his color, his race, his reU^icn. or his
national origin.

For at least the next 2 years and prob-
ably for the indeflnite future every reg-
istrar of voters m each State of the Un-
ion will be exposed to the possibihty of
being subpenaed before the Commission
to answer charges perpetrated by every
half-baked, rabble-rousing, so-called
Stifte^^ °^SanIzaUon in the United

How stupid can we be. How idiculoua
can we get. vLuuua

Now the Commission Is also going to
study and collect information concerning
legal developments constituting a denial

CoSt^titrn''"°^ °' "^^ ''^' ""^^'^ '^«
What do the words -legal develop,
ments constituting a denial of equal pro-
tection of the laws under the Constitu-
tion mean?

W-hy obviously, since there Is no defi-
nition m the bill, those words will mean
whatever the Commission wants them to
meaa It means that the Commission

will have the authority to investigate
every State law on the statute books that
deals with man's relationship with man.
It n.eans an Investigation of the mar-
ll^e and divorce laws; an investigation
n^^Mtf laws of personal property, and
the laWof real property.

You can rest assured that the Com-
mission will, at its first opportunity, in-
vestigate and report on the State laws
prohibiting miscegenation, for there can
be no doubt that the Commission will
take advantage of each unrestricted word
in this bill to break down every aspect of
separateness in America, regardless of
its justification, on the theory that this
bill is a legislative mandate that all men
and women must hereafter conform to a
common mold.

It matters not what the customs of the
community have been for the last 300
years. It matters not what the American
people have understood to be their rights,
privileges, immunities. rcsponslblllUes.
and limitations under the Constitution
and under the SUte governments in the
past.

Ihis Commission, and mark my words
well, is being given the authority to re-
write the Constitution of the United
States. For behind the Commission
stands the big club— the all-knowing all-
powerful Attorney General of the United
States, who wUl now be able to proceed
against every Individual in the United
States against whom a charge has been
levied without worrying as to whether
or not a criminal charge can be proved.

Do you suppose for one moment that
the Commission will confine its meddUng
to interim reports to the President'

No. my friends, this Commission win
become the tool of the Attorney Oen-
eral— the saboteurs of American social
Insitutions as we know them— and the
purveyors of gossip, rumor, and half-
truths.

And the Information will be used by
the Attorney General through the ple-
nary powers that are given to him in
other portions of the bill.

No public official who hAs any connec-
tion with voting shaU henceforth be safe
in the exercise of his statutory duties
for under the terms of this bill he
may be enjoined from exercising even a
statutory requirement If. in the opinion
of one man. a Federal appointee, his ac-
tion amounts to an attempt to intimidate
f^^^'^.'f^- coerce, or interfere with an
individual seeking to exercise the right

the qualincaUons for voting for Federal
office holders will hereafter be subject
to complete Federal review on the basis
of the slightest allegaUon of Intimida-
tion, coercion, or interference, regardless
LubTXd""^ "^^ Qualificauons we^

HrJil! policeman attempts to prevent a
drunkard from entering a voting booth

S intf^ <^^ '^""'^ answering a charge
of interfering with a voter because of 3«
race, color, religion, or national origin
T,«V ^" employer and his foreman do
not give their employees a whole day

tL^ °^'^'u^ ''''^- "^«y °^ay well And
s^eST ^^"^ * ^^^^"^ <^o^rt. an-
swering a charge of conspiring to pre-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

vent, by Intimidation, an employee from
"giving his support or advocacy" of a
candidate for Federal ofHce. For under
the terms of this bill, the Attorney Gen-
eral will bring the action In the name
of the United States. And the Attorney
General wUl have unlimited funds, un-
limited attorneys, and unlimited power.

But, my friends, the most significant
part of this bill — the most dangerous
aspect of this proposed legislation— the
most fantastic sacrifice that we are be-
ing asked to make In exchange for this
Imaginary cure to an Imaginary ill — ^is
the surrender of the hearthstone of
democracy, trial by jury.

Bear in mind that convictions for
violations of court decrees will be ob-
tained before a Federal Judge through
civil proceedings, and since the United
States will be a party of the proceedings
Instituted by the Attorney General, trial
by Jury will be eliminated.

In their zest to protect the so-called
minorities, the proponents of this legis-
lation would destroy a statutory guar-
antee of trial by Jury.

The proponents of this legislation will
not even agree to give elected State
officials the same guarantee of trial by
Jury that is afforded labor leaders. The
reason Is not difficult to find.

The Attorney General of the United
States summarized the situation suc-
cinctly, even though he may not have so
Intended. When appearing before the
Judiciary Committee, this is what the
Attorney General said:

Enactment of these propo*ed civil remedies
would not enlarge or In any way claah with
the constitutional llmltatlona on the Federal
Government to act In thla field. It would
rather permit the Federal Government to
take civil remedial action Instead of having
to depend solely upon criminal procedxires.

8679

But there were many wild charges by
the National Association for the Ad-
vancement of Colored People and other
organizations who would reduce us all to
a common level.

I have long ago learned to mistrust
do-gooders who profit by the chaos and
turmoil they engender.

Mr. Chairman, the Issue today is more
basic than the efforts on the part of some
to subjugate the South; the Issue is
more basic than amendments to the
United States Code. The Issue is our
form of government— whether it shall
perish or continue in future glory as it
has in the past.

What we are considering here today
constitutes, in my opinion, the most seri-
ous threat to constitutional government
that has ever been before the House.

The Constitution of the United States,
in the 10th amendment, provides that:

The powers not delegated to the United
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited
by It to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively or to the people.

Mr. Justice Brandeis in the case of
Erie Railroad versus Tomkins, said:

There stands, as a perpetual protest
against Its repetition, the Constitution of
the United States, which recognizes and pre-
serves the autonomy and Independence of
the State, Independence in their l^lslatlve
and Independence In their judicial depart-
ments. Supervision over either the'leglsla-
tive or the judlcUl acUon of the States is
in no case permissible except as to matters
by the Constitution specifically authorized or
delegated to the United States. Any inter-
ference with either, except as thxis permit-
ted, is an invasion of the authority of the
States, and, to that extent, a denial of its
independence.

And then comes the true analysis of
Uie situation, and I quote the Attorney
General:

In many case. I am convinced it would
make the difference between success and
failure In meaningful protection of the civil
rights of our citizens.

What the Attorney General means is
that he cannot prove criminal cases but
before the right Federal Judge in a con-
tempt proceedings, convictions will be
much easier. In fact, they will be
almost guaranteed.

Mr. Chairman. I cannot believe. I re-
fuse to believe, that the proponents of
this legislation have any true concept of
what they here propose.

They are seeking to eliminate what
they have been told is a wrong to certain
citizens of the United States.

They have not even established the
fact of the "wrong."

Who appeared before the Judiciary
Committee and testified as to an actual
Incident in which he was deprived of his
right to vote?

Did anyone come before the CMnmlt-
tee and state that he attempted to vote
on a certain day and was denied the
right to vote?

Did anyone come before the Commit-
tee and testify that he attempted to
register and that a registrar denied him
that privilege?

Did anyone name names? No.

Well, Mr. Chairman, we have seen the
independence of these sovereign States
of America invaded by the Supreme
Court of the United States in its efforts
to remold the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has recently en-
gaged in what I consider to be an im-
warranted invasion of the prerogatives
of the legislative branch of the Govern-
ment. I am firmly convinced, and have
so stated, that this action by the Su-
preme Court of the United States was
unjustified, illegal, and imwarranted,
but I have enough confidence in the
people of the United States to believe
that the will of the people in the long
run will prevail.

To paraphrase a recent decision of
the Supreme Court of the State of
Florida:

Whatever one's Ideology may be, whether
one is a strong defender of State sover-
eignty, or an equally fervent advocate of
centralized government. I think the great
majority of persons would agree that if the
death knell of this fundamental principle
of Jeffersonian democracy is to be tolled, the
bells should be rung by the peoples them-
selves as the Constitution contemplates.

Thus, I do not believe the American
people want this Federal Commission
snooping and spsring into practically ev-
ery phase of American life. I don't be-
lieve they will tolerate an uncontrollable
Federal grand Jury, supposedly limited
to a life of 2 years. And as soon as the
American people realise the magnitude
of the powers given to this Commission

and to the Attorney General under the
provisions of this bill, you will hear from
them.

I am growing tired of these constant
references to the oppressed minorities in
these United States. I am speaking now
for the oppressed majority— the men
and women of this Nation who have
made the Nation what it is today.

The men and women who. when they
fully understand the issues involved in
this proposed legislation, will rise In their
wrath to strike it down.

I will not be a party to a proposition
that would abolish the social and eco-
nomic diversification of this Nation

I will not subscribe to the assumption
that the 48 sovereign States of these
United States are incompetent, and in-
dolent, in their protection of those who
desire to exercise the privilege of the free
ballot.

I will not be a party to proposed legis-
lation that seeks to impose by criminal
sanctions, a philosophy of equality that
does not, in fact, and can not, in fact
exist.

I will not be a party to legislation that
not only encourages, but will seek the
statutory blessings of the Federal Gov-
ernment with regard to the marriage of
white with blacks.

I will not be a party to legislation that
destroys the pride of race, be it white,
black, red, or yellow.

I will not be stampeded by organiza-
tions who pretent to represent minority
groups.

I know my people, white and black,
and they do not want this legislation.

I believe firmly that my people are no
different than the people in the West
the East, and the North, aU of whom
are proud of their own national origin,
proud of their own race, proud of their
own religion, and proud of their own
color.

I wiU not be a party to 'legislation that
will destroy that pride and wiH cast a
cloud upon their heritage.

I will not be a party to legislation that
seeks to debase the sacredness of reli-
gion for political advantage.

I will not be a party to a proposition
that laughs at tradition; scoffs at cus-
tom, and makes a mockery of the wasrs
of life that have made this Nation what
it is today.

I will not be a party to mongreliza-
tlon by legislation.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
such time as he may desire to the gentle-
man from Alabama [Mr, Grant].

Mr. GRANT. Mr. Chairman, let me at
the outset pay my respects to and to state
what a debt of gratitude the people of my
section and the lovers of constitutional
government all over this Nation owe to
the members of the Judiciary Committee
who fought so valiantly and successfully
to delete so many punitive and harsh
terms from this bill.

Although the Wll was brought to the
committee from a subcommittee recom-
mending that it be passed as written,
those men that we owe a debt of gratitude
began a careful and considerate analjrsls
ct the bUl with the determination that If
it could not be defeated that they would
eliminate Just as much of the undesirable
sections as possible. In the opening

8680

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

statement of the minority report to this
bill, these men said:

Beginning In 1861 and continuing through
almost haU of the yvar 1885, one of the
greatest of all wan was fought upon our aoU.
Brother wae arrayed against brother, and
thousands of our finest young men, both
Federal and Confederate, offered up their
lives for principles that they believed in.
The value of those men has never been sur-
passed, and probably never equaled.

Let me upon this occasion say to these
men and those who voted against favor-
ably reporting this bill, il I may some-
what paraphrase what they have said
about another generation. You. too.
have shown your value to the people of
this country in your noble legislative
fight to save constitutional government
for our nation.

No legislative committee has ever been

called upon to consider a more vicious
and vindictive piece of legiiUation. It
Is bad enough now but the Judiciary
Committee eliminated many most un-
dssirable features. And the irony of it
all is that the proponents of this mon-
strosity have the nerve to stand upon
this floor and say. "Take your medicine
much of the ill has been eliminated; we
are now bringing you a moderate bill."

For the past week. Members have been
receiving propa:;anda from leftwin? or-
ganizations demanding that there be no
changes en the fioor. Crippliii? amend-
ments they call any amendment offeied
I do not want to cripple the bill: I want
to kill It cutri4;ht-kiU it as dead as a
dodo.

The members of the committee In
their working over of this bill. deHnitely
improved it in that a new section re-
quirmg the Commission in its hearings to
ob.ser\e the same rules cf procedure
which povem Con-re-<=sionaI cjramittees
was added and the bill v.as amcndt-d to
require complau^.ts filed before the Com-
mission to be in writing, under oath a^d
specific in content. The conmiittee" aL^
removed the s^-cUon which eaipoAerf-d
the investigation of con^plamts of un-
warranted economic pressure and au-
thority to study economic and social de-
vtlopments. This section, of course had

""^iS.^^ '° "^^ *"^ <^^^'^ "«^^t.s and' was
a tLPC section under another name

The committee did a good thing when
they removed from the bill tlie section
authorizing the Attorney G.>npral to
brmg a suit for damaw-^s on behalf of
one private citizen against another.
I here is no precedent in law for such
action when the damages arist out of a
tort or a personal grievance Tmie does
not allow me to explam all of the bad

rnllf^h^^' M^? *"^ ^^'*^ ^« eliminate
from the bill, but the Members of this
House who are only considenn? the bill
as U came to the House should read the
bill as It came from the subcommittee
and see just what the proponents of this
harmful legislation wanted to do

I realize that this House is going to
pass some kind of a bill. The pr oponentS
of this legislation must have something
to shout about. I trust that none of Se
supporters wiU fall out among themselves
as to who is to get the credit or who is
doing the most for the Negro race as was
done by two active supporters several

1957

years ago when the charge was made on
the floor by one that the other was so
active because he wanted to nm for a
higher office in liis State. I am sure
that none of the supporters of the pres-
ent bill are playing pohtics.

Amendments will be offered by me or
someone from the Judiciary Committee
to strike or clarify certain sections of
this bill. The leading one is to Insert a
provision guaranteeing to a defendant
the right of trial by jury. Much argu-
ment is being used here by the propo-
nents of this bill that this should not be
done. Some lawyers seem to be in dis-
agreement as to whether the right of
jury trial in contempt cases under the
National Labor Relations Act and other
Federal sututes has been repealed. The
advocates cf this legislation point to cer-
tain laws that have provisions for en-
forcement through injunctions obtained
by the Federal Government. However, I
believe that you will find that the in-
junctions were a device designed to be
used as a 5pecial remedy which could be
made available in courts of equity to
enforce civil or private rights between in-
dividuals. No such relationships exist
between tne Government and the people
in the enforcement of laws based on such
private civil rights. Regardless of argu-
ments to the contrary, the enforcement
of Federal laws against the people is
Ciuninal law and by what other names
It may be called, it is pure and simple
criminal prosecution for refusal to ot)ey
the laws.

Without entering further Into the
technical and legal aspects of this ques-
tion, let me say we are not here called
upon to make a decision a.s to just what
ir.iphcation is to be or should be placed
upon seme prior legislation. The L«sue is
Flam and short Do not confuse It; you
will be called upon to ca.'^t your vote
upon the question as to whether you ap-
prove or disapprove of trial by Jurv to a
defendant brought before the court un-
der this ler.siation. There is no middle
ground. You are either for jury trial
or ai^ainst the ri-^'ht of trial by jury.

The Congres.s in 1914 pa.s.^ed the Clay-
ton Act which provided for jur.- trials in
conttTOpt cases, and may I say that the
author of this act wa.s none other than
the chairman of the Judiciary Commit-
tee, Henry D Clayton, of Alabama, who
later served with distinction for many
years as district Federal judrre in my
dis'rict. ~

Why is there such an objection here
to t.he ri-.ht of trial by jurv? What Is
more sacred, personal ri.-hts or property
rights > The Federal Constitution pro-
vides that —

In suns at cmmon law where the value In
contfuversy shall exceed •20. the right of
trial by jury sh.iU be preserved.

So by this legislation a person who Is
sued in a civil action for $20 01 Is given
greater protection than In a contempt
case where his freedom and rig; ts can
be taken from him and he be sent to Jail
A person accused of stealing one penny
has the right of trial by Jury, yet a per-
son whose sentence would be many
many times greater under this legislation
has no such right. You can stand here
and argue until doomsday but you are

not .Eolng to convince the people of
America that there Is any substitute for
trial by Jury. I never thought that I
would sit upon this floor and hear such
arguments as have been made against
Jury trials. The reason given by one
oi the proponents of this legislation, and
please listen at this, are: First, •"Time
is the essence" and second. "A Jury trial
challenges the integrity of our courts
across the Nation." Those arc his worda.
Ponder these words. In tlie name of Jus-
tice and Uberty what are you here tryina
to do?

This legislation gives the district
courts jurisdiction of proceedings insti-
tuted pursuant to It and stipulates that
it shall exercise the same without regard
to whether the party aggrieved shall
have exhausted other remedies. It sim-
ply means that the Pedtral courta are
given the right to bypass tlie State courts.
This means that the Attorney General.
through the district attorney, may if he
so desires, meddle in the elections In
your Btate. Ju.st another gadget for
Washington to take over in .ill the States.
This Is dangerous legislation. It should
be opposed by all Americans regardless
of race. This has far-rea:hing Implica-
tions and should be amended.

If there is anyone who .-.hould be here
clamoring for the ri)?ht of trial by
Jury. It is those that the proponents of
this bill claim It is enact-?d for. I am
surprised that In your zeal you have gone
so far as to create something that would
d -stroy that which you claun you want
to preserve, namely, prt.tection of a
minority race.

There are other amendments that win
be offered in order to perfect as much
as po.^sible a bad bill. You know as well
as I do that all the troublt m the South
at tlie present tune aenxs from the
school -integral ion decLsion of the Su-
preme Court. Few of you would stand
upon this floor and defend that decision.
You know that It was legislaUon by a
Court that the decision was not based
upon law. This Congre.«;s would never
have pa>5ed such leRislatlon. You who
give hpservice to Stales riphts now have
an opportunity to defend these rights
You violate SUtes rights by the adop-
tion of this legislation and in fact
nullify the 10th article of the Constitu-
tion which provides m unmistakable
terms, 'the powers not delegated to the
United States by the Cun,utution, nor
Pichibited by it to the Slates, are re-
served to the States respectively or to
the people.- Oh yes. mar.y talk about
Uie other nine arUcles which deal with
the ruhts of the people but you forget
the 10th which deals with Uie powers of
the Federal Government.

Let Wi defeat this legislation. What-
ever might be the purpose of its sponsors
it can do no one good anl can in the
end do irreparable damaue to those who
you claim you seek to help. Strife and
ill will Will follow in Its wake U It ia
your wish, if it is your des:re to foment
trouoie and strife in the South, to retard
its mdustrial and economic development
you are on the right trade, for It wUl
certainly do it.

Where Is the demand for this legisla-
Uon? If you are serious, if you are ain-

a)NGRESSK)NAL RECORD — HOUSE

eere and really want to belp the Negro in
the South, help us knprove his ecanomic
status. When he aaks for bread do not
give him a stone. He caimot eat aocial
equality. How many of you whose
hearts bleed so here today for the south-
ern Negro hare ever tried to do anything
about helping him as a tenant, shaie-
cropper, or small landowner better hi«
situation. We of the South wek. you to
help us. We do not claim there is no
problem. It was being solved by men of
good will of both races until Ul-advised
so-called leaders from other sections
came in. They have done irreparable
harm to the cause of the advanoonent of
the Negro race.

Yes, our problems are many and we
have been solving them through better
schools, better Jobs, better housing, and
better economic conditions. No section
of this Nation or any people have made
more and better progress in the past 10
years than the Negroes in the South.
Some of you aeetn to think that you can,
by social legislation, raise the standing
of the Negro. You and your phony
racial Ideas. The great majority of the
Ifegroes are not Interested in eocial
equalUy. They do not want conditions as
some of the so-called leaders and
troublemakers in the North contovd.
They want to be the best Negroes possi-
ble, give their children an opportunity
for a schooling, an opportunity to earn
a good Uvlng, adequate housing, and
employment. The great majority of
the people of the South want them to
have these things. Hark my word, such
legislation as this is not going to help
the Negra Our future economic de-
velopment and prosperity is tied with
the Negro race. Neither race is going to
advance unless the other does.

You who today think that you are
punishing the South may wake up on
a somewhat not too disUnt tomorrow
and find that your liberties have been
taken from you. This is only the start
Set op this Commission and for the next
2 years you will have a multiplicity of
auggestions for legislation and in all
probability legislation to make a perma-
nent commission.

Several times during this debate argu-
ment has been made against the Ameri-
can Jury system because two defendants
who were tried for dynamiting were
freed by a Jury in Montgomery. Ala ,
and also to the fact that the NAACP
was fined $100,000 by a Judge in Mont-
gomery because they refused to turn
over its membership list The only thing
I can see from this argvunent Is that
you believe the defendants in one case
should have been tried by a judge instead
of a Jury and in tlie NAACP case there
should have been a Jury trial instead
of it being tried by the Judge.

The NAACP was originally given a
much smaller fix>e and only upon con-
tinued and persistent refusal to obey
the Court order was it increaaed. The
NAACP should be as subject to the laws
the same as white organizaUons.
whether it be the White CiUaens' Coun-
cil. KKK. or any other. No oi^aniza-
tion in Alabama is going to be a law
unto thems^ves.

I hold no brief for law violation re-
gardless of whether it be by white people

6681

or the NAACP. I do not aMWMe of vio-
lence and the people of my dlBtrict do
oot approve of it reewdless of why the
violence might be committed or whom it
might be coomiitted against "^^t^ no
mistake about that.

B^ore all this agitatton started race
relations in Montgomery were as harmo-
nious as any place in the world. Whites
and Negroes worked together in peace
and harmony. There was nothing for
the betterment of the N^oes of the city
that the great majority of the white peo-
ple were not interested in. Montgomery
has been known far and wide as a city of
friendship and neighborliness where the
people of both races lived in ha.TTTv>ny
and mutual respect. Tens of thousands
of young men of this Nation have trained
at Maxwell and Gunter Fields. Ask them
what they think of Montgomery. The
Jieople of Montgomery need no defoise
•I my hands but I am not going to let go
unchaUenged these statemenU that jus-
tice does not prevail there. None of
these things would have ever developed
If it had not been for the fact that some
of these modem-day carpetbaggers and
agitators came to town intent upon stir-
ring up strife and turmoil.

Law and order does function in Mont-
gomery. Arrests were made, several de-
fendants were indicted by a grand jury
and two of them were duly tried. A jury
of good and tried men said that the
State did not convince them beyond a
reasonable doubt that the defendants
were guilty. Who are we to say that
they were. There are yet others to be
tried. I want to say that defendants in
Montgomery, whether white or negrti
are going to receive justice and that the
courts and juries are not going to be
browbeaten and intimidated by outsiders
and troublemakers.

I call the membership's attention to a
news item in a Montgomery paper of last
week which is as follows: "Citizens Unit
States Stand Against Strife." The Mont-
gomery County Citizens Council declared
yesterday it does not condone violence
and civil strife and advocated a "contin-
uation of friendly relationship between
the races." W. B. Wyatt, chakman of
the board of directors, issued an g-poiot
atatement of principles which he said
was approved by the local directors.
The statement :

1. We are dedicated to Btstes tigbts aotl
local self -government.

a. We believe la ooneUtutional goven»-
ment and the diversion of power set out In
the Constitution of tlie United States.

8. We believe In t*ie preen vatlon of cns-
tonis and tradlttons.

4. We flrmly beUenre In MfMrate but cqud
■ehoQl BygtemB.

8. We do not condone vloJenoe and etvtl
strife.

6. We believe In the oootlBuatton of
hrlendly relation ihlp between the races.

7. We believe In the ri^t of all races to
•elect or reject their associates socially.

8. We are dedicated to elimination tH
OomaiTmlst tefltrence In ornr Oovemment
and educational and rrilgkmB tnstltotkna.

I am getting pretty well fed up with
the argument that has been made «n t^iift
floor that we must {wiss such Ifglfilatiftn
as this to build up the prestige of our
nation among the free people -of tbe
world. Think of it, thJis Nation the

isvatest on earth which is the envy of
the world, which has spent billions and
bUlioms of dollars over the earth is now
being told that in order for all this aid
t» be eCactive we must ^'Hqngg our wav
of life. ^

Yes, you have the votes as you claim
to pass this legislation and use the South
as a whipping boy but as surely as the
night follows the day many of you win
Uve to regret it It is legislation aimed
directly at the South. It is vindicUve
and will not stand the test of time, a
will not help those who you profess to
help and will in the end retard the de-
velopment of the Negro race in the
South.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
such time as he may care to use to the
gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. LoskbL
Mr. LOSER. Mr. Chairman, at the
outset I desire to express my apprecia-
tion to the distinguished gentleman from
New York I Mr. Cklub] for yielding to
me this time to speak on the bill under
consideration. Of course. I am opposed
to it. I consider it a vicious piece ol
legislation.

It gives me great concern because it
implies that a large segment of the pop-
ulation of the Natijn are a lawless
people, and that it is necessary to set
up another commission in the executive
branch of the Government to go about
the country holding hearings, under the
guise of further securing and protecting
the civil rights of persons within the
jurisdiction of the United States.

I am dreadfully afraid that It will
destroy the very civil rights that it pur-
ports to secure and protect.

The bill is couched in sophisticated
language, and many of Its provisions ara
mere repetition of the civil rights
statutes now in foree.

It is deceptive and nni.<i«»giHng jn that
It appears on its face to be bipartisan,
and therefore nonpartisan, by providing
that the Conmiission of 6 shall be ma/jp
up of 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats.
It is further deceptive and in<RU»nY<iT.j
in that the President of the United States
\& authorized, in section 103 (a) of the
hin. to appoint as members of the Com-
mission persons "in the service of the
United States Government" The only
qualification for membership on the
Commission is that 3 members shall be
Democrats and 3 shall be Republicans.
This would enable the President to ap-
point as members of the Commission
persons now serving as Congressmen, al-
though the bm states that the Commis-
^on on Civil Rights is created in the ex-
ecutive branch of the Qov«imient The
bin indicates, in section IDS. subsection
Cd^ . that Congressmen may be appointed
because it exempts fnAin^i.rf of the Com-
mission from operation of section 281 of
title 18 of the United l^ates Code. Sec-
tion 281 is a part of the Criminal Code of
the United States, and under its provi-
sions a Monher of Congress vidlatliig Ihe
aame i* ptinishahle by a flne of not more
than 410.000 or impri«»ntirt^T%^ f^ not
More than 2 years.

It ^ indeed a rtnrtUng ^novation in
the legislative prooess when a cooimis-
aioo in the executive bcaach of tbeOev-
erameat is4»r canbe. if the Jbeecuttsv so
choosey, presided over and governed Iqr

8682

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

f

1 1

members of the legislative branch. This
la destructive of the constitutional pro-
vision relative to the separation of
powers.

Time, place, and policy combine to
decry the approval of this bill.

Even if the general policy of the bill
were sound, which It is not; even If It
were appropriate to promulgate such a
policy here rather than in the legisla-
tures of the States, which It Is not ; even
so. the tensions and exigencies of the
present time should stay our hands from
a step that cannot fail to add fuel to the
flres of ill will lately engendered by a
sudden social controversy and the dis-
turbance of long-established custom in-
cident to recent judicial decLslons.

It is. of course, an historic fact that
social changes do take place and that
with the passage of time long -established
customs are altered. Unfortunately, it
Is aL*o true that during a period of tran-
sition there is always present the temn-
tatlon to hasten by radical legislative
action the pace of change or compel Its
course to conform to some partisan's
predilection. Very often, however, It is
such legislative impatience that works
woe to the very movement which it seeks
to aid and retards rather than acceler-
ates the progress which its proponents
profess to desire.

Our own history Is replete with ex-
amples. The Alien and Sedition Acts did
not serve to counteract the violence of
expression at which they were aimed,
but on the contrary brought about the
destruction of the political party which
sponsored them. The fugitive slave leg-
islation but added fuel to a controversy
that many yet believe could and should
have been amicably composed, although
their purpose was said to be no more
than to make certain the enforcement of
law already upon the statute books and
the protection of long-established prop-
erty rights that were undisputed. The
enactment of national prohibition laws
brought to an end the steady progres.s of
a public sentiment agairLst the hcen^^e
and sale of alcoholic liquors and reversed
a tide that up to that point had appeared
irresistible.

These are but Illustrations of the
preacher's words of wisdom that -for
everything there is a season, and a time
for every matter under heaven." A-ain
by the same authority we are told that
there is "a time to reap and a time to
sow; a time to keep silence and a time to
speak.- Very emphatically I desire to
state my feelings that upon the subject
now debated this Is a time when the Con-
gress of the United States can best pro-
mote the public welfare by silence

Can it be seriously asked whether the
k.nd of investigation and inquisition au-
thorized by this resolution would aggra-
vate the racial friction that until lately
was on the way to extinction, at least in
tne South? It would necessarily do so
for It would furnish a forum not only
for the honestly dissatisfied but likewise
for the Increasing number of those with
seiflsh interests, men who cannot profit
In quiet waters but can ride the waves
of passion and prejudice and who are
quick to seize such an opportunity Un-
fortunately conditions are such as to pro-
voke demagogues and at this time we

should eschew legislation which invited
their activities.

But even If the times were more
auspicious for an effort to enforce by law
a major change in social customs. It is
not to Federal action that proponents of
change should address themselves.
Traditionally and properly the States
have been the sources of statute law de-
fining the conduct of one man toward
another and I have heard no convincing
argument why they should not continue
to be such source. The fact that they
are such Is the virtue of our Federal sys-
tem and the likelihood that they will
remain so is the warrant for believing In
our continued civil peace and social well-
being.

There Is. however, an even weightier
reason for oppo.sin« this bill, for its words
and substance affront the very civil
risrhts to which its proponents assert
allet,Mance. To clothe Federal authority
with what should be the preroRatlve of
the State is evil, but to arm such author-
ity with the power to supersede Jury
trials and compensatory actions with a
system of injunctions and contempts is
to -strike at the very root of civil rights
under a pretense of supporting them.

To say, as the bill before us does say.
that a suit .<^hall lie and a restraining
order issue whenever 'there are reason-
able grounds to believe that any p?rson
is about to tnjage in any act or prac-
tice which would give rise to a cause of
action" pursuant to the act. is to
create a wholly unlimited authority in
a governmental agency to harrass and
oppress citizens whose only fault is that
they are suspected of being able to put
a denounced purpose into execution I
wunder if any statute of Nazi Germany
ever went to such an extent In dispens-
ing with the necessity of an overt act
in providing punishment for no more
than the existence of a naked purpose
I am aware that a court might con-
strue the term -reasonable grounds" as
requiring something more than a sus-
picious countenance or an intemperate
expression, but we must take the
language of the bill as it appears and if
it be conceded that a court might well
find such langua*;e so unreasonable in
its literal terms that it would have to
be amended by judicial construction
such concession is in itself proof of the
vice now complained of.

There are other provisions of the bill
that would require supplementary in-
terpretation before we could know their
actual extent and practical operation
The bill does not meet the test that
should be made of legislative novelty
namely, that it should spell out its
reach and limitations so clearly that
there may be no doubt of its boundaries
On the contrary it leaves us to guess
how much its inquisitorial processes
may be available to make partisan po-
litical hay and to conjecture how far
its procedural innovations may be
used to uproot such ancient landmarks
as trial by Jury, presumption of inno-
cence and an untrammeled right of
personal opinion.

We are being asked to swallow too
much In the name of civil rights and
to accept risks that would not be in-
vited under a less high-sounding title

For these reasons I oppose the passage
of the measure. At th«! proper time I
propose to submit certain amendments
to the bill.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
myself 5 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, one would think from
the debate that has been indulged In.
at least by some Members on this side
of the aisle, that we a-e taking away
rlRhts heretofore granted. This bill does
no such thing. This bill does not take
away the right of trial by Jury. The
right of a Jury trial of » contemner, a
man who Is charged wltfi contempt, has
not been generally accorded and is not
a constitutional right. I should like to
read part of a decision of the United
States Supreme Court d>?clded in 1890.
It is as follows;

It has alwaya been one of the attribute*,
one of the powers necMtsarlly Incident to a
court of Justice that It sliouid have this
power of vindicating lU dlgr.tv. of enf irclng
It* orders, of protecting lt«lf from Insult
without the necessity of rallng upon a Jury
to assist It in the exercise cf this power.

There have been for a brief space
rights accorded for jury trial, but when
those rights were accorded, they were
given by the Government as a matter of
grace and not as a matter of right. I
am referring to the Norris-La Guardla
Act concerning labor disputes and before
that the Clayton Act. Hut what was
given has been taken ajv-ay because the
National Labor Relations Act and the
Taft-Hartley Act, In so many words,
withdrew that right which was given in
the Norris-lA Guardla Act in a limited
number of cases. The two acts that I
have mentioned waived 8p<clflcally pro-
visions of the Norris-La Gus rdla Act. So
that today we are in the position in labor
disputes of not according tj labor, that
may be guilty of vlolaUons of court
orders, any rlpht of trial by Jury

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. CELLER. I yield to the distin-
guished gentleman from Lou siana

Mr. WILLIS. I know the gentleman
Is famihar with the fact that the 16
defendants in the Clinton. Tenn. case
who are charged with criminal contempt
are entitled to a trial by Jury and will
be tried by a Jury. The gentleman ad-
mits that; does he not?

Mr. CELLER. The court ordered that
trial by Jury.

Mr. WILLIS. Does not the gentleman
have confidence in the fact that the court
ruled on the law as it stands today
namely, that they asked for and under
the law they were entitled to. and the
Judge ruled that they will be tried by a
Jury? Is that not true?

Mr. CELLER. That was a private
lawsuit instituted by private persons
against the education department of a
particular county. That is not a cue
where the Government is involved

Mr WILLIS. Wm the gentlemaii an-
swer this question?

Mr. CELLER. I will try to

Mr^ WILLIS. Under the same Identl-
1k* u 5^^ *^"^ circumstances under
Which these defendants are being tried
by a Jury for contempt, if the blU of In-
junction had been filed under this act.
these same defendants today would not

iS57

CONGRESSIONAL RBCX)BJ> — HOUSE

be OBUtted to a trial bw iurw. WUl Mot
the gentlemcan admit that simple fact?
'Hii^CmAJSR. That iB wh&t m can
a supposmooB case. R to ray dlfflcnlt
to answer that question.

Mr. wnjJS. And yet. the gentleman
ran tends that certain rights ai« not
iKlng iaken away.

Mr. C£LLEB. I will say if a suit Is
fnstitutad by the Attorney General on
behalf of the Covemment imder any
and all circumstances to Clinton or out
of CHnton, there would not be a right
of trial by Jury to the conteizmor.

Mr. WILLIS. And the genUeman
knows that all actions authorized to be
filed under this bill will be fiied by the
Attorney General.

Mr. CELLER. I cannot answer that,
sir — I do not know.

Mr. WILLIS. Win the gentleman look
at the top of page 10. where It says all
actions must be nied by the Attorney
General?

Mr. CELLER. There is noUUng to
prevent private suits to be brought.

Mr. WILLIS. I am Ulktng about suits
to be filed under this bill. Win the gen-
tleman point to me where imder this
bUl one single new right or cause of ac-
tion Is given to an Individual? WIU he
not admit that all actions wiU be filed
by the Attorney General?

Mr, CELLEEL I cannot say that. The
words are permissive. The Attorney
General is not ordered. The word used
fa "may" and not "shall." So there is a
difference to that regard. A private
person may stlU institute a suit under
the hill also.

Mr. WILLIS. Then the gentleman
does admit that suits instituted by the
Attorney General under this act that
may result to contempt, a trial by jury
will not be had because the Government
will be a party to the suit?

Mr. CELLER. That Is absolutely
true. TTiere is no question about it.

Mr. 'WILLIS. The only difference It
makes Is that the people In Tennessee
are being tried by a jury and under this
bill they would not be.

The CHAIRMAN. The timp of the
gentleman from New York [Mr. CrLLM]
has expired.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
xnjrself 3 additional mtoutes.

The distinction the gentleman makes
win not bold. Too much is made of the
fact that many years ago. when I was
much jrounger tocidentally. I voted for
a Jury trial to connection with viola-
tions of labor tojunctions, in the sense
that I voted for the Norris-La Guardla
Act, and I made a speech to the weU of
this House to support of my position.
Now the reason why I voted for the
Norris-La Guardla Act was that the
courts had been granting, willy-nilly,
without good grounds or should I say on
coffee grounds, injunctions against la-
bor. There were grave abuses of the
power of to junction, and the Nation was
aroused. Congress took notice and said
under the circumstances it would be well
for the Congress to totervene and to
^ limit the Issuance of injunctions. I
/^nake thto statement, if we pass this biU
and there is a repetition of the abuse
that occurred prior to the passage of the
Norris-La Guardla AcW I voald be the

8663

flat to offer « ItiU to «ue1i the power «f
the court to grant such injmi/'tiftnfl.
Tbe jaere fact that I yotad tor the
Morri»-La Ovanlia bill has been bal-
loooed out of aU propertioDs. Tbeimue
is not whether or not I, the gentleman
from New- York, did or did not vote for
the Norris-La Ouardia Act. The issue
is the bill b^ore us. I might repeat what
I said before the Rules Committee when
I was charged with inconsistency. I
said It was General Lee who said to Gen-
eral Beauregard, "True patriotism some-
times requires of men to act exactly
contrary at one period to that which
they do at another polod." For that
reason I am weU withto my rights, under
the circumstances that exist today to
advocate with aU the power within me
the passage of H. R. «127. Just as I was
withto my rights to strongly argue for
the passage of the Norris-La Ouatdia
Act to 1»82.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from New York has agato
expired.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself S addidmial minutes.

Mr. KEATZNO. Mr. Chairman, win
the gentleman yield?

Mr. CELI£B. I yield.

Mr. KEATINO. I would Just like to
add a comment to the coUoquy had be-
tween the gentleman from New York
and the gentleman frMn Louisiana in
which the toference was made that rights
would be infringed. For such an infer-
ence to be drawn would be unfortunate.
There is nothtog in this bill which does
away with any existing right of an indi-
vidual to bring an action fw damages
or for injunctive relief against another
todlvldual. or Indiriduals, who toterfere
with his rights.

It Is Impossible to envision whether aU
cases In the future, all actions to be
brought, would be brought by the Attor-
ney General or whether they would be
brought by todividuals.

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Chairman, win the
gentleman yield to me that I may ask
the gentleman from New York a ques-
tion?

Mr. CELLER. In Just a minute. I
Just want to caU attention to part 3
which is entitled "To Strengthen the
Civil Rights Statutes, and for Other Pur-
poses." This title to effect adds two
paragraphs, caUed fourth and fifth, to
the old Ku Klux statute of 1871. Tliat
statute gave considerable rights to todi-
viduals whose civU rights were being
filched from them particularly by State
officers or others acttog in conspiracy
against those whose rights were thus
being corroded. Under that old civil
rights statute not only private suits for
damages, but also for injunctive relief
eouM be had by those aggrieved for the
violation of the rights accorded to them
and guaranteed to them by that old
statute of 1871.

So there is nothing new to the sitoa-
tlon. Of course to the CUnton case there
was a private suit brought against quite
a number of individuals. In that fc-*tvl
cf case, which is different from the cases
envisaged by the UU before us. suxely
there can be trial by Jury. There can be
no question of doubt where there is a
violation of the court injunction and

tbe sameaet i««ieo a vlolattoBW either
a State or « Feitecal ^tafrutf; but tho
point is that we have any aumbarof hffls
that we have passed in this Hn»«p in tbo
last lew decades where we feftised, we
actually refused to give trial bg Jury to
those who had violated orders of tha
court

Tbe gottlemaa fram New York men-
tioned the antitrust laws. There is a
eeeorities and fiaehaage Commiaiton
Act; the False Advertisements Act; th»
False ProdiKts fahrting Act; tbe Pair
lAbor Standards Act: the Longshore-
ma's and Harbor Workers' Clbmpensa-
tion Act; the Wool Products Act; the
Stockyards Act; the «"*^marine Cabies
Act; the Sugar Qnota Act; the Water
Carriers' Act; the PlammaUe PWirics
Act; tbe Electric Utilitiea Act- tha
Atomic Energy Act. and many m<M«.

We heard no qnarrd when those bills
were being considered to this Chamber,
no one raised a voice saying that where
there was a violation of an injunction
there should be a Jury trtai; aH those
provisions were accepted without re-
monstrance, without let or hindrance,
and now we have this sudden outcry.

Mr. BOYLE. Mr, Chairman. wiU the
gentleman yield?

Mr. CKIiER. I yield to the gentle-
man from nitools.

Mr. BOYLE. As a matter of fact an
during the last sessions of the 84th
Congress not one of the great lawyers
who now are tosisting (m the right of
trial by Jury even suggested that such
an amendment should be tooorporated
to tbe civil rights bill. Is not that
right?

Mr. CELLER. The gentleman is cor-
rect.

Mr. BOYLE. Mr. Chairman. wiU the
gentleman yield for a further observa-
tion?

Mr. CELLER. I yield.

Mr. BOYLE. If an amendmuent pro-
viding for a trial by jury was so neces-
sary— certainly its absence would have
been unconscionable — is It not a fair
observation to say that any one or all
of the lawyers to the House who now
are tosisting upon the proviso would
have oome forward and had it in/'in^M
to the bill to the last session of the ft4th
Congress?

Mr. CELLER. Not only that but see
how impossible this law would becoma
if you granted the right of trial by jury
to anyone who would violate the order
of the court There are aU kinds of
orders issued by a court There is the
subpena. which is an order of tbe court,
there is the cubpena duces tecum which
requires an todividual to pro^ice to co\ut
certato documents. In one of these
cases that may be brought or wlU be
brought by the Attorney General there
may be 30 defendants to that one case.
One todividual will say after he has
received the subpena that be questkms
the subpena. Then the court would
say, "You have to testify pursuant to
that subpena." He would say. "I will
not testify, I did not get the subpena."
There it becomes a questtoa of fact. Ha
could demand a trial by Jury to deter-
mine that question as I onderstMid ttaa
proposed Jury trial ftm«mrinrM»*t^

8684

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
fentleman from New York hu expired.
B£r. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
myself 5 additional minutes.

Mr. Chairman, that determlnatlan
might be by another court before a
Jury. If the determination is agajist
him, he could take an appeal to the cir-
cuit court of appeals, then probably to
the Supreme Court.

In that same case another defendant
could say, "I shall appear in court but
I will not answer, I will not submit the
documents tliat were called for by the
subpena duces tecum." The court will
order lilm to produce the dociunents.
He will refuse and the court will then
find him in contempt. He will demand
a jury trial on the question of whether
the subpena duces tecum has been served
or whether it Is proper for him to give
the information that is described in the
subpena duces tecum. That case could
be tried before a jury outside this par-
ticular case, far distant probably. Then
If there is an adverse decision the indi-
vidual could take an appeal again to
the circuit court of appeals, and possi-
bly to the Supreme Court.

There may be 3 or 4 such cases in the
original matter. How long would it take
before the original case has been termi-
nated? You would have nothing but
procrastination, deliberate procrastina-
tion. You would render this whole act
abortive If you can have jury trials at
every twist and turn in the progress of
a case. For that reason I do hope that
men who are faUing for this specious ar-
gument will think twice before they vote
for a trial by jury amendment.

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. CELLER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Louisiana.

Mr. WILUS. I hope the gentleman
did not mean to indicate that we were
advocating an amendment which would
deprive a Federal judge of punishinq for
contempt committed in the presence of
the court or so near thereto as to ob-
struct justice, such as in the case of the
subpena, where he said the man ap-
peared before the court and said "No I
will not produce the bocks." Of course
the court has the power to punish that

SnSuTge "^^ *" "°' ^^""^ ^°' ^''^ '"'^

Mr. CELLER. Suppose he denies there

was the service of a subpena' That is

not in the presence of the court He

«nH h ''^J'iu^^^ ^^^ ^'^"^^ proceedings
and hold the proceeding up Indefinitely
If you would give him a trial by jurj
under those circumstances.

Mr. Chairman, I now yield to the gen-
tleman from Virginia [Mr. Surrn]

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-

8536. of the CoNCREssioN.AL Record t
discussed the subject at lengrhTn de?
I tH.?h'^^ "^^' °' organized lal^rlo

nave as my opponents the gentleman
from New York [Mr. KeatingI and the
gentleman from New York [Mr Ce'lerI
I just want to say a word; I do not
want to be repetlUous. and I do not w^n
to get into that discu&yon. because it
may lead us off the track of what we are
doing today, and I do not wan to get

off the track chasing rabbits, because we
have some other very Important ani-
mals to chase before we get through,
and I want to stick to that But. I
Just want to say this: The Taft-Hartley
Act that these gentlemen contend re-
peals the right of organized labor to a
right of trial by Jury In contempt cases
was passed in 1947. Title XVm of the
Code, which includes section 3692, which
gives labor the right of trial by Jury
In all cases involving contempt was
passed a year later, and I think any-
body that knows anything about law
knows that the latest piece of legisla-
tion on the subject governs.

The gentleman from New York re-
ferred to a decision in which he says
the right of trial by Jury was denied.
Now. that was not a Supreme Court
case; that was a circuit court case, and
the opinion is very brief. It was dis-
missed because it was not a contempt
proceeding, and contempt was in man-
ner involved. But, In that case it was
not a lebor union that was seeking a
trial by jury; it was the employer.

Now. to bring the matter up to date
I would like the record to show that I
referred to the case of Tinder against
United States, decided by the Supreme
Court of the United States and found
in Volume 345 United States Supreme
Court Reports at page 565, which settled
that question for all time.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from New York I Mr. CelukhJ
has again expired.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
myself l additional minute.

I yield to the genUeman from Vir-
ginia [Mr. Smith).

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. It does not
refer to the labor section, but it refers
to another section of title 18 and just
says flatly and conclusively that the
latest law is the law. that title 18 which
was enacted into positive law and which
is later than the Taft-Hartley Act. is
the law. and how anyone can dispute
it. I do not know.

My only reason for raising the ques-
tion IS that the Committee on the Judi-
ciary is the official body of this Con-
gress to revise the Code, and the Code
of the United States is dependent upon
by lawyers, thousands of them all over
the United States, as being the law
which Congress has passed, and which
is the law of the land; and an attack
on the integrity of the United States
Code by the people who revise it seems
to me a very unfortunate situation

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
myself 2 additional minutes in order to
reply to the gentleman.

I am not going to enter into any tech-
nical argument as to the Tinder case
but I am going to place in the Rigged a
complete answer to the contention made
t)y the gentleman from Virginia I Mr
Smith 1 . I am going to put into the Rec-
ord, as my own remarks, a brief entitled

«';^!7o'^^^^^^ ^" Contempt Proceedings
With Special Reference to Labor Injunc-
tions."

I do hope that the Members wiU read
these two documents which are a com-
plete and smothering answer to the con-
tention made by the gentleman from

Virguua iMr. Smith]

The matter referred to la as foUows:

MncoBAjrstrM u Tnton v. U. 8. (846 U. 8. S6S)
Th« genUwnan from Virginia cannot gmln
any comfort from th* opinion In Tinder v.
United States. Tbat caae Involved a sub-*
■tantlv* Chang* In the law relating to thefta
of mall matter by providing a leaaer punlah-
ment where the value was leea than tioo.
The change wae propar Inaamuch aa the re-
vision of title 18, Crimea and CrUnlnal Pro-
cedure. wae considered by the Committee of
the Judiciary which has Jurisdiction of re-
vision of the laws and bills relaUng to Crimea,
and which, of course, may report bills chang-
ing the criminal code.

The intent to make the change was set out
fully In the committee report on the bill a*
part of the revision notes explaining each
section.

The Supreme Court agreed that only a
change in punishment provisions accord-
ing to the value of the theft was Intended
and that there was no Intention to create a
new substantive offense. Recognizing that
the revision notes in the committee report
were incorporated to explain changee In •ut>-
stantive law the court suted: "It would have
been a simple matter for the reviser, or Con-
greea. to have made clear, had such been the
Intent, that ateallng an article or thing from
an item of mall otherwise intact. Is to be
regarded as a less serious offense than steal-
ing the item of mall itself. A highly tech-
nical distinction of this sort, which could
easily have been spelled out. cannot be Im-
posed on the general words "any such arU-
cle or thing" in the concluding proviso of
section 1708.

What the court clearly said and held was
that no further change was intended than
that which was explained in the committee
report. Again the court adhered to the gen-
eral proposition that a codincatlon makes a
change In existing law only to the extent that
a clear Intention to make such a change Is
manifested by the Congress, and the courts
»U1 not infer additional changea.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Juar TsiAus in Contxmpt PaocnoiNoa WrrH
Special RxrEaxNca to Laaoa Imjumc-

TIONS

There Is no constitutional right to a trial
by Jury in either a crUnlnal or civil con-
tempt proceeding (in re Debs. 158 U. 8. 564),

There U a serious question of constltu-'
tlonal law as to whether or not the Congreea
has the power to enact legislation grantlmr
the statutory right to a Jury trial in a dvll
contempt proceeding. The speciffe teue
here is whether or not such an enactment
encroaches upon the equity jurisdiction In-
tended by the Constitution. (See Michael'
»on v. V. S. (26« U. 8. 42).) «'«'*«<*

The Congress first provided for a trial by
jury in a criminal contempt case in 1914
TTie enactment of the Clayton Act (38 SUt!
730) in section 21. provided that one who
wilfully disobeyed a lawful order of a Fed-
eral court by doing any act which also con-
stituted a criminal offense under any
Federal or State statute shall be proceeded
against for contempt. Section 22 of thS
aam- act provided that the accused could
demand a trial by Jury. Section 24 of tha

rx^HtZ^!^"- P^°^"*«* exceptions to the
right of the accused for a trial by Jury la
a criminal contempt; these exceptions were
contempt, committed in the presence of the
court or so near thereto as to obstruct the
admujistratlon of Justice, contempt. coS!
muted in disobedience of any laWful wHt
proce«. order, rule, decree, or command
entered in any suit or action brought or
prosecuted in the name of. or on behalf of.
the United States. '

These sections of the aayton Act. namely,

of Public Law 772. 80th Congress. 1st seas
fli fatat. 864 (1848). 18 U. 8. C. 402. 9295.

8691, (62 Stat. 701) conUlns the subatanca
of these provisions at the present time.

In 1932 the Congress enacted the Norrls-
La Ouardla Act. the act of March 23, 1932
(47 Stat. 70). This act. entitled "An act to
amend the Judicial Code and to define and
limit the Jurisdiction of courts sitting In
equity, and for other purposes", restricted
the power of Federal courts to Issue restrain-
ing orders and Injunctions in certain caMs
Involving or growing out of a labor dispute.
Section 11 of that act provided as follows:
"In aU cases arising under thU act in which
a person shaU be charged with contempt In
a court of the United SUtes (as herein
defined), the acctised shall enjoy the right
to a speedy and public trial by an Impartial
Jury of the SUte and district wherein tha
contempt shall have been committed: Pro-
vided. That this right shaU not apply to con-
tempts committed In the presence of the
coxirt or so near thereto as to Interfere
directly with the administration of Justice
or to apply to the misijehavlor, misconduct,
or disobedience of any officer of the court In
respect to writs, orders, or process of the
court." That provision was contained In
section 111 of title 28. United SUtes Code.
until It was repealed by the act of June 25
1948 (ch. 646, sec. 21. 62 Stat. 862). The
reviser's footnote relating to the repeal la
as follows: "Section 111. set Mar. 23, 1932
(ch. 80. sec. 11, 47 SUt. 72), related to con-
tempts, speedy and public trials by Jury,
and Is now covered by section 3602 of tiUe'
18, Crimes and Criminal Procedtire."

The enactment of section 11 of the Nor-
ris-La Ouardla Act afforded the contemnor
in a criminal contempt proceeding for vio-
lation of a restraining order or Injunction
arising out of a labor dispute as defined
in the Norrls-La Ouardla Act the right to a
trial by Jury in all cases except those here-
tofore mentioned; namely, in the presence of
the court or so near thereto as to constitute
an obstruction of Justice or the disobedience
of an officer of the court In reepect to the
court's orders. ThU provUlon had the ef-
fect of limiting the exception to the right
to trtal by Jury provided for in the Clayton
Act. Specifically, it affected the exception
wherein Jury trial in a criminal contempt
proceeding was not available where the
United States was a party to the original
action. Moreover, the applicability of sec-
tion 11 of thU act was limited. In the con-
ference report (H. Rept. 821. 72d Cong 1st
■««■■. p. 6 (1932)) the statement of the
managers on the part of the House is as
foUows: "The House bill (sec. 11) providea
that in cases arising under sections 3. 4. 6,
6. and 7 of this amendatory act in which a
person Is charged with criminal contempt
of a court of the United SUtes. the accused
should enjoy a speedy public trial by Jury.
The corresponding provision of the Senate
amendment (sec. 12) is broader, in that it
relates to all cases in which a person Is
charged with contempt in a court of the
United SUtes. The conference agreement
applies only to cases arising under the act
under consideration In which a person Is
charged with contempt In a court of the
United States."

In 1935 the National Labor Relations Act
was enacted into law (49 Stat. 449 (1936).
29 U. S. C. sec. 160). The Wagner Act. aa
it is popularly known, provided the Na-
tional Latwr Relations Board with power to
deal with unfair practices, and It further
granted Jurisdiction to the courte In cerUln
case* to enforce the orders of the Board.
WhUe the National Labor RelaUons Act does
not expressly provide for contempt proceed-
ings, they are a corollary of the jiKllclal
power to Issue enforcement orders. In
House Report 1371. 74th Congress. 1st ses-
sion, page 6 (1938), there U the statement to
the effect that if an unfair practice is re-
sumed or continued "there will be Immedi-
ately available to the Board an existing court
decree to serve as a basis for contempt pro-

8685

ceedlngs." In the sections of that act re-
lating to prevention of iinfalr labor prac-
tices, provision Is made for the enforcement
of the Board's orders by petition in circuit
courU ct appeals; jtnlsdlctlon Is conferred
upon the cotirta to Issue temporary re-
straining orders or other temporary reUef,
and to Issue decrees enforcing, modifying
the order of the court. Section 10 (h) of
the National Labor Relations Act of July 6
1935 (49 SUt. 466) provided as follows:
"When granting appropriate temporary re-
lief or a restraining order, or making and
entering the decree enforcing, modifying,
and enforcing as so modified, for set-
ting aMde In whole or In part, an order of
the Board, as provided In this section, the
Jurisdiction of the court sitting In equity
shall not be Umlted by the act entitled 'An
act to amend the Judicial Code and to de-
fine and Umlt the Jurisdiction of courts sit-
ting In equity, and for other purposes ' ap-
proved karch 28, 1932 t&; 8. C. Supp. VIL
title 29, sees. 101-116).'*^ . o PP. vu.

It Is obvious, therefore, that the National
Labor Relations Act (sec. 10 (h) ) waived the
NorrU-La Ouardla Act In Its entirety, as ap-
plied to cases coming within the purview of
the National Labor Relations Act Itself. Not
only were the courte authorised to Issue In-
junctions, which had been banned under the
provisions of the Norrls-La Ouardla Act but
It Is clear from the language of the act and
the sUtement of legislative Intent as con-
tained In the report, that the provisions of
the Norrls-La Ouardla Act would not be ap-
plicable both as to the Issuance of injunc-
tions to enforce the Board's order nor to the
power of the court, sitting m equity, to en-
force such orders of the court. As an equity
court, the court has ancUIary Jurisdiction
to effectuate lU decrees and to prevent them
from being frustrated. (28 U. S. C 1651-
Local Loan Co. v. Hunt (292 U. S. 234) ; Julian
v. Centrca Trust Co. (193 U. 8. 93. 112); Root
V. Woolworth (150 U. S. 401, 410-413)- see
also, Steelman v. All Continent Corp '(301
U. S. 278, 288-289); Dugas v. American Sure-
ty Co. (300 U. 8. 414, 428); Uoore v. N Y
Cotton Exchange (270 U. 8. 693); Looney v.
Eastern Texas B. R. Co. (247 U. S. 214).)

It Is apparent that Congress did not In-
tend the NorrU-La Ouardla Act provisions to
apply to the proceedings arising out of the
operations of the National Labor Relations
Act. Here It should be noted that only a
few years before. Congress had provided lor
the right to trial by Jury In a crUnlnal con-
tempt proceeding arising out of cerUUi la-
bor disputes. Therefore, It Is a reasonable
assumption that when consideration of the
National Labor ReUtlons Act was before the
Congress, It was cognizant of the then-exist-
ing rlghU afforded for a Jury trial In crim-
inal contempt proceedings arising out of
those labor disputes. A fair deduction is
that if Congress had Intended to continue
the right to a trial by Jury In such circum-
stances, It would have specifically so pro-
vided. Yet the clear and unequivocal word-
tog of section 10 (h) of the National Labor
Relations Act (supra) clearly indicates a
waiver of all the provisions of the Norrls-
La Ouardla Act, Including the provisions for
a Jury trial. In cases where the Oovernment
was a party to the original action.

The subsequent legislative history of the
National Lattor Relations Act sustains this
position beyond all doubt. In 1947 the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act was amended by
an act popularly known as the Taft-Hartley
Act (Labor -Management Relations Act, 1947
61 SUt. 136; 29 U. 8. C. 141-188). That act.'
as It dealt with unfair labor pracUces. spe-
cifically section 10 (h) contained the exact
wording of section 10 (h) of the original
National Labor Relations Act; this language
was a complete waiver of aU the provlslona
of the Norrls-La Ouardla Act as to proceed-
ings involving the issuance of injunctions
and the enforcement thereof aa authorized

by the National Labor Relations Act. That
such was the specific legislative Intent la
clearly Indicated In House Report No. 246.
80th Congress, Ist session, page 4S (1947).
"Section 10 (h) remains unchanged In tha
amended act."

The Taft-Hartley Act also provided the
President with authority to seek injunctions
against strike* which imperiled the publlo
health and safety and authorized the At-
torney Oeneral to seek the same, and pro-
vided the authority for the courte to Issue
them. (Sec. 206 (b) of the Taft-Hartley
Act (61 Stat. 156) provided as follows: "(b)
In any case, the provisions of the act of
March 23, 1932, entitled 'An act to amend
the Judicial Code and to define and limit
the Jurisdiction of coiui;s sitting In equity,
and for other purposes,' shall not be ap-
plicable.") Here is the second InsUnce of a
complete waiver of the entire Norrls-
La Ouardla Act. The legislative Intent to tha
effect that the Norrls-La Ouardla Act was
inapplicable to proceedings vmder tha
amended National Labor Etelations Act, la
clearly indicated In H. Rept. 245, 80th Conf.,
1st sess. page 9 (1947) , which sUtes "Second,
the biU arms the President with authority to
seek Injxmctlon. against strikes that imperil
the public health and safety, and authorizes
courte to issue injunctions in such cases
without regard to the Norrls-La Guaitlla
Act."

That same report, on page 43, further
sUtes: "But it also makea the Norrls-
La Ouardla Act inapplicable in suits and pro-
ceedings Involving violations of contracte
which labor organizations voluntarily and
with their eyes open, enter Into. Among
other things, this change makes applicable
in such cases as these the rules of evidence
that apply in suite involving aU other
citizens."

The third indication of the iniqjpllcability
of the Norrls-La Ouardla Act to cases arising
under the National Labor Relations Act, aa
amended, is contained In section 302 (e) of
the act of June 23, 1947. (61 Stat. 158)
Section 302 which makes it tmlawful for an
employer to pay an employee's represenutlve.
and for the latter to accept the same, con-
tains in subsection (e) the following
language: "• • •, without regard to the
provisions of • • •, and the provisions of
the act entitled 'An act to amend the
Judicial Code and to define and limit the
Jurisdiction of courte, sitting in equity, and
for other purposes,' approved March 28. 1932
(U. S. C. tlOe 28, sees. 101-116)." ThU sec-
tion conferred Jurisdiction upon the United
SUtes courte to restrain violations of this
section of the Taft-Hartley Act.

Further evidence of the fact that Congress
was cognizant of the existence of the righte
under the Norrls-La Ouardla Act and that It
was the legislative Intent to waive the Norris-
lA Ouardla Act In regard to cases under the
Taft-Hartley Act, Is found In sUtements
contained In the minority views as set forth
In the report accompanying the blU (supra).
For example, on page 64, "By making prac-
tlcaUy aU strikes unlawful. It repeals the
Norrls-La Ouardla Act, signed by President
Hoover." On page 100. "It grante the district
courte authority to Issue Injunctions, thus
Uklng away the long-sUndlng beneflto of
labor's hard- won righte imder the Norris-
La Ouardla Act. It goes beyond that and
gives the district court the right to Include
provisions In order "to fadllUte the volim-
tary setUement of disputes." This provision
amounte to compulsory arbitration, and If
the parties faU to comply with the provisions
set forth by the court to facilltete the settle-
ment of the dispute, they could lae held In
contempt of cotirt." Page 107, "In 1932 Con-
gress finally passed the Norrls-La Ouardla
Act, which expanded the definition of 'labor
dUpute' and restricted the Jurisdiction of
Federal courts to Issue injunctions in sudi

8686

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

4i

|i

disputes.* Ccrtmlnly H cannot ba maln>
talned on tbe buls of leglalatlTe history that
In enartlng the Taft-Hartley Act Congreaa
meant to pnaarye within Ita provlaions any
of tlM rlchta afforded to labor under th«
prevloualy enacted Norrls-La Ouardla Act.

If artritttonal erldenc* to sustain this con-
tention la necessary, one merely baa to refer
to Conference Report. House Report 510. 80th
Congress, on tbe Taft-HarUey Act. In the
atatement of the managers on the part of
the House, page 67. Is the following state-
ment: "(17) Sections 10 (g). (h). and (1) of
the present act, concerning the effect upon
the Board's orders of enforcement and review
proceedings, making Inapplicable the provi-
sions of the Norrla-La Guardla Act In pro-
ceedings before the courts, were unchanged
either by the House bill or by the Senate
amendment, and are carried Into the confer-
ence agreement."; on page 64. referring to
section 208. Is the following language: "The
Norrls-La Guardla Act was made Inappll-
cable." *^

The history of the enforcement of the
National Labor Relations Act. as amended
affords proof that In contempt proceedings
arising out of violations of court orders en-
forcing the act. there Is no right to a trial
by Jury as had been provided for In the
Norrls-La Guardla Act. In these cases the
Government has been a party to the origi-
nal action and under existing law there is
no rlglit to a trial by Jury, in a criminal
contempt proceeding, and the exception pro-
vld«^d In the Norris-La Guardla Act does not
apply Over the years In the enforcement
Of the National Labor Relations Act, the
Board has rarely petitioned for criminal
sanctions because It considers civil contempt
the more appropriate Instrument for reeu-
latlng the behavior of labor and manaee-
f-tm' ':? ,""• '*'' Instance, where it has
petitioned for contempt citation, the courts
have been reluctant to grant It. preferrlna

th!.l'^°*'"°J' °'" '*** criminal. However
there have been Instances where the Board
has petitioned for both civil and criminal
contempt citations, and the court h« r^
ferred the matter to a master. The absence

theT^if r'^n' " '° "^' applicability of
the Norrls-La Guardla Act. so as to provide

proo'f^^hlt'rH' '^^""^^'-P^ cltatlons.'^u aSo

.: r^H. , ^'™"' Relations Act. If such

at least one cate controlUng. yet no such
ruling case can be found.

That the provisions of section 11 of the
Korrls-La Ouardla Act are limited to thosS

caied by the Supreme Court In Its ri^rui^,,
in Ur^^ted State, v. VnUedM^VwoTkJ^,'''^,
America (330 U. S. 258 ( 1947, , irTfhar '
the union and Its pre^idej were aSjud«d
guilty Of civil and criminal Tontemp^ /nd
fined for violating a temporary re«raimn2
llVrTn '." " T 'y ^^ Oovernmem ?J
were in the possession of and were »>»i„»
E?:c"unve'' T «-"— t. pursuant to'an'

^hou^^r d'ef^drt? rd-Vi^:;:£V-

^y jury before the district coun^'rvenLe"
jtrvTrK?^^' ^^«y urged their right to ^

20B. treated tm^'^t.^* „7, ..^J-^-. - Pa«-

His;ic?^^"--rrS~3

K^^iu-iCVd^Ac?? Br£i^H/^^^
operative here, for ,t appaJToily to cIlT.

he.d that the restriction upon lajunctlons
toposed by the act do not g.vera Ms case
The defendants, we think, were p ope'y

tried by the eotirt without a Jury." The
footnote, set forth the pertinent language
a secUon 11. Footnote 66 stated: "We be-
Ueve, and the Government admits, that tbe
defendants would have been entitled to «
jury trial If section 11 applied to the Instant
contempt proceeding and If the case arose
under the Norris-lA Guardla Act".

In the same case Justice Frankfurter, In a
concurring opinion on page 311. stated:
"And so I Join the opinion of the Court in-
sofar as It sustains the Judgment for crim-
inal contempt upon the broad count of vln-
dlcaUng the process of Uw" (2). Ftootnote
(2) reads as foUows: "Since, In my view, this
was not a convlcUon for contempt In a case
arising under this act the Jury provlalons of
section 11 of the Norrls-La Guardla Act do
not apply. For obvious reasons, the peti-
tioners do not claim that the ConsUtutlon
of the United SUtes affords them a right to
trial by Jury."

It is clear, therefore, that the right to a
trial by Jury as provided in the Norrls-La
GuardU Act was conflned by the wording of
the act Itself to thoee cases arising under the
act.

It has been contended that in the revUlon
and codification of title 18 of the United
States Cede In IMS. at which time that code
was enacted Into positive law. Congress re-
stored the right to a trial by Jury in criminal
contempt cases arising out of a labor dis-
pute. Such a contention Is predicated unon
title 18. United States Code, section 3692
which reads as follows:

"Sec. 3692. Jury trial for contempt In Ubw
disputes.

"In all cases of contempt arising under the
laws of the United States governing tbe Is-
suance of injunctions or restraining ord^-rs In
any case Involving or growing out of a labor
dispute, the accused shall enjoy the right to
a speedy and public trial by an Impartial Jury
of the State and district wherein the con-
temnt shall have been cammlffd

/.nZ!^/f/^''!'° V^*^' ""'^ »PP'y ^ contempts
committed In the presence of the court or £o
near thereto as to interfere directly with the
administration of Justice nor to the misbe-
havior, misconduct, or disobedience of any
officer of the court In respect to tbe writs
orders or process of the court." (June 25'
1948. ch 645. sec. 1, 62 stat 844 ) '

h^^K "^"'"^'^t '"r this contention Is that
by the en-^ctment of the subsequent act

nnn/ Jl P'"'^**^"^-? »hlch was denied to It
under the provisions of the prevlously-en-

;m^n,i h'''2"'' "^"^^ Relation, Art.^
amended. Stress seems to be laid upon th«
fact that section 36P2 t:,es the ph^"e'?n
all cases and the conclusion Is that the
codification Is a new enactment and prlvlfu
over the Taft-Hartley Act. The worSln/oJ
section 3692 of title 18 is practlcaiirvVrbat'm
the wording of sectl.m 11 of the NorrTs S
Guardla Act. The main difference appeaJf
however. In that the Norrls-La Guardla Act

?n^ Jt'-'^IT^' '" "" *^'»" arising un52
this act while the codification employ, the
language "In all case, of contempt arising
under the law, of the United States gov«n!
mg the issuance of Injunctions or restram-
ing orders in any case Involving or growln,
out of a labor dispute." growing

Support for the contention Is based upon
• canon that a later law supersedei^^S
earner one to the extent thaV he^ .rJ
inconsistent. That canon Is true on% in

^'h°h }^'" leglsiauon that cleanly ^
Intended to change .ubstance ^

An examinaUon of the legislative blrtnr^
of Bectioa 3692 of title 18^ Unltl^ £^,2

to mlk. ' '\''** ''^ ^^ l«^"'atlve intent
to make a substantive change in the law
Once again It must be noted that here Co^'
greas in 1948 wa. dealing with a "erj ,nS>°"
^nt ri^ht. namely, t.he rl -ht to trlaTb^J^y
in contempt proceedings arising out of I

labor dispute at itractlcally the same period
of time when it was taking away that right
In 1M7 In at least three specific Instance*,
under the Taft-Hartley Act. The legisla-
tive history of the revision of title 18 as
oontalned In the report does not support
tbe contention that the enactment of section
3662 carried the leglalatlve Intent to change
aubetantlve law. Tbe rerlaer's notee clearly
support that argument. For example, the
reviser's notes as contained In title 18, sec-
tion S603. are as foUows: "Based on section
111 of title 26. United SUtes Code. 1940
edition, Labor (March 23. 1632. cb. 60. sec.
11. 47 SUt. 72)." In other words, section
3862 was based upon the original section 11
of the Norrls-La Guardla Act. In addition,
the revision of Utle 18 speclfU»lIy repealed
that provlalon of the Norrla-LaOuardla Act,
as Indicated by the reviser's note*. Sec-
tion 21 of the revision act Itself set forth a
schedule of the revised statutes which wer*
specifically repealed at the time of Its en-
actment into positive law. Included In that
List, and specifically mentioned. Is the act
of March 23. 1932. chapter 80. sections 11
and 12. volume 47. SUtutes. pages 72 and 73;
title 29. United States Code, sections HI and
112. That elUtlon refers specifically to
secUons 11 and 12 of the Norrls-La Guaidl*
Act. Nowhere Is there any mention made
of any Intent to change substantive law.
The whole effect of such enactment was
merely to transfer from title 26 Into Utle IS
the provision providing for a Jury trial la
criminal contempt proceedings arising out
of certain labor disputes. Indicative of the
fact that 8\ich was the Intent, namely to
merely transfer and not alter subetanUv*
law. Is the comment contained on page 379,
Federal Practice and Procedure Rules Edi-
tion. Barron, volume 4: "Under title 18,
United SUtes Code AnnoUted. section 3802,
a defendant charged with contempt arising
under laws of the United Bute* governing
the issuance of Injunctions or restraining or-
ders growing out of a labor dispute Is en-
titled to a Jury trial. The same exception*
outlined In the next preceding paragraph
also apply here " The reference to the ex-
ceptions in the next preceding paragraph
are as follows: "This section, however, doe*
not require a Jury trial if the contempt waa
commuted In the presence of the court or
so near thereto as to obstruct t.ie admiln-
Istratlon of Justice or. If the contempt con-
sists of disobedience of any lawful writ,
process, order, rule, decree or command of
the court Issued In any suit or actloa
brought or prosecuted In the name of, or on
behalf of the United SUtes." The p^tlcu^
Ur section being referred to In thUlatter
Instence Is secUon 3691 which guarantee*
fJ.'^'VJ"^^ ^°' contempt Which conslaU^
the willful disobedience of any lawfulwrlt

llTr'^-J:^''- °^^"^' ^'^'^ or commands

constitutes a criminal offense under anyT^

in ?hT.".'.°' ""^" '^« '**» ot any Stiu
In Which It was done cr committed ThT
author of that book. W. W.Trm n^uS,
was engaged as chief reviser b?" S?i«»
publishing companies who ^^ empSyed ij

Seu^n:r;:;itarjj;r-'^^°°--"-S

vulved here. The courte ha've l^p^ei? S."
me ;^ P/^^mptlon in a codlflcaUon stift!
ute tha the law u intended to remain sub-
TxUtiT^ "^Changed as a conunuatioro^

terminology do not result in cha^e. to
subsunce nor Impair the prec«lenc. ^luj
Of e.irller judicial decisions and other te-

firm this principle: «• ~

Stru:art y. Kahn (11 Wall. 493, 502 (1871))
Smytnc V. F^ke (23 Wall. 374. 382 (1874)):

1957

McDonald ▼. Hooey (110 U. 8. 619 628
(1884)). •

United StaUa ▼. Ryder (110 U. 8. 729 740
(1884)).

United States w. Siacho (262 U. 8. 168. 168
(1823)).

Walah. ▼. Commonwealth (224 MaH 239
112 N. E. 486, 487 (1916)).

In re Sullivan'a Kttate (38 Ariz. 887. 800
Pac. 193, 196 (1981)).

State ex rel. Rankin ▼. Wibavx County
Bank (85 Mont. 632, 281 Pac. 841. 844
(1929)).

Sigal T. Wise (114 Conn. 297, 158 Atl. 891.
894 (1932)).

Martin v. Dyer-JTane Co. (113 N. J. Bq. 88
186 Atl. 227. 229 (1933)).

Norfolk * Portsmouth Bar Aaan. v. Drewry
(161 Va. 833. 172 8. E. 282. 286 (1634) ).

Sutherland. Statutory ConatructUm (8d
ed., Horack (1943), sees. 8709, 3710).

In this particular tnsUnce, the presump-
tion that the substance of the existing law
was not changed by the enactment of sec-
tion 3663 of title 18, Is strongly buttressed
by the absence of any evidence of a legisla-
tive Intent or purpose to make a subsUntlve
change in the existing law. The enactment
of section 3662, Utle 18, United SUtes Code
did not In any way amend the existing law as
conUlned In the Labor-Management Rela-
Uons Act of 1647 and therefore In any crimi-
nal contempt proceeding arising out of the
National Labor Relations Act. as amended,
there U no right to a trial by Jury.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORP — HOUSE

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
such time as he may care to use to the
gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Sildkn].
Mr. 8ELDEN. Mr. Chairman. I rise
In opi)osition to the measure now under
consideration.

Mr. Chairman, I am extremely con-
cerned over the far-reaching and harm-
ful effects that will almost certainly
result if the legislation now before us
Is enacted into law. This proposal is
unquestionably the most dangerous that
has been considered in the House of Rep-
resentatives since I have been a Member
of this body.

Although the bill is cited as a civil -
rights measure, it will not. in my opinion,
safeguard civil rights. On the contrary.
It will not only undermine civil rights
but, at the same time. It will destroy
time- honored rights of the individual
States. In addition, it entails the spend-
ing of an indeterminate amount of
money at a time when the national debt
Is unbelievably high and the Congress is
In the midst of an effort to reduce the
Federal budget.

Two important safeguards for the
rights of the individual were instituted
by our forefathers when they framed a
constitution for this country— specific
prohibitions against certain kinds of
governmental action and a diffusion of
powers between the Federal Government
and the governments of the individual
States. If we are to maintain a demo-
cratic form of government, then these
long -established principles must be con-
tinued. Yet, the legislation now before
us strikes a lethal blow at those basic
foundations of freedom and democracy.
History teaches us that individual
rights are protected by denying powers
to government, not by Increasing them.
Guarantees against too much govern-
ment and the checking of power by
other power have been the traditional
safeguards of our liberties. Despite
these facts, a measure has been allowed
to reach the floor of the House of Repre-

sentatives which contaUis ivovlsioiu di-
rectly infringing upon those established
and time-tested doctrines. H. B. «127
does not deny power to the Federal Gov-
ernment, as does the Bill of Rights, but
Instead It vests the Central Government
with new powers with which It can op-
press the Individual citizen. Under the
terms of this measure, the Federal Gov-
ernment is given the power to supervise
the States In matters traditionally with-
in the field of State authority.

Our own system of government waa
created In opposition to the Invasion of
local authority by the overwhelming am-
bitions of a distant government. Our
forefathers died to assure their descend-
ants of a democratic government based
on the principle of local autonomy. Most
of the great spokesmen of American lib-
erty from the time of Thomas Jefferson
have Insisted that the Central Govern-
ment be given an absolute minimntri of
power, and that the only safe reposi-
tories of governmental power are those
authorities that are closest to the people.
But Instead of assuring the continua-
tion of local autonomy, the modem pro-
ponents of civil-rights legislation seek to
increase the powers of the Central Gov-
ernment. In the name of liberty, they
support principles which have ever been
destructive of that liberty.

Part I of H. R. 6127 advocates the cre-
ation of a Cwnmission on Civil Rights
for the purpose of investigating the ne-
cessity of civil-rights legislaUon. Yet,
the remainder of the bill proposes the
very legislation whose need is supposed
to be investigated. If an investigation Is
what the proponents of this leglslatlcm
really want, then I caimot understand
why the commission's conclusions are
prejudged. Generally, investigations
produce recommendations which in turn
serve as the basis for remedial legislation.
In H. R. 6127, we create an investigative
body, presume the results of its investi-
gation, and proceed to enact legislation —
all in the same bill. The peculiarity of
this procedure can only raise doubts in
the minds of many as to the real pur-
pose of this investigative commission.

The President already has the author-
ity to create a commission in the execu-
tive branch of the Government, but he
cannot authorize the power of subpena
for such a commission. This power of
subpena, given to the proposed Commis-
sion on Civil Rights under part I of the
legislation, is one that should be Jealously
guarded. Yet it is given, under the terms
of H. R. 6127, to an appointive commis-
sion composed of six men whose only re-
quired qualifications are political.

When investigative commissions are
set up, efforts are usually made to make
certain that the membership is unbiased
or at least of varying viewpoints. The
proposed Civil Rights Commission, how-
ever, has no philosophical standards, no
geographical requirements, and no edu-
cational prerequisites. All six members
can be from the same State and can
have the same opinions on the issues
they are supposed to investigate. Al-
though this may not be likely. It Is a
possibility, and Congress should not leave
broad loopholes of this type In the far-
reaching measure we now have imder
consideration.

8687

Armed with the power of subpena.
this Commission can compel the attend-
ance of witnesses anywhov within a
judicial circuit for the purpose of giv-
ing testimony on an alleged deprivation
of clvU rights. Several States often
comprise a Judicial circuit, making it
necessary for a subpenaed witness to
travel quite a distance to appear at the
Commission hearing.

The accused, as I understand the leg-
islation, must bear the financial respon-
sibility of transporting himself and any
witnesses to the designated place, while
the person or organization making the
allegations will receive $4 daily for their
attendance and traveling time, in addi-
tion to 8 cents per mile for going from
and returning to their place of resi-
dence.

Besides this, the prosecution's wit-
nesses are entitled to an allowance of $12
each day for expenses of subsistence, in-
cluding the time necessary for traveling
to and from the site of the hearing.
This could conceivably result in a tre-
mendous cost to the Federal taxpayer.
Other expenses Incurred by the Com-
mission will Include the payment of the
members of the Commission at $50 per
day for each day of work and reimburse-
ment for necessary travel expenses plus
a per diem allowance of $12 per day in
lieu of actual expenses for subsistence.
In addition, it will be necessary to pay
a full-time staff director and such other
persormel as the Commission deems ad-
visable. There is even more expense
entailed by the provision of the bill per-
mitting the Commission to utilize the
service of voluntary and uncompensated
personnel who must be reimbursed for
travel and subsistence expenses. Actu-
ally, it is impossible to estimate the total
cost of this proposed Commission on
CivU Rights.

Part n of H. R. 6127 provides an addi-
tional Assistant Attorney General who
is expected to be in charge of a new Civil
Rights Division in the DepartmeSt of
Justice. There is no limit in this legis-
lation on the number of attorneys who
can be hired by this new department,
also at great expense to the taxpayer.
In fact. It is my understanding that
when interrograted, representatives of
the Justice Department could not even
estimate the number of persons who
might be employed in this new division.
There is already established in the De-
partment of Justice a civil -rights divi-
sion, fully competent to handle civil-
rights cases. Judging t^r the small case
load reportedly handled by this section,
the appointment of an additional Assist-
ant Attorney General with innumerable
assistants might appear at first glance
to be based on the fallacy that there is
some advantage in creating more Gov-
ernment Jobs. After more careful con-
sideration, however, many have reached
the conclusion that this new division
of lawyers is intended to displace United
States attorneys who are familiar with
local laws and customs.

It Is evident, then, that part n of this
legislation — and I think a reading of the
majority report will emphasize my view-
point— is designed to enable the Federal
Government to Invade all of the States

8688

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

I

and aabdlvlalons In matters relaUnt to
Integration, the field of cdncaiUtan. and
even Interstate and Intrastate matters.
lncludln«r primary eleetten. There Is no
doxibt but that this voold constitute a
fxmstant threat, not only to all State and
local Koremments. but also to Tlrtually
ever7 officer and agent of such govern,
ments.

As we examine H. R. 6127 further, its
proTisions become more and more alarm-
ing. Part m of the bill is enUtled "To
Strengthen the Civil Rights Statutes,
and for Other Purposes." while part IV
Is "to provide means of further securing
and protecting the right to vote." But
the powers granted under parts m and
IV ars far more dangerous than their
titles would indicate. These sections
provide a device whereby State laws.
State courts, and all State officials are
bypassed in deference to the Federal
courts.

Under parts m and IV. Federal judges
would be permitted to Issue injunctions
against anticipated violations of civil
rights and then proceed to punish local
oiBclals and private citizens without any
reference to State remedies. The ac-
cmed violator of civil rights could then
be punished without even the benefit of
trial by jiuy.

In clause 3 of section 2 of article 3 of
OUT Constitution, the framers of that
doomient stated, In the broadest possible
terms, that "the trial of all crimes, ex-
cept in cases of Impeachment, shall be
by Jury."

The fifth amendment declares that no
person shall be held to answer for a capi-
tal or other Infamous crime unless on a
presentment or indictment of a grand
jury, except in cases arising In the land
or naval forces, or In the militia, when In
actual service. In time of war or public
danger.

Amendment 6 of the Constitution
states that in all criminal prosecutions
the accused shall enjoy the right to a
spee^ and public trial, by an impartial
jury of the State and district wherein
the crime shall have lieen committed,
and to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation ; to be confronted
with the witnesses against him; to have
compulsory process for obtaining wit-
nesses In his favor, and to have the as-
sistance of counsel for his defense.

Also. In the seventh sunendment. it is
provided that in suits at common law,
where the value in controversy shall ex-
ceed $20. the right of trial by jury shall
be preserved.

It has been stated by several propo-
nents of H. R. 6127 that the right to trial
by jury In contempt cases is not guai-an-
teed by the Constitution. This state-
ment is correct as far as civil contempt
proceedings are concerned. But. when
the power of Injunction is used as an
ultimate means of depriving persons of
their Uberty without trial by jury, as is
the obvious purpose of H. R. 6127. then
the spirit. If not the letter, of the Con-
stitutional guarantee of jury trial would
appear to be violated. In any event.
Congress in 1914 Inserted in the Clayton
Act a stipulation that whenever an act
charged as contempt of court Is of siich
character as to ecnstitute a criminal
offense under ftoy Atatute of the United

States, or mider the laws of any State,
the person accused should be tried by a
Jury if he lo requests. Congress at the
same time made an exception to this
general rule which provides that the
right to jury trial in contempt cases
should not pertain to suits brought in
the name of the United States. It is
under that exception that the right to
trial by Jury will be denied if H. R. 6127
is enacted into law. This legislation
does not give to individuals the right to
file suit for alleged violations of their
civil rights. Only the Federal Govern-
ment is given the right to file suit, with
or without the consent of the aggrieved
party. Therefore, since the Federal
Government will constitute the plaintiff
in all suits, the right to trial by jury is
conveniently wiped out by this ill-con-
ceived legislation.

Under the general and sweeping lan-
guage of H. R 6127. the Attorney Gen-
eral is authorized to grant relief "when-
ever any person has engaged or there
are reasonable grounds to believe that
any person is about to engage in any
acts or practices ■ which would deprive
any other person of his civil rights. This
bill does not require that any such
deprivation shall have been committed,
or attempted, or even threatened. It
permits the Federal courts to step in
whenever a person is about to invade
someone's rights. But how can the At-
torney General or anyone else determine
when a person is about to do something?
This provision, coupled with the broad
and vaguely defined rights which may
be protected by injunctive relief, vir-
tually gives the Federal courts a blank
check to write new criminal laws, affix
the penalties, and prosecute and punish
offenders without any of the safeguards
that experience has taught us are neces-
sary to preserve individual liberties.

Mr. Chairman, it is obvious that H. R.
6127 is fraught with hazardous provi-
sions. Although we are aware that this
measure is aimed at one particular sec-
tion of the United States, we should not
overlook the fact that its provisions will
apply with equal force to all sections of
this country and can be u^ed to haras.*!,
intimidate, and victimize any citizen
anywhere in this great Nation.

I urge the Members of the House of
Representatives to defeat this extremely
dangerous bill.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman. I yield
myself 2 minutes.

In conjunction with the remarks of the
gentleman from New Yoric (Mr. Cxi-LaRl.
I rather regret that we are not going
fully into this question today of the effect
both of the Wagner Act and the Taft-
Hartley Act on the Norris-La Guardia
Act, because it is perfectly clear that since
the Wagner Act, and since the Taft-
Hartley Act. there has been no right to
a jury trial in any labor dispute case.

I hold in my hand the public law which
was passed in the 80th Congress, the
Taft-Hartley Act so-called, and in this
paragraph it reads exactly the same as
the Wagner Act. It refers to the very
section relating to a Jury trial which is
contained in the Norris-La Guardia Act
and says that:

When grsntlng appropriate temporary re-
lief for a restraining order or making and

«aterlng a decree enfordng. laodtfyli^ and

e:iforclng aa so modlfled, or setting aakle in
vliDle or In part an otttcr of the Board, aa
provided In this section, tiie jurladlctton at
oouru ittttng In equity ibaU not be limited

by the act entitled —

And then follows the long title of the
Norris-La Guardia Act. and then the
specific citaUon: United States Code,
supplement VII, title 29. sections 101 to
115

Section 111 was the one relating to
Jury trials. It Is true that the only case
where thia question has arisen, that T
know of. la the one cited in my remarks
yesterday, which is a decision of the Fed-
eral coiu-t of appeals — National Labor
Relations Board v. Red Arrow Freight
Lines (193 F. 2d 979 (5th clr. 1952)),

When we go back Into the House. I
shall ask to Insert at this point In the
RxcoKo as part of my remarks a portion
of a brief filed by the National Labor Re-
lations Board on this very subject of the
right to a Jury trial in labor dispute
cases. It Is very Informative. It Is per-
fectly clear. It Is somewhat long, but It Is
a clear argument, which was adopted by
the court. Jury trial was denied. It Is
the only case on the subject.
JnxT TaiALs iw CojrmtfT PiocKzoiwoa Wrra

SPZCIAI. RzrXKZMCZ TO L,ABOa iNJUNCnONS

There la no consUtutlunal right to a trial
by J\iry In either a criminal oc clvH contempt
proceeding {In re Deba (158 U 8. 564) ).

There la a serious question of constltu-
tlonai law aa to wbeiher or not tne Congreaa
has the power to enact legislation granting
the statutory right to a Jury trial In a drU
contempt proceeding. The specific Issue bcr*
to whether or not such an enactment en-
croachea upon the equity jurisdiction In-
tended by the Constitution. (See M^c^ael•
iOn w. U S (286 D. 3. 42).)

The Congreaa first provided for a trlnl by
jury In a criminal contempt case In 1914.
The enactment of tlie Clayton Act (38 Stat.
739 » In section 31. provided that one who
willfully disobeyed a lawful order of a Fed-
eral court by doing any act which aUo con-
stituted a criminal offense under any Feileral
or State statute shall t>e proceeded agtlnst
for contempt. Section » of the samr act
proTlded that the accused could demarnl a
trial by Jury. SecMon 34 of the act, how-
ever, provided exceptlona to the right o? the
accused for a Ulal by Jury In a crtnilnal
contempt; tbeee excepitlons were contempt*
committed tn the praaence of the court or
Bo near thereto as to obstruct the adminis-
tration of Justice, contempts committed In
disobedience of any lawful writ, prrceaa,
order, rule, decree, or command entered In
any suit o» action brought or prosecuted In
the nama of. or on t>ehaU of, the United
States.

These sections of the Clayton Act. namely,
sections 31-25. were repealed by section 31
of Public Law 772. 80th Congreaa. 1st session.
63 Stat. 864 (1»48). 18 U. 8. C. 402, 1285.
3691 (62 Stav 701). contains the BUl>stan:e of
these provisions at the present time.

In 1932 the Congress enacted the Ncrrts-
La Ouardta Act. the act of March 23. 1932
(47 SUt. 70). ThU act. entitled "An art to
amend the Judicial Code and to define and
limit the Jurisdiction of courts sitting In
equity, and for other purposea," restr cted
the power of Federal couru to Issue reau aln-
Ing orders and Injunctions In certain <;ase8
Involving or growing out of a labor dispute.
Section 11 of that act provided as follows:
^n all cases arising under this act In whlcb
a person ahall be charged with contempt In
a court of the United States (as herein de-
fined), the accused shall enjoy the right to
a speedy and public trial by an ImparUal

1957

CONGRESSIONAL llECORD — HOU5B

-^n

8689

Jury of the Btato and district wherein tbe
contempt shall have been eommltted: Fro-
vided, That this right aball not apply to
contempts eommltted tn tli« pnnepcn of thm
court or so near tlxcreto aa to Interfere di-
rectly with the administration of Justice or
to apply to the mlsbehavlar, misconduct, or
disobedience of any oineer of the court In
respect to wrlU, orders, or prooeaa of th«
court." That provtaton was contained la
section 111 of title 38, United States Code,
untU it was repealed by the act of June 2fl,
IMS (ch. e4S. sec. 21, 83 Stat. 863). Tbe re-
viser's footnote relating to the repeal to •■
follows: "fiectlon 111. act March 33. 1933
(ch. 90. eec. 11. 47 Stat. 73). related to con-
tempts, epeedy and public trials by Jurj.
and to now oo^wred by section S0M at title
18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure."

The enactment of section 11 of the fforrto-
La Guardia Act aflorded the oontemnor In a
criminal contempt proceeding for vloUtlon
of a restralnlug order or injunction arlali^
out of a labor dtopute as defined tn Uw
Norrto-lA Quardla Act the right to a trial by
Jury In aU cases except those heretofore
mentioned, namely In tlM presence of the
court or ao near thereto as to constitute an
obstruction of Justice or tbe disobedience
of an ofllcer of tbe coin^ In respect to tbe
court's orders. Thto pvnrlslon had the effect
of lUnltlng the exception to the right to trial
by Jury provided for In the Clayton Act.
Specifically. It affected the eaeeptlon wherein
Jury trial In a criminal contempt proceeding
was not available where the United States
was a party to the original action. More-
over, the appUcabluty of section 11 of thto
act was limited. In the conference report
( H. Rept. 831. 72d Cong.. 1st sees., p. 0 ( 1932) )
the statement of tbe managers on the part
of the House to aa follows: ~The House bill
(sec. 11) provides that In cases arising un-
der secUons 3. 4. S, 8. and 7 of thto amenda-
tory act In which a person to charged with
criminal contempt of a court of the United
States, the accused should enjoy a speedy
public trUl by Jury. Tbe corresponding pro-
vision of the Senate amendment (sec. 13)
to broader, tn that it relates to all cases la
which a person to charged with contempt In
a court of the United Statea. The confer-
ence agreement appUes only to cases aiisli^
under the act under eonslderatlon In which
a person to charged with eonteoipt tn a court
of the United Statea."

In 10SS the National Labor RelaUons Act
was enacted Into law (4B Stat. 449 (1958).
29 U. 8. C. sec. 180). The Wagner Act. as
It to pogmlarly knowa. provided tbe Matknial
Labor Retotions Board with power to deal
with unfair practlcea. aiMI It farther granted
jurisdiction to the courts tn certain cases
to enforce the orders of the Board. While
the National Latxv Beiatlons Act doca not
espressly provide for ooctempt proceedings,
they are a corollary of the Judicial power to
issue enforcement orders. In H. R. report
1371. 74th Congreaa. 1st sem. 5 (1935) there
Is the statement to the effect that if aa
unfair practice to resumed or continued
"there will be Immedtotely avaltoU* to the
Board an extottng court decree to serve
as a basis for contempt proceedlnga." la
the sections of that act relating to preven-
tion of unfair-labor practices, provtolon to
made for the eoforeement of the Board's
orders by petition In Circuit Courts of Ap-
peals; Jurisdiction to conferred upon tbe
courts to Issue temporary reatraining orders
or other temporary relief and to Issue decrees
enforcing, modifying the orders of tlie court.
Sec. 10 (h) of the National Labor Relations
Act of July 8, 1935 (49 Stat. 455) provided
as follows: "When granting appropriate
temporary reNef or a restraining order, or
malting and entering the decree enforcing^
modlfylag. and cnCar<^ng im so mn^tttfi^, tor
setting aside In whole or la part, an order
of the Bond, aa provided In thto aectlon.
the JurtodlcUon of the court iltttng 1?
equity shall not be limited by the act en-

Cin 547

titled *Aa act to amend the Judicial Code
and to define and limit tbe Jurtsdletlaa at
courts sltttn^ In equity, and for other pur-
IMses.' approved March 28, Itsa (U. A. O.
•upp.. VXX. tltto 29. seca 101-115)."

It U obvious, thereTors, that the Nattonat
Labor Relations Act (sec. 10 (h) ) waived the
Iforrto-La Guardia Act In its entirety, as ap-
plied to caeee coming within the purview
of tbe National Labor Relations Act Itself.
Not only were the courts authorized to Issue
injunctlona, whl<^ had been banned under
the provtolons of the Norrto-La Ouardla Act.
but It to dear from the language of the act
and the statement of legtolatlve Intent aa
contained In the report, that the {H-ovtolona
ttt the Nonrte-La Ouardla Act would not be
applicable both as to the Issuance of Injunc-
tions to enforce the Board's order nor to the
power of the court, sitting In eqtilty. to en-
force such orders of the court. As an equity
court, the court has ancillary Jurisdiction to
effectuate Its decrees and to prevent them
from being fnistrated. (28 U. 8. C. 1661;
Local Loan Co. v. Hunt (292 U. 8. 234);
Jvtian V. Ctfntrol Trust Co. (198 U. 8. 98,
113); Root V. Woolworth (150 U. 8. 401, 410-
418): «ee also Steelman v. All Continent
Corp. (301 U. 8. 278, 288-280); Duqos v.
i47nerican Surety Co. (SOO U. 8. 414, 428):
Moore v. N. Y. Cotton Exchange (270 U. 8.
C93); Looney v. Eastern Texas B. B. Co. (247
U. 8. 214).)

It to apparent that Congress did not Intend
the Norrto-La Guardia Act provisions to ap-
ply to the proceedings arising out of tbe op-
erations of tbe National Latxn- Relations Act.
Here It should be noted that only a few
years before. Congress bod provided for tbe
right to trial by Jury In a criminal contempt
proceeding arising out of certain labor dto-
putaa. Therefore. It to a reasonable assump-
tion that when consideration of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act was before the
Congreaa, it was cognizant of the then-ezlst-
ing rights afforded for a Jury trial In crimi-
nal contempt proceedings artotng out of
those labor utoputes. A fair deduction to
that if Congress bad Intended to continue
tbe right to a trial by Jury In such circum-
stances. It would have specifically so pro-
vided. Yet the clear and unequivocal word-
ing of section 10 (h) of the NatloiuU Labor
Relations Act (supra) clearly indicates a
waiver of all tbe provisions of the Norrto-
La Guardia Act, including tbe provtolons for
a Jury trial. In cases where the Government
was a party to the original action.

Tbe subsequent legislative history of the
National Labor Relations Act sustains thto
position beyond all doubt. In 1947 the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act was amended by
an act popularly kaown as tbe Taft-Bartley
Act (Labor -Management Relations Act. 1947^
61 Stat. 188; 2S U. 8. C. 141-188) . That act
as It dealt with unfair labor practices, qw*
clflcally section 10 (h) eoatalned the exact
wording of section 10 (h) of tbe original
National Labor ReUttons Act; thto «*ngii»e»
was a complete waiver at all the provtolons
of the Norrto-La Guardto Act aa to procesd-
tngs Invotvlcg the tosuance of tn J unctions
and the enforcement thereof aa authorised
by tbe National Labor ReUtlons Act. That
such was the spedfle legtolatlve latent to
clearly Indicated In H. B. Rept. 245; 80th
<3ongr>aa. 1st session, page 48 (1947). "8ee-
tlon 10 (h) remains unchanged in tha
amended act."

Tbe Taft-Hartley Act also provided th*
President with authority to seek Injunctions
against strtkes which ImperUed the public
Xicalth and safety and auttiorlaed the Attor-
ney General to seek the same, and provided
the authority for the coiu-ts to toue them.
(See. 288 (b) of the Taft-Hortlsy Act (61
Stak 158) provided as follows: "(b) In any
ease, the provisions of the act of March 28,
1882. endued 'An act to amend the Judicial
Code and to define and lUnlt the jurtodlctloa
of coiu'ts sitting In equity, and for other pur-

poses.' shatt not be appbesfale." Here to the
second Instance of a complete waiver of tha
«ntlre NchtIb-Ia Cuatdla Act. The legtola-
tlve intent to the effect that tbe Norrto-La
QuaRha Act was InaijpUcaMe to proceedings
under the amanded National Labor y^rtations
Act. to dearly Indleated tn House Bjeport 248,
«Oth Ooogrsss. Ist session, page 0 (1947),
which states "Second, the bill arms the
President with authority to seek Injunctions
against strikes that Imperil the pubUe health
and safety, and autborlEes courts to issue
Injunctions In such eases wltfaout regard
to the Norrto-La Guardia Act."

•niat same report, on page 43. further
states: "But It also makes the Norrto-La
Ouardla Act Inapplicable la stilts and pro-
ceedings involving vlolattons of contracts
which labor organisations voluntarily and
with their eyes open, enter Into. Among
other things, thto change makes applicable
in such cases as these the rules of evidence
that apply In suite Involving all othw dti-
zenfi."

The third Indication of the Inapplica-
bility at the Norrto-La Guardls Act to cases
arising under the National LabcM- Relations
Act, as emended, to contained In section 302
(e) of the act of June 28, 1947. (61 Stat.
158.) Section 802, which makes It unlaw-
ful for an employer to pay an employee's
representative, and for the latter to accept
the same, contains in subsection (e) the
following language: "• • •. without regard
to the provtolons of • • •, and the provi-
sions <tf the act entitled 'An act to amend
the Judicial Code and to define and limit
the jurisdiction of courts, sitting In equity,
and for other purpoees.* mpffrovM March
23. 1932 (U. a C title 29, sec8. J01-H5).-
Ttila section conferred jurisdiction Upon the
United Statea courts to restrain violations
of thto section of the Taft-Hartley Act.

Further evidence of the fact llMt Congress
was cognizant of the ezlstenos SfOie rights
xmder the Norrl-La Guardia Aet&M^that It
was the legislative Intent to walfffhe Nor-
rto-La Guardia Act in regard to casM und«
the Taft-Hartley Act. to foimd In statements
contained in the minority views aa set forth
In the report accompanying the blU. supra.
For example, on jtage 64. "By tnaking prac-
tically all strikes imlawful. It repeato the
Norrto-La Guardia Act. algned by President
Hoover.** On page 100 "It grants the district
courts authority to tostie Injimctlons. thus
taking away ths long-standing benefits of
labor*s hard-won rights under the Norrto-
La Guardia Act. It goes beyond that and
gives the dtotrlct court the right to Includs
provtolons in order "to facilitate the volim-
tary settlement of dtoptrtes." Thto provislou
amounts to compulsory arbitration, and If
the parties fall to comply with the provisions
set forth by the court to facilitate the settle-
ment of the dispute, they could be held In
contempt of court." Page 107 "In 1932 Con-
gress fhmlly passed the Norrto-La Guardia
Act, which expanded the definition of labor
dispute* and restricted the Jurtsdlctlon of
Federal epurts to Issue injunctions in such
dteputee." Certainly It cannot be main-
tained on the baste of legtolatlve history that
in enacting the Taft-Bartley Act Congress
meant to preserve within Its provisions any
of tba rights afforded to labor under ths
previously enacted Norrto-La Guardia Act.

If additional evidence to sustain thto con-
tention to necessary, one merely has to refer
to Conference Report, H. Rept. 610, 80th
Otmg., on the Taft-Ebrtley Act. In the
statement of the Managers on the part of
the House, page 67, to the following state-
ment: "(17) Sections 10(g), (h), and (1)
of \h9 present act, concerning the effect
upon the Board'k orders of enforcement and
review proceedings, making Inapplicable ths
provisions of the Norrto-La Guardia Act in
proceeding before the courts, were un-
changed either by the House bilj or by the
Senate amendment, and are carried into the

4/

m

8690

CX)NGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECCHWD — HOUSE

8691

'.|

'«

eonfar«nc« agrMment.": on pag» «4. refer-
ring to wctlon 308. U the following language:
•The Norrla-La OuanUa Act waa made In-
applicable."

The history of the enforcement of the
National Labor Relatlona Act. aa amended,
aiforda proof that In contempt proceeding*
arising out of Tlolatlons of court orders en-
forcing the act, there U no right to a trial
t>7 Jury as had been provided for In the
Nonis-L* Ouardla Act. In these cases the
aovemment has been a party to the orig-
inal action and under existing law there Is
no right to a trial by Jxiry. In a criminal
contempt proceeding, and the exception pro-
Tided In the Norrls-La Ouardla Act does not
apply. Orer the years In the enforcement of
the National Labor Rflatlons Act. the Board
has rarely petitioned for criminal sancUons
becaiise It considers clvU contempt the more
appropriate Instrument for regulating the
behavior of labor and management. In the
t few Instances where It has petitioned for
contempt citation, the courts have been re-
luctant to grant It. preferring clvU sanction
over the criminal. However, there have been
Instances where the Board has petitioned
for both civil and criminal contempt cita-
tions, and the court has referred the matter
to a master. The absence of cases In point
as to the applicability of the Norrls-La
Ouardla Act. so as to provide for a Jury trial
In contempt citations, is also proof that
there is no such right under the Labor-
Management Relations Act. If such a right
existed since 1935. there should be at least
one case controlling, yet no such ruling case
can be found.

That the provisions of section 11 of the
Norris-La Ouardla Act are limited to those
cases arising under the act is clearly indi-
cated by the Supreme Coxirt in its decision in
United States v. United Mine Workers of
America (330 U. S. 258 (1947) ) . In that cace
the union and its president were adjudged
guilty of civil and criminal contempt and
lined for violating a temporary restraining
order Issued in a suit by the Oovernment in a
labor dispute arising while the coal mines
were in the possession of and were being
operated by the Oovernment. pursuant to an
Executive order under authority conferred
upon the President by the War Labor Dis-
putes Act. In its ruling, the Court held that
the Norris-La Ouardla Act was inapplicable to
the factual situation before the Court. Al-
though the defendants bad waived an ad-
visory Jury before the district coiurt. never-
theless on appeal they urged their right to a
Jury trial as provided in section 11 of the
Norrls-La Ouardla Act. The Court, on page
398. treated this point ss follows: "We need
not treat these at length, for defendants, in
this respect, urge only their right to a Jury
trial as provided in section 11 of the Norris-
La Ouardla Act. But section 11 is not opera-
tive here, for it applies only to cases arising
under this act. and we have already held that
the restriction upon Injunctions imposed
by the act do not govern this case. The
defendants, we think, were properly tried by
the Court without a jxiry." The footnote set
forth the pertinent language of section 11.
Footnote 69 stated: "We believe, and the
Oovernment admits, that the defendants
would have been entitled to a Jury trial if
section 11 applied to the Instant contempt
proceeding and if the case arose under the
Norris-La Ouardla Act."

In the same case Justice Frankfurter, in
a concurring opinion on page 311. stated:
"And lo I Join the opinion of the court in-
sofar as it sustains the Judgment for crimi-
nal contempt upon the broad count of vin-
dicating the process of law" (3). Footnot«
3 reads as follows: "Since, in my view, this
was not a conviction for contempt in a
case arising under this act the Jury pro-
visions of section 11 of the Norris-La Ouardla
Act do not apply. For obvious reasons, the
peutlouera do not claim that the Constitu-

tion of the United States affords them a
right to trial by Jury."

It Is clear, therefore, that the right to a
trial by Jury as provided In the Norrls-
La Ouardla Act was confined by the wording
of the act Itself to those cases "arising under
the act."

It has been contended that In the re-
vision and codification of title 18 of the
United SUtes Code in 1948, at which time
that code was enacted into positive law.
Congress restored the right to a trUl by Jury
In criminal contempt cases arising out of
a labor dispute. Such a contention Is pred-
icated upon title 18. United SUtes Code,
section 3893. which reads as follows:

"Sac. 3683. Jury trial for contempt In
labor disputes.

"In all cases of contempt arising under
the laws of the United SUtes governing the
Issuance of Injunctions or restraining ordera
In any case involving or growing out of a
labor dispute, the accused shall enjoy the
right to a speedy and public trial by an
Impartial Jury of the SUte and district
wherein the contempt shall have been com-
mitted.

"This section shall not apply to contempU
committed In the presence of the court or
so near thereto as to Inteifere directly with
the administration of Justice nor to the mis-
behavior, misconduct, or disobedience of
any officer of the court in respect to the
writs, orders, or process of the court."
(June 25. 1948, ch. 645. sec. 1, 63 8Ut. 844.)

The argument for this contention Is that
by the enactment of the subsequent act.
namely, title 18, the Congress restored to
labor the right to a Uial by Jury In a crimi-
nal contempt proceeding which was denied
to it under the provisions of the previously
enacted National Labor Relations Act, as
amended. Stress seems to be laid upon the
fact that section 3693 uses the phrase "In all
cases" and the conclusion Is that the codifi-
cation Is a new enactment and prevails over
the Taft-Hartley Act. The wording of 3693
of title 18 is practically verbatim the word-
ing of section 11 of the Norrls-La Ouardla
Act. The main difference appears, however.
In that the Norrls-La Ouardla Act uses the
language "in all cases arising under this
act" while the codiflcation employs the lan-
guage "in all cases of contempt arising under
the laws of the United SUtes governing the
Issuance of Injunctions or restraining orders
In any case Involving or growing out of a
labor dispute."

Support for the contention is baaed upon
a canon that a later law supersedes an earlier
one to the extent that they are Inconsistent.
That canon Is true only In cases of later
legislation that clearly Is Intended to
change subsUnce.

An examination of the legislative history
of section 3692 of title 18. United States Code
Indicates beyond any question of a doubt
that there was no legislative intent to make
a subsUntive change in the law. Once again
It must be noted that here Congress In 1948
was dealing with a very ImporUnt right,
namely, the right to trial by Jury in con-
tempt proceedings arising out of a labor dis-
pute at practically the same period of time
when it was Uking away that right in 1947
In at least three specific Instances, under the
Taft-Hartley act. The legislative history of
the revision of title 18 as conUlned in the
report does not support the contention that
the enactment of section 3093 carried the
legislative Intent to change substantive law.
The reviser's notes clearly support that argu-
ment. For example, the reviser's notes as
contained In title 18. section 3693, are as
follows :

Based on section 111 of title 39. U. S. C.
1940 ed.. Labor (Mar. 33. 1933. ch. 90, sec. 11.
47 Stat. 72)." In other words, section 3693
was baaed upon the original section 11 of the
Norris-La Ouardla Act. In addition, the re-

vision of title 18 specifically repealed that
provision of the Norrls-La Ouar<lla Act. as
Indicated by the reviser's notes. Section 31
of the revision act Itself set forth a schedule
of the revised sututes which wen- specifical-
ly repealed at the time of Its enactment Into
positive law. Included In that la^t. and spe-
cifically mentioned. Is the act of March 23.
1933. chapter 90. sectloiu 11 and 12, volume
47, Statutes, pages 73 and 73: tlUe 39,
United SUtes Code, sections 111 and 113.
That clUtlon refers specifically to sections
11 and 13 of the Norrls-La Oaardla Act.
Nowhere Is there any mention made of
any Intent to change substantive law. The
whole effect of such enactment was merely
to transfer from title 39 Into title 18 the pro-
vision providing for a Jury trial In criminal
contempt proceedings arising out of ceruin
labor disputes. Indicative of the fact that
such was the Intent, namely to merely trans-
fer and not alter subsUntive law, is the com-
ment contained on page 379. Foderal Prac-
tice and Procedure Rules Bdltlon. Barron,
volume 4: "Under 18 U. 8. C. A.. Heotlon 3693.
a defendant charged with conUmpt arising
under laws of the United SUtes governing
the Issuance of Injunctions or restraining
orders growing out of a labor dlipuU la en-
titled to a Jxiry trial. The samii exceptions
outlined In the next precedlnc paragraph
also apply here." The reference to the ex-
ceptions In the next preceding paragraph are
as follows: "This section, howe^er. does not
require a Jury trial If the contem pt was com-
mitted In the presence of the court or so near
thereto as to obstruct the admLnlstratlon of
Justice or, If the contempt conslsu of diso-
bedience of any lawfvil writ, process, order,
rtile, decree or command of the court Issued
In any suit or action brought or prosecuted
In the name of. or on behalf of the United
SUtes." The partlcxilar section being re-
ferred to In this latter Instance Is section
3691 which guarantees a Jury tiial for con-
tempt which conslsu of the willful disobedi-
ence of any lawful writ, process rule, order,
decree or command of any Unlteil States dis-
trict court which also constitutes a criminal
offense under any act of Congress or under
the laws of any SUU In which It was done
or committed. The author of that book,
W. W. Barron. Esq., was engaged as chief re-
viser by the law publishing coir.panles who
were employed In connection wl.h the revl-
slon of title 18 of the UnlUd SUtes Oode.

Finally, the usual canon of construction
hereinbefore mentioned, does no". apply to a
codification sUtuU, such as the revision of
tlUe 18, United SUtes Code, which Is In-
volved here. The courU have upheld the
contrary presxmiptlon In a codlfl-aitlon sUt-
ute that the law is Intended to remain sub-
sUntlally unchanged as a cont:nuatlon of
existing law and mere changes la style and
terminology do not result in char.ges In sub-
sUnce nor ImfMlr the precedence value of
earlier Judicial decisions and othi>r Interpre-
tations. The following authorities affirm
this principle:

Stevart v. Kahn (11 Wall. 493, 603 (1871)).
Smythe v. Fiake (33 Wall. 874. 383 (1874) ).
McDonald v. Hovey (110 U. H. 619. 628
(1884 ) )

United States v. Ryder (110 U. 8. 739, 740
(1884)).

United States ▼. Si$cho (363 U. 8. 169, 168
(1923)).

Walsh, V. Commonwealth (234 Mass. 239,
112 N. E. 486. 487 (1916)).

In re Sullivan's Estate (38 Ariz. 387, 300
Pac. 193,195 (1931)).

State ex rel Rankin ▼. Wihaux Countp
Bank (85 Mont. &33, 381 Pac. 341,344 (1939)).
Sigal V. Wise (114 Conn. 397, 158 Atl. 891.
894 (1932)).

Martin v. £>yer-Jran« Co. (118 N. J. Eq. 88,
166 Atl. 237, 329 (1933)).

Norfolk A Portsmouth Bar Aaa'n v. Drevrg
(161 Va. 833, 173 S. E. 382, 285 (l(i34) ).

Butherland Statutonr Construction (third
edition, Horack, 1948), eectkms 8709, 8710.

In this particular Instance, the presump-
tion that tha substance of the existing law
was not changed by the enactment of section
8693 of tlUe 18, la strongly buttressed by the
absence of any evidence of a legislative In-
tent or purpose to make a subsUntive change
In the existing law. The enactment of sec-
tion 3693, title 18, United States Oode did not
In any way amend the existing law as con-
tained In the Labor-Management Relations
Act of 1947 and therefore In any criminal
contempt proceeding arising out of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act. as amended, ther*
Is no right to a trial by Jury.

As I said earlier, one of the reawms why
jury trial haa seldom been demanded Is
that labor lawyers, so-called, have ac-
cepted as a clear statement of the law
Just what the law said whm It was
passed, namely, that that proviBJk>n was
waived.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the

gentleman from New York has expired.

Mr. KEATINO. Mr. Chairman, I yield

10 minutes to the gentleman from New

York (Mr. MnxKBl.

Kfr. MILLER of New York. Mr.
Cihairman, I think at the outset it might
be stated that in my Jndgment the very
form in which this bin finds itself at this
time is adequate proof of the fact ttiat
even in the great field of civil rights it |s
possible for us here in the Congress to
make mistakes that upon sufficient re-
flection we correct.

You will remember a year ago when
this bill was on the floor of the House
I said I was a great believer in civU
rights, and I repeat that statement to-
day. In the course ot my motion a year
ago to recommit this bill I pointed out
that I did so because I thought in its
then form it would destroy more civil
rights than it would promote. I pointed
out that imder the bill a year ago this
Commission created in this bill could
subpena anyone in this country any-
where and keep him interminably at his
own expense. That has been corrected
in this bin.

I charged a year ago that this bill per-
mitted the Commission created to inves-
tigate loose allegations of unwarranted
economic pressure, and that such eco-
nomic pressure if being exerted on the
ground of religion would mean we would
attempt to legislate in this Congress that
a Catholic publication must hire an
atheist if he appHed for a Job and was
otherwise qtalifled in that field. TTiat
has been corrected in this bill.

I charged a year ago that in an emo-
tion-packed bill such as this the Con-
gress would retain no turisdlction over
the operation of this Commission if we
allowed it to hire an unlimited number
of volunteers to work in this field and to
pay them a per diem allowance. "Diat
has been corrected in this bill.

I charged a year ago that the bill in
its then form permitted the Attorney
General to institute actions in the name
of people who never even asked for or
consented to his action. That has been
corrected in this bill.

Now we get down to the simple ques-
tion, in my judgment, of this matter of
Jury trial. A lot has been said about
this question of Jury trial, which has no
relation at all to the amendment which

I am talking about and to which I re-
ferred when I talked about an amend-
ment to this bill providing for a jury
triaL

I am not talking about these cases in
the Securities and Exchange Commls-
alon or the Atomic Energy Commission
or in any other field of civil contempts
As an illustration, in this bill, as I dis-
cussed with the counsel of the committee
the other day, this commission can sub-
pena a witness to appear and testify. If
that witness fails to appear, the com-
mission can secure the services of tlie
Attorney General to get an Injunction or
an order demanding that that person
Appear before the commission. If that
person does not appear in pursuance to
the court order, the Attorney General
can seek a trial in contempt against that
person. Now I aLi not in favor of a jury
trial In that proceeding. That person
has committed no act which is a crime
under the penal laws of this country.
He has failed to obey a court order and
the court has the right to enforce its
orders In the civil field without a jury
trial But, what I am talking about is
what this bill does in the criminal con-
tempt field. I was not in the Congress
when the Norris-La Guardia Act was
passed. But. if I were. I would have
voted for it because I believe in trial by
jury, when you are trying a man for an
act which is a crime, even though tlie
same act may also be in contempt of
court I was not in Congress when it
was allegedly repealed by the Taft-
Hartley or the Wagner Act. But, I find
no record that anyone then made a
statement on the floor that they were
in favor of repealing the right of labor-
ing people to trials by jury in labor
cases even though that may have been
the legal effect of the passage of the
a?t. Bat, if I had beoi In Congress at
that time, I would not have voted to take
away from labor their right to a jury
trial in contempt cases. Labor is for
this bill — so they say. But, I wonder if
they really understand the precedent it
creates for labor hecAUsc If this is passed
in its present form without a trial by
jury in criminal contempt cases, it means
that at some future time it may be al-
leged that you cannot get a conviction
of a laboring man in, let us say, laboring
Pennsylvania because of the fact that all
of the jurors would be members of a
labor union. 8o, therefore, you enjoin
laboring people from committing assaults
or blowing peoples' houses up. all of
which are crimes and for which they
may be indicted and get a jury trial, but
you may restrain them by inj;iTM»,tion
from doing those things, and then when
they assault someone you send them to
jail not for an assault but for contonpt
of court, and they go to jail for the
same act which constitutes a crime, but
without a jury trial. It is alleged, and
it has been alleged aU the time that this
bill creates no new rights, and that is
correct. But, If It creates no new rights,
it creates no new wrongs. What it does
do is to give the Attcnney Geceral of
the United States tbe right to proceed
against tDdirldual Americans In two dif-
ferent ways for the same act. Httier
he may indict and try before a jury or

he can get a restraining order and then
try In contempt without a jury trial at
all the same individual for the same act
which he now has all the authority in
the world under existing penal code to
try, prosecute and convict, if guilty, in
this country without this legislation.
What worries me about this question is
this. We are talking about the fact that
there is no precedent in these cases be-
cause under the law of this country,
and it always has been the law where the
United States is a party to an action,
there shall be no trial by jury.

Now, that is true, but because there
have been abuses in the labor field at
one time it was provided that even in
that field, where the United States was a
party, there would be a jury trial. Now
we are legislating in a new field. If I
had my way, I would be la favor of legis-
lation which would provide that in all
cases of criminal contempt there shaU be
a jury trial— in all cases. But, in any
event, we are now legislating in a new
field. I say that we have the right, and
It seems to me the duty to see. If there is
no precedent in this field, that we estab-
lish ore, to make sure that the Attorney
General cannot proceed against individ-
uals for the same act for which he might
proceed against them today, but in a
way which permits him to circumvent
the trial by Jury requisite. If you follow
the theory and philosophy of this bin to
Its logical conclusion, it could mean that
In every single case regarding all the
penal statutes of this country we might
provide a method by which the Attorney
General can reach the same individual
for the same act. Thus, we would give
the Attorney General the power to pro-
ceed against individuals which would put
them in Jail to rot, the very thing which
we fought to establish our indQ)endenctt
from in this country.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, win the
gentleman yield?

Mr. MILLER of New York. I yield.

Mr. CELLER. It does not f oUow that
the action that constitute contempt
must necessarily be a crime. It could be
a tort.

Mr. MILLER of New York, I am talk-
ing about my amendment, which I have
in mind, which relates only to criminal
contempt, and, as defined tn the statute,
only those acts which are today a crime.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentlemem from New York has expired,

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chahman, I
yield the gentleman 3 additional min-
utes.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. wiU the
gentleman yield further?

Mr. MIUER of New York. I yield.

Mr. CELLER. I understand, then,
you are contemplating offering an
amendment limiting this matter to crim-
inal contempt?

Mr. MILLER of New York. That is
aU. Just for those acts which today con-
stitute a crime.

Mr. CELLER. As defined in ttUe 18?

Mr. MILLER of New York. That is
correct.

Mr. KEATINO. Mr. Chairman, wffl
the gentleman yield?

Mr. MIUiER of New York. I yield.

Mr. KEATING. There is nothing im-
QBual. is there, in providing tiwt ttw

'm

m

8692

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

If

same acts might give rise to a prosecu-
tion for a crime, or an Injunction pro-
ceeding to restrain the continued com-
mission of those acts? Is that not some-
thing which is common, not only in the
Federal Jurisdiction but in the State of
New York?

Suppose you and I walk out and you
hit me as we are going across the street
and I do not like it, but I swallow that,
and the next day you hit me again and
I do not like that. I have two remedies.
I can go to the District Attorney and
have you charged with assault, or I can
bring an action in equity for an injunc-
tion to stop you from continued assault.

Mr. MILLER of New York. You can.
and if you do I get a jury trial.

Mr. KEATING. Not in the injunction
suit.

Mr. MILLER of New York. Yes.

Mr. KEATING. Then, if you hit me a
third time, in that case you are in con-
tempt of court, and there is no jury trial
In such a case.

Mr. MILLER of New York. Under the
Federal Jurisdiction, if you are the
plaintiff, there Is now.

Mr. KEATING. I am talking about
New York State.

Mr. MILLER of New York. It does not
make any difference. The proceeding
which you are talking about would be
for the District Attorney to get an in-
junction for you? There is no such pro-
ceeding as that.

Mr. KEATING. You can bring an ac-
tion against continued wrongful acts.

We have cases time and again of ac-
tions in a court of equity in the State of
New York where an act is sought to be
enjoined which may in addition be a
crimmal act, but it may be that the com-
plainant rather than proceed criminally,
wanted to proceed by injunction in order
to restrain the continuation of the act
before it took place. In the event,
after the court issues an order restram-
ing that action from taking place some-
one defies that order, the one defying It
has no right to a Jury trial.

Mr. MILLER of New York. I am not
talking at all about the injunction pro-
ceedings. In other words that is one
reason why the Attorney General wanted
this particular legislation because of the
haste he claimed was necessary. I am
not talking about that because under my
proposed amendment there is no prohi-
bition or objection at all to the Attorney
General getting his temporary injunc-
tion or getting his permanent injunction
eventually. All we are talking about
here is what happens when the defend-
ant is brought into court for his trial
for the violation of a court order. Then
what has haste got to do with whether
he has a trial or not?

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from New York has again ex-
pired.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I yield
the gentleman five additional minutes
and ask him if he will yield to me.

Mr. MILLER of New York. I yield.

Mr. KEATING. If on the eve of elec-
tion an effort were made to interfere
with an election, and an injunction was
sought to restrain such Interference, it
would result in undue delay amounting
to a denial of justice if a jury had to be

Impaneled and the man tried by a Jury,
because in the meantime the election
would have taken place and the question
would be moot.

Mr. MILLER of New York. He would
have to be charged with being guilty or
he would not be in court at all.

Mr. KEATING. He would not be In
court without having been charged.

Mr. MILLER of New York. But he
would have been charged already with
committing the crime.

Mr. KEATING. The court would act
to restrain him or prevent him from do-
ing something. Then if he continued
and you had to impanel a Jury to de-
termine whether or not he was guilty,
the election would be over and your
whole question would be moot.

Mr. MILLER of New York. That does
not in my judgment follow at all. In
other words, once you get him into court
theoretically the speediness of the trial
loses significance. At that point when
you go into court and he is standing
trial the question is how long is the trial
going to take. I am thinking of pro-
crastination. Why. a defendant could
take days even without a Jury in sub-
mitting all kinds of evidence for the
defense if he wanted to. To my mind
that does not reach the problem at all.

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Chairman, does the
gentleman yield?

Mr. MILLER of New York. I yield.

Mr. WILLIS. I think the gentleman
has made a very clear and penetrating
statement. I was intrigued in connec-
tion with one passage of his argument.
Let me see if I followed the gentleman
correctly. The gentleman argued, did
he not, that under this bill a man
charged with criminal contempt could
be sent to jail by a Federal judge with-
out a jury. Now, suppose that for one
reason or another the district judge
held him to be not In contempt: then,
under the same facts he could still be
prosecuted, could he not?

Mr. MILLER of New York. That is
right.

Mr. WILLIS. Is not that in essence
double jeopardy, putting his liberty twice
in jeopardy''

Mr. MILLER of New York. Except
that it Ls a violation of two different
statutes.

Mr. WILLIS. That is correct, two dif-
ferent statutes, but there would be no
such situation under present law; it is
what could happen by virtue of the pas-
sage of the bill now before us.

Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield'!'

Mr. MILLER of New York. I yield to
the gentleman from South Carolina I Mr.
RivtRS ! .

Mr. RIVERS. Under the gentleman's
amendment, would the defendants in the
Clinton case be entitled to a Jury trial
notwithstanding the United States was
an original party to the proceeding?

Mr. MILLER of New York. Yes; they
would.

Mr. RIVERS. Under your amend-
ment?

Mr. MILLER of New York. Yes.

Mr. RIVERS. And in the school cases
under the unconstitutional opinion given
by the Supreme Court, if they got an in-
junction against an entire community.

under this bill the entire ccmraunlty
could be put in Jail for violation of the
Injunction. Under your amendment
every one of them would have the right
to a Jury trial?

Mr. MILLER of New York. If the act
which It is alleged they did which vio-
lated the injunction is also an act under
the laws of the United States Govern-
ment.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. MILLER of New York. I yield to
the gentleman from New Yoik.

Mr. CELLER. I wonder wf.ether the
gentleman will put in the Record the
amendment that he contemplates offer-
ing?

Mr. MILLER of New York. Yes; I will
be glad to.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
10 minutes to the gentleman from Illi-
nois (Mr. Boyle).

Mr. BOYLE. Mr. Chairman, the com-
mittee has listened patiently to the de-
bate for these several days, and off of the
record of all of the individuals who have
taken ttie floor and who have spoken on
this very serious piece of legislation, It
is patent that there is a terrifDc amount
of talent in the House of Representa-
tives. I would be uncomplimentary to
anybody's powers of perception if I at
this late date was to assume even by in-
ference that I probably could add any-
thing new to that which has already
been stated. The ground has been very
well covered. Brilliant addresses, bril-
liant remarks, brilliant questions have
punctuated all of the debate. What we
have seen on the floor here today has
further demonstrated the excellence and
the brilliance of the Individuals who
compose this great body.

I believe there is one observation,
however, that has not been concurred in
yet and I want to record my agreement
in It at this time. When my very good
friend, Mendel RrvERS, said that if a
man is In jail he is in Jail, the gentleman
uttered a very profound philosophical
observation, because under the principle
that a thing can be and cannot be simul-
taneously I do not think anybody is going
to quarrel with the factuality of that
remark.

I had the honor of serving here in the
last session. I further had the honor of
being a member of the Judiciary Com-
mittee. As a member of the Judiciary
Committee I was on section 2. the section
that heard all of the testimony and all
of the witnesses on the bill covering the
civil rights bill in the last session. On
that committee was the fine gentleman
from Georgia, Mr. Forrester: the great
lawyer from New York. Mr. Miller; and
those very fine and equally brilliant law-
yers, the late Chauncey Reed. Mr.
Burdlck, Mr. Donohue; and the chair-
man. Thomas Lane. It is truly remark-
able how much you learn to respect
and to accept and to appreciate people's
viewpoints when you sit with them day
after day after day and see the workings
of their fine legal minds.

Mr. Chairman, If civil rights means
anything generlcally. It means merely
the protecUon of the rights of all Indi-
viduals, particularly minority groups, to

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8693

security, to liberty, and to vote as Amer-
ican citlEens. That, simply. Is pretty
much just what the area of ciyil rights
encompasses.

We all know, and It has been heard
several times — yes, a dozen times — that
the first 10 amendments to the Consti-
tution are restrictive on Federal activi-
ties and that the subsequent amend-
ments are restrictive on State activities.
When you talk about the 13th amend-
ment and the 14th amendment and the
15th amendment, you are talking about
legislation that limits and characterizes
the rights of States, so that when we
view the 15th amendment, we see it
guarantees the right of people every-
where in the United States to vote, ir-
respective of race or creed or color or
servitude or sex.

Under all of the cases Interpretating
and adjudicating this amendment the
Supreme Court has a right to enunciate
what constitutes and Ls the supreme law
of the land. The weight of authority Is
the 15th amendment, is self -executing,
and Inherently has all the elements to
effect its design and purpose.

The present civil-rights bill reiterates,
codifies, and reenunciates the right of
everybody in the whole United States
to security, to liberty, and to the right
to vote. When you weigh this bill you
are talking about a bill that is ordinary,
matter of fact, and reasonable as any
civil-rights bill could be drafted. Per-
sonally. I do not think it goes far
enough, but It Is not for me to work my
will on the subcommittee or on the full
Judiciary committee or on the House.
I merely say that if you want to be
honest and if you want to talk about
this bill, you have to talk about it in
connection with the guaranties of the
15 th amendment. Tou all know the
rights created by the 15th amendment
have corresponding duties which devolve
upon everybody. Let us now draw back
aghast and be unduly worried with an
individual or a group of individuals who
will not appreciate or honor the guaran-
ties of freedom of voting and who are
unmindful of the duUes that the 15th
amendment imposes on all of us. Con-
tained In this bill Is civil remedy for the
enforcement of civil rights. There are a
lot of valid reasons for the need of this
bill. The area of clvU rights, looking
at It from my background, my pedigree,
and my Judgment fortified by 3 years of
study, research, and testimony of a great
number of witnesses, indicates that from
time to time the civil rights of people
have not been fully protected and pre-
served. The need for better enforce-
ment or a better firming up of the
guaranties of the people under the Con-
stitution of my work on the commit-
tee was demanded. A civil remedy ap-
pears more effective and workable like
a criminal remedy, because there a lot
of wonderful people, honest as the day
is long, who have different philosophies
and different viewpoints about civil
rights making criminal prosecutions
hard to secure and somewhat ineffectual.
And, that is all well and good.

The testimony developed that under
existing law. you have to firm up the
15 th amendment You have to make U

more articulate so that it means to
everybody in all sections of the country
Just what the law sasrs in Its very words.
No Justifiable objection exists against
having the rights protected by a civil
proceeding. It is not nearly so harsh
in a civil proceeding which finds the per-
son or persons going to the Attorney
General and registering complaint under
oath that their rights are being injured
or taken away or abridged or are about to
be taken away or abridged. What hap-
pens then? The Attorney General ex-
amines the phjrsical facts and sees
whether predicated upon existing law
and the verified physical facts, a case is
made out. If the Attorney General is
satisfied that it does, he files an applica-
tion for an injunction in court. The
court in its wisdom, looking at the four
comers of the petition for an injunctive
writ, passes upon the sufficiency of the
recitals. If the injimction issues, the
individual is served with an injunction
writ restraining him— from what? Re-
straining him from not recognizing and
appreciating and g\iaranteeing another
American's rights.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BOYLE. I yield.
Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. I would
like to ask the gentleman this question.
I have studied that provision in refer-
ence to injunctive relief. I notice no
restrictions at all on the injunctive order
which the court may issue. Does the
gentleman construe that, as Z do, that a
Federal Judge, sitting here in the District
of Columbia could issue an order pro-
hibiting the doing of certain things on
suspicion that there might be some
chance of the law being violated, and
that that would be binding upon a man
in California, or a man in Louisiana, or
a man in Maine or a man. let us say. in
Minnesota? Is that the construction
the gentleman places on it?

Mr. BOYLE. I would say no. I would
say merely to the gentleman's hypothesis
that no injunction writ should Issue.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. What
limitation does the gentleman place on
the judge?

Mr. BOYLE. I think any injunction
that ts predicated solely on information
and belief does not meet the true test for
injunctive relief.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. Does not
the gentleman construe this wording to
mean that the order issued in the Dis-
trict of Columbia would bind anyone in
California Just as well?

Mr. BOYLE. No ; I do not. As a mat-
ter of fact, I do not think the language
indicates that at all. I do not think the
District of Columbia is the place where
you would make your application for an
alleged infraction that is taking place
somewhere in a Judicial district.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. There is
no restriction in the bill.

Mr. BOYLE. I think there is.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. I could
not find it. I would be glad if the gen-
tleman would point it out to me.

Mr. BOYLE. I think there is.

Bir. BROOKS of Louisiana. Will the
gentlemuupoint It out?

Mr. BOYLE. I cannot take the time
at this moment to do that.

Mr. McCULLOCH. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOYLE. I yield to the gentle-
man.

B(r. McCULLOCH. I think the Code
of Civil Procedure beyond any question
wil answer the question of the distin-
guished gentleman from Louisiana [Mr.
BkooksI.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. The Code
of Civil Procedure is not a part of this
statute.

Mr. McCULLOCH. I know, but the
courts are bound by the Code of Civil
Procedure. And, in addition, I am sure
that the gentleman will agree with me
that this would not he the proper forum
In which to bring a defendant into court,
and he could not be brought into court.

Mr. BROOEZS of Louisiana. I would
say it is not the proper forum; there is
no question about that.

Mr. McCULLOCH. This fonun would
not have jurisdiction, and therefore, in
my opinion, could not issue a valid order
If it were challenged.

Mr. BOYLK That is my understand-
ing, and I thank the gentleman very
much.

Mr. McCULLOCH. I refer the distin-
guished gentleman from Louisiana to
paragraph (d) of rule 67 of the Civil
Rules of Procedure.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. I did not
find it as clear as the gentleman seems
to think it is.

Mr. BOYLE. Let this record indicate
that I am a firm believer in the right
of trial by jury in criminal cases. The
right to a trial by Jury in criminal cases
represents a 700-year struggle for
himian rights and I would be the last
one to impose any roadblocks or to do
anything that would diminish those
rights. However, if you are going to en-
cotirage the three branches of our Gov-
ernment to be separate, distinct, and co-
extensive, you must agree that you can-
not tie the hands of a court, especially
since the l^al decisions from time out
of memory have enimciated and re-
enunciated the inherent right of the
courts by contempt proceedings to take
care of their decretal orders, to take care
of Infractions against their dignity.
Thus the reason for the rule every court
shall have power to compel obedimce to
its lawful Judgments, orders, and proc-
ess. When an individual is brought into
court, for violation of an injunction pre-
viously issued against him restraining
him from interfering with a person's
right to vote, he has a perfect right to
appeal that order if he wants to. but so
l(mg as the injunction order is on the
books unchanged or unmodified, then
the man is right within almost the
presence of Uie court. If an individual
wants to arbitrarily ignore the injunc-
tion which says. "You shall not inter-
fere with the rights of Mr. 'B'." thMi of
course he acts at his peril. And what is
so shocking or unconscionable about
sentencing an individual who fiagrantly
violates the order of the court being ad-
Judged In contempt? Absolutely noth-
ing.

If time p^-mitted, I would like to go
throiigh this brief of 176 pages which
details what the law of iiUuncUons is
obtaining in almost every State. Very

•■?§

8M4

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

S695

^

few States afford the eontemnor a
trial by Jury.

Wben this bill came up on the floor In
the last session of Congress none of the
lawyers in my subcommittee raised the
point of trial by jury because they knew
that the right oi the court to enforce
lt« own Injunetioo decrees was a right
that was part aiul parcel of the Im-
primatur or the sanction of a court. If
you take that right away from the courts
of course you are tying the court's
hands. But in addition to that, to ac-
cept the position of the opponents of this
bill you have to assume that the execu-
tive branch of this Government will not
do its level best with its responsibilities,
which are care, obedience, loyalty, and
duty to account: but assuming that is
not the case, transmitting that fact, ycu
still have to go a step further, and as-
sume that the judiciary of this great
country, the judges that constitute the
Federal courts, are not going to be able
to look at this problem and render a
decision under a rule to show cause
why a person should not be held in
contempt of court. In a proceeding of
this character the question is : Has the
order of the court been violated?

I submit that the amendment for a
jury trial is an afterthought. I submit
that although I believe in a jury trial
In criminal cases. There is a real differ-
ence between a crune under a statute
and criminal contempt proceedings.
The issues are not the rame. The fact
that a fellow wants to arbitrarily Ignore
and contravene the order of the court
and ends up in Jail is far different from
the case where the individual commits a
crime — against the United States be-
cause he is guaranteed the right of a trial
by Jury. In no instance where the
United States is a party do you have the
right of a trial by Jury m pure injunction
cases.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. BOYXE. I yield.

Mr. GROSS. I have sat here for sev-
eral days and have tried to listen with
an open mind to this discussion of the
pros and cons on the question of jury
trials. I am becoming more and more
convinced, since it appears there are no
two lawyers — or at least not much more
than two lawyers in this body who can
agree on this thing that, perhaps, the
best thing we can do is to put a provision
in this bill for a jury trifil and leave it to
12 good men and true to decide.

Mr. BOYLE. In answer to the gentle-
man. I say he is one of those individuals,
whom I referred to earlier, with all kinds
of talent, and when he makes observa-
tion after listening with as open a mind
for all of these days, he comes to that
opinion, I respect him for making that
observation. I say I think it would be
a shame if we burdened this legislation
with trial-by-jury amendment solely be-
cause I have not made myself clear. The
courts have a right always to punish for
contempt and they should not have to
get the opinion of 12 good men and true
when they adjudicate to the simple ques-
tion of whether or not there was in fact
a violation of a court order.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman has expired.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chainnao. I yield
such time as he may care to use to the
gentleman from Louisiana IMr. Loa«].

Mr. LONG. Mr. Chairman, much has
been said here today about the conatitu-
tlonahty of this bill. It has been tu-gxied
that this measure will not take away
any of a person's rights for trial by Jury
In criminal cases. Yet this law is a re-
draft of a criminal law.

One of the fundamentals to me In our
Constitution Is a guaranty of the right
of trial by jury. In my humble opinion,
if this bill is passed, and there are many
good lawyers who believe as I do, you
will And that men will be brought into
court and tried without the rights of
trial by jury having been preserved.
They would be sentenced to jail and
forced to serve sentences. This is sup-
pose to be a civil-rights law.

In my State of Louisiana, we have no
objections to any man. regardless of
his race or color, voting. Of course, we
have laws that are applicable to both
races and if an individual qualifies under
the laws, he is entitled to vote. There
miirht be -instances in communities
where mor^* %-hue people qualified to
vote than there are colored, but there
mi^ht be more colored people in another
community qualified to vote. The re-
lationship between the white man and
the colored man in our State is very fine.
The colored man has his schools and
his communities, and he is happy with
them. The only trouble that we are
having in Louisiana are cases m which
some interloper NAACl* group or other
orKanization of that kind comes in and
stirs up strife and hatred in what was
otherwise a friendly relationship be-
tween the two races.

Again. I want to say that I believe I
know a parallel case as far as the civil
rights of a man are concerned.

As I said before, they are saying that
a man will not be denied his rights to
trial by jury under this law.

On June 30. 1955. we had under con-
sideration in this House of Representa-
tives a bill which would have made it im-
possible for our Government to enter Into
treaties whereby our boys could be tried
in a foreign country. It was argued then
if a man was on the grounds occupied by
our troops, where he was entitled to be
and m line of duty, that he could not be
snatched and tried in a foreign country,
and very likely an unfriendly coiirt.

Yet, I would like to cite a case now
that, regardless of the argument made
here back in 1955, has happened today.
William S. Girard, of Illinois, is today
facing a trial by a Japanese court.

Maybe it would be well to remember
just a few things about Japan. A few
years ago, as everyone here remembers,
Japan made a sneak attack on Pearl
Harbor. Today, hi the hull of the U. 8. 8.
Arizona lying at the bottom of the Pacific
Ocean at Pearl Harbor, there are 1.102
good American boys as a result of this
sneak attack. Twenty-four are from my
home State of Louisiana and four from
my district.

Knowing the temper of the Japanese
and how anxious they are to get hold
of this American soldier lor trial makes
one's Uood run cold. If Girard Is turned
over to Japanese courts, then his rights

under tlM OoastUutlon will be denied him
because in Japan they have no trial by
Jury. This man. because of an accident,
will probably be allowed to rot in a Jap-
anese Jail — fed to the wolves, as It were,
by our diplomats. Why? Because they
say that it is imperative that we main-
tain good relations with Japan.

How many mothers whose sons are on
foreign soil and serving their country will
understand that their sons will not be
sacrificed on the altar also for diplomatic
relations?

I repeat, this case is parallel to the
issue now under consideration.

The problems which ari5e from a bi-
raeial society are many and cannot be
solved by passing a law or takmi^ a posi-
tion one way or the other on one of
these several vital issues. We In the
South with its large Ne?ro population,
through many years of contact, have
learned the colored man's ways and he
has learned ours. To say that a man in
New York, where the Negro population
is 6 percent, would know as much about
this problem as a man in Louisiana where
the population is 33 percent, is not speak-
ing realistically.

One cannot understand these problems
by mere observation. We in the South
have had actual contact with the situa-
tion. I firmly believe that if we let each
State handle its own civil rights, there
will be no insurmountable di£Bculty or
trouble.

In my opinion, and in the opinion of
many who have had an opportunity to
observe firsthand the progress of the
Negro in the South, vast improvements
have been made in his lot. I do not be-
Ueve that anyone feels the questions
which have arisen and which confront a
biraclal society have been answered, but
tiie important thing is that great and
consistent progress has been made to-
ward the solution of these problems.

In a biraciai society .such as we now
have m the South the Negroes have their
own professional men and own business-
men, their own working groups, their
own organizations, churches, associa-
tions, and so forth, which are doing well
and which are making steady advance-
ment and improvement.

In the great State of Louisiana our
election laws permit equal opportunity
to both Negro and white voters. Ehirlng
the tenure of my brother, the late Huey
P. Long, as Governor of Louisiana, we
abolished the poll Ux long before there
was any aglUUon In this matter. When
the children of the SUte of Louisiana
were given free schoolbooks, those same
free schoolbooks went to Negroes with-
out discrimination. For many years the
SUte of Louisiana has given free
lunches to schoelchildren, both Negro
and white. There are many fine achoola
in Louisiana for Negroes and the oppor-
tunity for eelf-lmprovement In our
SUte Is exceedingly great for Negroes.
The problems that do exist can best be
solved in the local areas by the people
InTolved who havt to lire with these
problems and who therefore understand
them better. Aggressors who go into
southern areas from other sections of the
oonntry clearly for pollUcal purposes do
not have an understanding of the pnob*

lems which exist and operate In the

South.

With respect to integration in our
schools, I hare said in the iMtst, and re-
peat here today, both the white and
Negro races are satisfied with the exist-
ing situation and the only exception Is
that small group which aggravates the
clrcumsUnces and creates dissension.
The colored people In the SUte of
Louisiana have their own sections in the
towns and cities, and are happy and con-
tent to sUy there in those areas which
they have gravitated to and which are
established as their part of town. These
communities have their own churches
and recreational facilities. Negro busi-
nessmen and professional men operate
in these communities very successfully.
To disturb these arrangements would
not Improve the relationship between
the white and Negro races In the South
and would generate hatred, strife, dis-
content, and economic hardship which
presently do not exist.

For the Federal Government to In-
trude by stepping behind SUte lines vio-
lates the principles of States* rights. The
people in Louisiana, my home SUte, and
I am sure the same Is true in other
SUtes, feel that the rights in the Indi-
vidual States begin at the border of the
SUte and that the SUte Legislature and
SUte police power can and should regu-
late their school systems. As a firm be-
liever in SUtes rights, I strongly oppose
any attempt to pass legislation which
strives to force mankind to alter his
mode of life as based on custom, tradi-
tion and personal beliefs.

Mr. CELLER Mr. Chairman. I yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from Cali-
fornia IMr. Roosevelt J.

Mr. ROOSEVELT, lii. Chairman,
like the other ladles and gentlemen who
have sat through these almost 3 days of
debate. I think, perhaps, some of us who
are not lawyers can now for the first time
appreciate how It is possible to get a
5 to 4 Supreme Court decision. I cannot
help, however, from remarking that as
the debate has proceeded on the tech-
nical arguments, the legal arguments
that have to do with the right of Jury
trial, hardly a word has been said here
as to the fundamenUl moral question
which Is raised by this particular legisla-
tion. This legislation is called for by the
President of the United States. It Is
called for by his Attorney General. It
has been called for by many previous ad-
ministrations, not capriciously, because
there is a fundamental moral need to en-
force a part of the Constitution of the
United States. I believe It was the gen-
tleman from Texas who asked of this
House if anyone knew of any cases, in
our districts, which required this legis-
lation. I think It would be weU for all
of us to go back. If we do not come from
such districts and satisfy ourselves that
there Is a need for this legislation and
that there has been that need for a good
long time. I would refer all of you, first
of all, of course, to the hearings, to the
hearings on the Senate side and then the
hearings on the House side. I can give
ycu the pages to read in which the At-
torney General of the United SUtes spe-
cifically cited the reasons, the cases, for
this legislation. And anybody who cares

to do so can, I am sure, then go to the
Department of Justice and read the
sworn complaints of actual people who
claim and who want redress because their
rights to vote as guaranteed to them as
citizens of the United States have been
denied, and who believe tbeir rlghta are
In Jeopardy.

Mr. DIES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. ROOSEVELT. I have only 5 min-
utes. I will yield later.

Mr. DIES. I will not take the gentle-
man's time.

Mis. CHURCH. Mr. Chahman. I rise
to a point of order. I make the point of
order that there ts no quorum present.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chah: will
count. [After coxmtlng.] Nhiety Mem-
bers are present; not a quorum.

The Clerk will call the roll.

The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to
their names:

(Roll No. 105]

Alger

Ford

O'Konskl

Anfuao

Prellnrhuysen

Osmers

BaUey

Oarmatz

PhUbin

BAITCtt

Granahan

Poage

Baaa, N. H.

Barvey

PowcU

Beuner

Healey

Prouty

Belctaer

HUllngg

Radwan

Bennett. Mlcb.

Hoeven

Santa ngelo

BoKh

Hollfleld

8t. George

Bow

Holtzman

Bcrlvner

Bowler

Horan

Beely-Brown

Brown, llo.

James

Bhelley

Buckley

Keeney

Smllb, Wlfc

Budge

Kilburn

Spence

Burdick

liatham

Taylor

Eirrne, m.

LeCompte

Teller

Chudoff

McConnell

Vursell

Cooley

Mclntlre

Walnwrlght

Coudert

Mactirowlca

Wbarton

Dawson. HI,

Mason

Wlgglesworth

Dempaey

May

WUUams. K.Y

DoUlnger

MUIer. Md.

Willis

Donobue

MiUer, N. T.

Wltbrow

Dooley

Morano

WolTerton

Eberbuter

Moulder

2telenko

Eagle

Multer

Pogarty

Norrell

Accordingly the Committee rose; and
the Speaker having resumed the chair,
Mr. FoRAicD, Chairman of the Commit-
tee of the Whole House on the SUte of
the Union, reported that that Commit-
tee having ha4 under consideration the
blU H. R. 6127. and finding itself with-
out a quorum, he had directed the roll
to be called, when 355 Members respond-
ed to their names, a quorum, and he
submitted herewith the names of the ab-
sentees to be spread upon the Joum&L

The Committee resumed its sitting.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from California IMr. RooskvkltI Is rec-
ognized.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Chairman.
Just prior to the quorum call, I had tried
to express my humble opinion that while
the House had participated in one of the
most brilliant legal debates that has been
held for a long time, perhaps we have
somewhat wandered from the great
moral issue which is before the House in
this bill: In particular I asked the Mem-
bers of the House whether they would be
good enough to go back over the infor-
mation available to the membership as
to the fundamenUl moral need for this
biU.

Mr. Chairman. If there Is one citizen
of the United SUtes In our democracy
who is unable to vote because of intimi-
dation or because his basic, constitu-

tional right to vote is being denied to
him by any unlawful means, it Is im-
portant to our democracy that that
wrong be righted by the action of the
Congress of the United States.

It wotild also be well for us to recognize
that there Is immediately available to
the Communist propagandlzers of the
world the greatest issue that can be
used against free people and democracies
If they can point to the United SUtes
as not securing one of the fundamenUl
rights of its Constitution to every
American citizen. But I will not draw
upon that further because I think It is
more important first for us to look at it
as something that we must cure within
our own house.

The issue of trial by Jury has been
brought before us. Those of us who are
not lawyers, will listen to the argumenu
with this fundamenUl thought in mind:
Is this and any amendment, which is
proposed to this bill, aimed fundamen-
tally at preserving a right of the indi-
vidual, or is it aimed at destroying the
effectiveness of the bill itself?

I have justified confidence in the two
fine gentleman from New York who are
in charge of this debate in saying that
if there Is any amendment offered on
this floor which does in any way try to
secure rights which are the Justified
righU of all the citizens and at the same
time which does not destroy the effec-
tiveness of this bill, they will give it
favorable and serious consideration.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California has expired.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
California.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Up to this point,
and I think this is not unfair criticism,
we have not yet heard any amendment
or any effort at trying to describe an
amendment, with the possible exception
of the amendment proposed by the gen-
tleman from New York [Mr. Molkr] —
whose amendment Mr. CKixza has said
he will consider when it is available in
written form — which would not di-
rectly destroy the heart of the bill it-
self. I hope this House when it comes
into the debate under the 5-minute rule
will do all that it can in its wisdom to
sift out those amendments with that
criterion in mind, that we may do what
the Constitution calls upon us to do, im-
plement the applicable amendments of
the Constitution.

Let us remember always the basic,
fimdamental thesis of the legislation.
We are not seeking to pimish anyone.
We are seeking simply to prevent anyone
from denying the right to vote or to co-
erce anybody in his righU or her rlghta
under the Constitution. No one can be
punished who does not willfully violate
an order of the Court to enforce Ita
orders.

I personally believe, after listening to
the debate, that this bill accomplishes
those purposes. I know that with the
evidence before us. if we again fail this
year to right these wrongs which have
been brought before us year after year
by Republican and Democratic adminis-
trations; if we fail at a time such as this
in the history of the world our right to
be the leader of the free peoples of the

\

\

8696

CX>NGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

woiid. — ^fc-^Tig pemoe for all manltnd.
will Indeed be seriously questiaaied and
undoubtedly Imperiled.

Finally. In condinion. I hope that the
House will pas? H. R. 6127 and that tt
may be a signal to all the world that this
House, representing directly the people
of the world's greatest democracy, has
ezerclaed with courage its duty.

S\ich action will remove the accusation
that our devotion to fundamental rights
and freedoms is but lip service. It will
make of our Constitution a truly living
thing. It will Justify those who long to
be sure that a free people will guard with
Justice and insistence the rights of all.
every one of its citizens.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I yield
such time as he may care to use to the
gentleman from North Carolina I Mr.
Alexaxoek].

Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Chairman, on
July 17 of last jrear. In a speech on the
floor of the House. I opposed a bill which
I believed to be dangerous and destruc-
tive to our constitutional system of Gov-
ernment. That bill was the vicious and
vindictive H. R. 627. the so-called civil
rights bill, which, fortunately for the
American people did not become the law
of the land. But H. R. 627 has not rested
long in its tnave. Its corpse, and that
of its predecessors have been resurrected
and today the Congress finds itself de-
bating H. R. 6127.

Mr. Chairman, it is about H. R. 6127
that I wish to speak for a few minutes.
I will not try. In the brief time allotted
to roe, to analyze the bill. The measure
and its various sections have been thor-
•ughiy discussed so far on this floor and
I dare say there is not a Member of the
House who is not familiar with it. But.
Mr. Chairman. I would not be faithful
to my conscience and the trust placed In
me by the people of my Coneiressional
district if I did not oppose, with all the
strenf?th at my command, this assault
on the Constitution of the United States.
The proponents of H. R. 6127 tell us that
It ts necessary to have this measure
enacted in order to protect the consti-
tutional rights of our fellow Americans.
From the arguments that have been ad-
vanced on the floor of this House in
support of this measure and from read-
ing some of the inflammatory, journal-
istic propaganda being circulated today
throughout the land. one. if he did not
know the truth, would be led to believe
that Americans are a race of imclvlllzed
iMrbarians.

Where, I ask of those who are so con-
vinced of the great and pressing need
of this legislation, are Americans being
denied of their fundamental rights In
such a wholesale manner as would jus-
tify the revolutionary features embodied
In this bill? Where, in the great State
of North Carolina are cltlsens being de-
prived of their constitutional rights to
Mfe. liberty, and the pursuit of happi-
ness?

Mr. Chairman, let us be frank about
this legislation. Let us admit that It is
directed at those States south of the
Potomao — States which have had the
courage to the past to oppose tyranny
from whatever source, and which stand
imlted today as never before to protect
ttoeir way of life within the framework

at the Canstltatlon of the Tlnlted Statea.
The breakdown in k>cal law and order
eontemplated in H. R 6127 does not
ezlat in North Carolina nd her sister
Southern States.

The bill that we have before ns Is a
radical and revolutian&ry measure i e-
slgned to strip the States of this Union
of the sovereignty they have so jealously
guarded since the foimding of the
Republic.

If the measure we now have under
debate becomes law the States wlB nave
ceased to e.xist in their true constitu-
tional sense, and the strong centralized
government the enemies of democracy
have so long strived to secure will at
last become a reality.

The Constitution of the United States
is on trial in this debate. Within recent
times it has siifTered at the hands of the
executive and judicial branches of oui'
Government. If H. R. 6127 becomes
law it will be further stripped of some
of its fundamental provisions.

Mr. Ciiaii-man. I do not believe that
our forefathers ever contemplated that
the day would come when the Congress
of the United States would seriously con-
.sider creating a Presidential Commwsion
to rove about the land and intimidate
and harass free Americans. I do not
believe they had thie remotest idt i that
someday their children's children would
attempt to create an Assistant Attorney
General for the sole purpose of interfer-
ing with the rights of the sovereign
States.

Mr. Chairman, could we truthfully
say tliat our forefatiiers ever dreamed
that the day would arrive when the Con-
gress would even debate, much less reri-
ou.<:ly interfere with Uie right of trial by
jury? No. Had any of these things
been realisred by tiie Pounding Fathers
as a future pas.'Jibillty. we mi^ht never
have had a Union. Certainly the Con-
."ctitution as submitted to the States <ind
the people had adequate safeguards
against such usurpation of power.

We have come a long way since the
representatives of the original colonies
fashioned our fundamental law and thus
molded a nation.

Mr. Chairman, the guiding spirit of our
progress is the firm adherence to the
basic and time-tested principles em-
bodied in the Constitution of the United
States. That great document sets up
definite areas of action for the Central
Government and the sovereign States.
Those powers not expressly granted to
the Federal Government are reserved to
the States and the people thereof. Mr.
Chairman, the Federal Government has
only those powers given to it In the Con-
stitution. The rest remain with the
States and no creature of the Federal
Oovemment, Including the Congress It-
self, can usurp these sovereign powers.
Only the people, through an amendment
to the Constitution, can give away any
of their sovereignty.

It is tragic to witness the great erosion
of basic liberty which Is taking place
today in America. Slowly but surely the
Federal judiciary, the executive, and
unfortunately the Congress, are drawing
a nooee tight around the neek of the In-
dividual States and In time they will
cease to exist as sovereignties and be-

June 10

le admlntetrathre provlncea, if a halt
Is not called.

Mr. Chairman, the brakes must be
applied here in the Congress. If the
States do not find a champion of their
constitutional rights in this Capital,
ttien I fear their decline has become
complete.

It, therefore, behooves each and every
one of us to look to the broad issues In-
volved in the radical bill which we have
under debate. Let us search our con-
science, and if It becomes a choice be-
tween the Constitution as we under-
stand it and the measure now under
debate, let us, without hesitation, stand
by the great charter of all our liberties.

Mr. Chairman, it is with a sense of sad-
ness that I hear lo>al. patriotic and dedi-
cated Americans debate whether or not
their fellow citizens are entitled to a
trial by jury. It is hard to visualize that
such would ever come to pay^s in the
United States. Trial by jury is so fun-
damental to the Anglo-Saxon race that
we ought to accept it without question.

Mr. Chairman, it might be well for us
to pause a few moments and reflect upon
the preat price that has been paid by
tJiC English -.speaking peoples for the
right we are attempting to deny to our
own countrymen today. Our Anglo-
Saxon forefathers won a great victory
when they wrestled the ^!agna Carta
from King John of England. And in
that Immortal document — the first of a
long line of charters that was to give
dignity to the individual and liberty to
the work — was a guaranty of the right
of jury trial. Mr. Chairman, in clause
39 of the Magna Carta, King John
promL^ed that no freeman should be
taken or jailed "except by the legal
judgment of his peers or by the law of
the land." That great right arm was
granted on June 15, 1215 — over 700 years
ago. Ever after man was to be tried by
his fellow man. Five hundred and sixty-
one years to a day after Magna Carta,
on June 15. 1776. Virginia gave to the
world Its magnificent Declaration of
Rights. Articles 8 and 11 of that great
document guaranteed the right of jury
trial.

So. Mr. Chairman, it is well for us to
consider the past and the history of the
origin of our liberty, for In so doing we
might be more mindful of the sacred
nature of our institutions and more de-
termined to protect them from the as-
saults of ill-advised and radical meas-
ures, such as H. R. 6127.

I am convinced that there Is no de-
mand today for such an extraordinary
departure from our fimdamental rights
of citizenship as are the provisions of
H. R. 6127. We have committees of the
Congress composed of duly elected Rep-
resentatives of the American people
which have the constitutional right, at
aixy time, at any place, to investigate
the denial of basic rights to American
citiaens.

What is the great oompeiling reason
that forces us to abandon trial by Jury;
to create a super Investlgattng oommis-
sion? Why most we Uterally go beyond
the Constitution Itself In order to enact
a measure that will satisfy the demand of
minority pressure groups?

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8697

Mr. Chairman, tn addition to the Con-
gress of the United Stetes, there are 4t
State eonstltntioiM dedicated to the
preaervatloa of the rights of the citlmw
of this Utakm, and as many State
legislatures ready to Inveetlgate and
provide by due proeets of law remedies
to safeguard the baslo fteedoms of our
people. The States are the natnral
guardians of the ehil liberties of th»
American people and Congress shouM
exert every effort to itrengthea the
power of the States in this respect. We
should not — we must not — let political
expediency or personal passions sway
our better Judgment whenever we are
legislating In this field.

What this Congress docs with H. R.
6127 will have a profound effect on the
future of our Nation. If this bill be-
comes law the point of no return wlB
be passed on the highway we are now
traveling toward constitutional Irre-
sponsibility. H. R. 6127 will deal a mortal
blow to the historic role the States
now play In the Union and Federal power
will be supreme In every phase of eco-
nomic, social, and political life oi the
Nation.

Mr. Chairman, It Is my Ih^n belief
that the United States wlU enter a
period of decline If the States of this
Union are stripped of their sovereignty.
The happy and harmonloos balance we
have had In the past between State and
Federal power has enabled us to become
a leader of the world. Destroy that
balance and it Ls my conviction that ve
will have centralized despotism.

In conclusion. Mr. Chairman. I call
on the Members of this Congress to re-
affirm their faith In the Constitution
of the United States and strike down
this bill, which. If enacted, will do vio-
lence to our fundamental Institutions.
Let us dedicate ourselves to the task
of strengthening our States, for only
In their strength can America survive.

Mr. CELI£R. Mr. Chairman. I yield
30 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia [Mr. Fosaxsm].

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Chairman, I
am not given to coming down to the
well of the House and speaking on all
occasions. The truth of the matter is
It Just so happens this is the first time
that I have been In the well of the
House during this particular session of
the Congress, and it is the first time I
have Injected my thoughts and my
ideas In the debate on any legislation
that we have been considering. But.
Mr. Chairman, if you will pardon me
for this observation, and I say this in
all humility. I honestly believe I know
something about this leglslaUon. I be-
lieve it the duty of a man when he walks
into the well of this House, and when
he addresses you. to be of the opinion
that he might make some contribution,
particularly when we are engaged in one
of the most complex pieces of legisla-
tion that has ever been submitted to a
Congress.

Mr. Chairman, I have been a member
of the committee that has heard this
legislation. I have been engaged in the
study of this legislation for approxi-
mately 3 years. I tell you here and now
that I oppose this legislation. I am not

going to tatt to you just about an amend-
ment providing 'for Jury trlali In con-
tempt eases. I am canpletely aware
that ttie hour is late. \nA 1 say to yon-
bear with rae— bear with me for the
work'fe sake because I say to each and
every one of yon— never have yon In an
yonr sendee in the Oongreis been en-
gaged upon socb a serious matter as yon
arc now being called spon to r^lcot upon
and vote upon. Upon my word of honor,
I say to you that this Is not an Innocuoia
bllL It Is not a watered down bill. This
is a bin that strikes at the very vitals
ol eoBstitutional government, and when
I say that I am measuring my words.

I do not poec as an expert on morals.
I will ten you what I do know. I do claim
credit for having been a country lawyer
tar 30 years, and in my limited way I
would not be surprised but wtnt I have
tried as many criminal cases as any man
in this House. I have tried ttiem t^ the
thousands and the thousands.

I heard one of our distinguished Mem-
bers on the floor today say we did not
understand the bafie operations of this
bin. WeQ, he is a brilBant young man.
but you know there is always a posribfl-
ity that if you wlU let a little experience
talk sometimes, those who have been
through the miU, those who have been
whipped In the courtroom lots of times —
you know that Is Important too in und^"-
standing there can be two sides. One of
the worst things that can happen to a
young lawyer Is to win his first 3 or 4
cases. You just about ruin him. The
thing to do is to let him lose aftout a half
a dosen and make him wonder whether
he is ever going to win one. Then he win
begin to realize that there are two sides,
and that he had better approadi that
problem from two sides.

Now, BCr. Chairman, I want to taHc to
you seriously today, and I want to talk
to you from my heart and my soul. I
want to hty this matter on yoin* hearts.
I am talking to 3rou Republicans. I am
talking to you Democrats. I have got a
right to taBc to you. I hare got a right
to talk to you because, above an, and
before you are Democrats and before you
are RepubUcans, first you must be
Americans.

I want to ten joni this. I have felt no
coBxpuIsions whatever in leaving this
Democratic side over here and waBdng
over there with you, and you kirow It.
Just let the issue be a matter of con-
science with me. and If I think you are
right, I wiU walk over there x.-th you,
vote with you. and I win apologise to no
man for It. As a matter of fact. If the
time ever comes when I cannot do it,
somebody else Is going to get the Con-
gressman's Job from the TUrd District
of Georgia.

I want to talk to yon in that vein. I
want to talk to yoa as Americans, be-
cause you and i have got a whole lot of
work to do. You know I want to woxk
with yoa. I wm have to confess that I
am getting a little tired of hearing an
of this argument about what the Com-
munists are going to think of us. WeU,
I have been hearing that argument for
25 years now and If we have ever ap-
peased them, ^at Is news to me.

I think of that old Biblical quotation:
Tot what is a man profited, if he shaU

gain the whole world, and lose his own
sonl?" or, "What shaU a man give in oc-
tbange for his soul?"

I am talking to yoa about the soul o(
America. I am taSdng to you aboot the
things that made us great. I am taUcknc
to yoa about indispensable things. I
am talking to 3fou about things that
separate the she^ from the goats and
separate the men from the looya.

Now I want to say this to you, I hava
follovied this legldatiaa from tts rexj
beginning in the Etgfaty-fourth Con-
gress. It is true that you have some
records, consisting purely of hearsay, in-
dicting my people, the people of the
South; but, my friends. I want to plead
with yoa now, to ten you. for the first
time you are getting legislation that is
going to hurt you.

I know the gun Is ateied at my people;
oh. yes, i understand that; you know
I thoroughly understand what this wfll
do to my people, and I want you to be
sympathetic with my people.

You know, I like Yankees; God knows
I do, I muTied one of them; and I want
to t^ you another thing. There has
never been a truer woanan in this world
than that little Ysnkee wife that I have
got. But I want to teU yon sompttilng
else, too; up to Uie pieaent time there
has never been a more devoted south-
erner Uian she.

Now let us get down to hardpon. I
am taKing to you and I want In particu-
lar to talk to these lawyers. I made a
speech to the Georgia Bar Aaseeiatioa
last week and I want to teU you some-
thing I said to them. I said to them that
a constitutional government is in the
gravest danger, but the ones w1m> are to
save It are the lawyers of this eoun^.
Tliat this is one job you eannot turn over
to the miziiBtry; it is not the ministers'
job. You can ask the ministers to save
the soub oi people but you must adc the
lawyers to save the soul ot this Natioa.

H you win examine into this record I
said that if you eliminate hearsay evi-
dence, opinion evidence, we stand thor-
oughly acquitted at the Judgment bar. I
have gone over this record with a fine-
toothed comb and there Is not one alle-
gatlon against our people that would
stand up In any court oi the United
States. I am asking you lawyers to be
lawyers. I teU you that up to the 8Sth
Congress and at a time when there was
not one southerner on the subcommittee,
when the closest one to my people was
from Ohio or the State of New Jersey, I
say this to you. that for the first time
those gentlemen accorded to the opposi-
tion an opportunity to come In and tes-
tify. You say. Shame. Of coiffse It is a
shame, but It Is true.

I take off my hat to our distinguished
chairman, the gentleman from New York
[Mr. Cp.T.nl. and I say to you that he
for the first time gave my pecgUe the
slightest opportunity to come up and
testify against one of the charges mada
by pressure groups— and you know ttiey
are pressure groups. Let us not kid our-
selves: let us get down to hardpan; yon
know they are pressure groups, you know
they are. But for the first time, in the
85th Congress, we were even permitted to
open our mouths.

9

jr.

1 •

8698

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

M

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8699

And do you know what you did? I
want to tell you what you did. You ac-
quitted yourselves as lawyers, and you
took things out of that bill that you
passed on the floor last year, and it Is to
your credit.

Let me tell you what you did last year
on the floor. I tried to tell you about it
th«i. but let me tell you what you did:
You passed a law last year that set up a
commission to investigate allegations as
to unwarranted pressures on account of
race, creed, religion, and so forth. By
the grace of the Most Holy Ood. you vio-
lated the first amendment to the Con-
stitution of the United States. That is
what you did. That Is what you did.
Is there any lawyer who wants to dispute
roe?

I say to you that if the Senate had not
Etopped the bill over there that is the
kind of law you would have had. because
the first amendment says that there
shall be no law relating to the establish-
ment of religion or the free exercise
thereof. Yes. Mr. Chairman, you had
better Inquire about this legislation.

The American Civil Liberties Union in
an article which appeared in the Wash-
ington paper told you why they wanted
that law relating to unwarranted eco-
nomic pressures on account of religion
and I want to tell you what they said.
They said. "We are getting tired of
Catholic priests telling their member-
ship to boycott certain picture shows or
to read certain books." That is what
they say. Yea. you are getting tired, are
you? All right. Whenever you say that
a Catholic Church cannot teach its
membership whatever it wants to, then
you are telling the Jews they cannot do
something, you are telling the Baptists,
the Methodists, the Presbyterians, you
%n telling every religion on the face of
the earth they cannot do it. In the
name of Ood. Mr. Chairman, under the
first amendment you have the right to
discriminate in religion. That is why
our people came over here. You know,
we just simply are not conformists. I
am not a conformist. But you are try-
ing to make everybody conform. Do you
catch what I am trying to tell you?

The subcommittee took that provision
out. Then pressiire mounted so heav-
ily, yes, I am telling you, pressure
mounted so heavily that the word "re-
ligion" was put back there in an innoc-
uous sort of way. All on earth it says
now Is that you cannot discriminate on
a person's right to vote because of his
religion. You know that you do not
need that? Do you not know that the
Constitution gtuu-antees you the pro-
tection, the equal protection of the law?
Listen to me. I never heard a person
in voy life say that he was denied the
right to vote because of his religion. I
never have and I ask you. and you. and
you. and you. have you ever heard of
It? Of course not.

Mr. Chairman, you are getting ready
to hear it. You are giving them a start.
You have given them the suggestion, and
that is all on Qod's earth some men
need. No, I am not going to move to
take it out. There is not the slightest
religious discrimination down where I
live, but I tell you this, you are letting

them get their foot in the door and you
better not start it.

Let us talk a little more about this
Commission. Do you know what that
Commission is going to do? It is Just
going to investigate allegations imder
oath that persons have been discrimi-
nated against in their right to vote be-
cause of race, religion, and so forth.
But let me say — if I am wrong stop me —
you have to file an allegation under an
oath that a man has been discriminated
against, but did you know that imder
that Commission when they start in-
quiry nobody is under oath any more?
Did you know that? I am telling you
that is right. I know this legislation.
When that Commission goes out and
starts Investigating, not one time will
any man be under oath, not one time
will he be subject to perjury or to false
swearing. He can make wild-eyed
charges and run that Commission up
and down the countryside with impu-
nity and without any violation of the law
whatsoever.

I will tell you another thing about
that Commission. You say you want
to balance the budget. If you do you
better not pass this legislation. There
is provided $50 a day for every member
of that Commission, plus traveling ex-
penses, plus $12 per diem, not more than
$50 a day for the staff directors, for the
secretary, for the stenographer. You
have to pay for the ofllces. you have to
pay for subpenaing of the witnesses, and
so forth.

I will tell you another thing. We never
could pin them down, and you cannot
pin them down now. and I challenge any
man to get up on the floor and tell me
what it is going to cost. Now, is that of
any importance to you?

Now I will tell you another thing about
this Commission. They have got a right
to subpena you to go anywhere within
your Judicial district. Well, let me give
you a concrete example there. Down in
the district where I live you can subpena
a man in the Canal Zone to go to San
Antonio. Tex. Cold facts. That word
"circuit" sounds good, but when you get
down and you analyze it. then you can
see what I am talking about

Now, you want to send out somebody
to investigate. You know, I will tell you
something that would be revolutionary,
but. by the grace of Gkxl, I want to do It,
and I want to help you do It. and that is
I want to see Congress quit abdicating its
resixmsibillty. If you think that these
kinds of charges exist, I want to see you
have a Congressional committee. I want
to see you make the investigation. Let
the gentleman from Georgia, Tic Foit-
axsTKx, challenge you. I am challenging
you. Oet rid of this legislation. Come
on next year with an investigation. Put
us under television: put every one of
them under oath; put all my people un-
der oath. but. in the name of Ood, let
the good people of the United States see
it and let them hear it. Let them look
at those witnesses, their demeanor on
the stand, their opportunity for knowing
or not knowing what they are saying
about it. And I make you this proposi-
tion. I do not care who you select to
question those witnesses. You know. I
would be willlcg if you would Just let a

little fellow like me Just defend the other
side of it. Just cross-examine them some.
Just make them come on and let their
milk down. Just get the cold truth. I am
your Huckleberry. I am ready whenever
you want to go. Yes; I am willing to
throw this case into the hands of the
American people, and. Just as sure as
you live, it is goina to the American peo-
ple. You are not going to escape your
responsibility. Do not kid yourself.

And I want to tell you something else.
It is not a question of whether Attorney
General Brownell wants this bill. Oh,
no; the responsibility is with the Con-
gressmen. You are the ones that the
people are going to ask. Why did you
deny the people the right of trial by
Jury? And they ought to ask you. and
they are going to ask you, and you had
better give consideration to it while there
Is yet time.

Now, let us go to part U of this bill.
It says that they shall appoint an As-
sistant Attorney Oeneral. Does that not
sound sweet? The only trouble Lb they
did not tell you how many assistants to
the Assistant Attorney General they are
going to need. Now. let me tell you, that
Will Maslow, general counsel of the
American Jewish Congress, testified be-
fore the committee that they needed at
least 50, and nobody disputed it. Well,
at a salary of $10,000 a year — I assume
they will get more, but that is $500,000.
Do you know why they want them? I
want to tell you why they want them.
Because they want to set up regional
offices; because they want attorneys
down on the ground where they can go
down and they can talk to the witnesses:
where they can work up the case from
the beginning; where they can work for
months and months; where they can go
to the grand Jury; where they can bring
these petitions for Injunction; where
they will have the whole power of the
omnipotent Govenunent, with money no
object, because the taxpayers are paying
the freight. That is what they want
them for. And then, my friends. In addi-
tion to that, there Is a stipulation that
not more than 15 tmcompersated per-
sonnel should be allowed to serve, but
they get $12 per day per diem. Now.
you know what that is for. Now. I want
to tell you what it ts for, and ;[ am going
to be honest with you Republl(«ns. This
Is not new with you. Mr. Triman beat
you to It on that. That was the NAACP
and those other pressure groups. Any-
body want to deny that? I'he record
shows that Is who it was and that ts the
only kind you can expect to work for
nothing. You were not bom yesterday.
I say it is a shame and I say It Is not to
the credit of this Congress; you ought to
be doing it yourself.

Then there Is a stipulation that you
are going to waive dlsqualifli'Jitions of
people in order to let them 8«?rve. Oh.
no, that is not right. There are 170 mil-
lion people in this coimtry. You have not
gotten down to such a dearth of men that
you have got to pick up someoody who
Is disqualified and put him on tills Com-
mission to make this kind of investiga-
tion. And I tell you you had better be
scared of it. You have got more sense
than that, and I know you htive.

Let ufl get down to part m. Part in
adds two subsections to what Is known
as the conspiracy law. A lot of the fel-
lows like to call it the Ku-Kluz-EQan
law. I have never been a Ku Klux. I do
not believe in such organizaticxis. but I
want you to know I do not believe in these
ragtag pressure groups, such as the
NAACP and a whole lot of others here.
And I want to tell you another thing. If
the chips were down in America, when It
came to preserving the flag of the United
States. I would hare to pick the Ku Klox
over some of this rotten stuff. I am Just
telling you plainly now, because it Is
something you ought to hear. I have
never heard of one of those Ku Klux who
advocated the violent overthrow of your
country. No, I am against these other
un-American groups completely.

I am a courthouse nian. I believe In
the law. My whole life has proved that.
I was a prosecuting attorney for 27
years. The courthouse is the proper
fonmi to settle disputes.

But let us get down and see about this
conspiracy law. Some of them say that
this is jiist to protect against an impend-
ing wrong. Do you still want to stand
on that, you gentlemen who made that
statement? Do you still want to stand
on that? I am telling you that Is not
right. I am telling you that it says that
when an act has been committed or when
you are about to engage. It reminds
me of the old soticitor general down
home who had too many words in his
Indictment and the Judge asked him
about it and he said. "You know. Judge,
I put those in in order to try to catch
him coming and going."

But here is what the bill says. You
have got a completed act and you have
got "about to engage."

listen to me now; I do not know any
Federal law. Federal courts are some-
thing to scare country lawyers and coun-
try folk and humble people. And yon
know it. You have never seen one of
those in your life that was not to some
extent autoeratle. Ami right about that
or am I wrong? I am talking from
so-odd years of experience as a lawyer.
You know what I am talking about.

You Just teU me what "about to en-
gage' means. Just imagine— "about to
engage in a conspiracy." Why, the very
essence of conspiracy is that there must
be an overt act committed, and until that
overt act Is eommitted, every lawbook in
the country says that you have a right
to recant, a right to repent and disasso-
ciate yourself from it And If that be
true, you have not committed a crime.

You say you do not have to worry
about It. but yes. you do. too. You Just
get an InJimcUon against those who are
about to engage. Maybe you do not
know what 11 means. The Judge wiH not
know what it means. But the trouble la
that the Judge may think he knows what
it means and if you have innocently done
something that he thinks may come
within the purview, he gets you for It
and puts you In the poiitentiary ; he puts
you In priaon; and do not kid youra^.
They put you In prison. It may be Il-
legal, and probahly la. hot the tnmble la
you are In prlsoo. You can go to prison
for violating an Invalid edict laid down
by a Judge. Did you know that? Well.

you can. Yon are Just rldcing putting
your hide In Jail when you say "No mat-
ter how much it stinks, I am Just sure it
Is not right." But do not violate the
order of that Judge. If you do. you are
long gone.

Let us see what else Is said: When
you engage or are "aboxit to engage," the
Attorney General in the name and on
behalf of the United States shall bring
suit for injunctive relief or a restrain-
ing order or other order. What that
"other OTder" means I do not know. But
I know something about injunctions aw^j
I know something about restraining or-
ders.

Under no circumstances woxild I tell
you that that is imconstitutlonaL Do
you know why? Any lawyer that tells a
client today a thing is unconstitutional
is a fool. He has not practiced law 30
days. I will tell you this, though. It
was unconstitutional, and I hope that
someday I can have a part with you
and you in restoring constitutional gov-
ernment in this country. That duty is on
you. You cannot throw it off. Never
has your country needed a constituti<xial
government more than It needs It to-
day.

Let me tell you why it is unconstitu-
tionaL I have a right to go to court. I
have a right to stay out of court. The
Attorney General has no right to de-
cide for me whether I want to go into
court with a case or whether I do not.

Let me show you how foolish that is.
That Attorney General may think that
I ought to go to court, and I might know
that I do not have any case. I might
know that I have done something I did
not want that Judge to know I did. He
might get me in that court and he might
get me where I had to incriminate
myself.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Georgia has expired.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorada Mr.
Chairman. I yield 10 additional minutes
to the gentleman from Oemrgia.

Mr. PQRRSSTER. I am gokag to aak
the gentlemen to be kind and gi!ve me
lots of time. I have not even eaten. I
was supposed to speak at I o'clock but
I have had to sit here until 4:30 pl m.
and not eaten yet I am a little weak,
but I am still going stroog.

I want to tell you this much. It was
uneoDstltt^lQnaL Yea. you might dls^
cover that a man had committed a crime
by taking him into court against his
wilL Dki you ever stop to think at>out
that?

Let us see n^at else you have In all
this sweet little bill, this precious little
bill that would not hmrm a C-manth-old
baby. Let me show you what it does.
It is the most unequal thing I ever heard
of. While you talk about morality, while
you talk about riiminatlng inejQcttee.
while jou taBc about making everybody
equal, here is what you are doing. You
are throwing the greatest legal burden
in the entire worM upon the shoulders
of one little old poverty-stricken man,
in most of the cases. ^gff<T*«^ him you
are giving the services of a dq>artment
that has t.TOO lawyers. 94 district attor-
neys, and the flUBiatnnt dlstxlet attorneys
are as thiek as the sands of the sea.
You are giving against him -a law firm

that even a billionaire could not Improve
on, and you are giving it free of charge.
You are giving it at the taxpayers' ex-
pense.

Meanwhile what happens to the poor
little defendant. You know they have
forgotten him entirely. But you know
he breathes. Actually, there is a little
life in him. Maybe he has been badly
treated because maybe while he is at
home with his wife and children, the FBI
has been down there working on him for
2 or 3 months. They have gotten affidavit
after afBdavit. Maybe they have 100 af-
fidavits. That poor man did not know
anything about it. Then, all at once
here comes an ex parte order and he is
directed to stop whatever he is doing
immediately and appear at a Federal
courthouse the next day. You say,
"FoRRisTBs. surely that does not happen
In America." Yes; it does hain>en. It
is happening now in America. I am
going to talk to you about a case, and I
know what I am talking about. Anybody
who wants to challenge it can challenge
it. But I want to show jrou sometlung.
I want to show you an injunction
granted In the school case down in Clin-
ton. Tenn. I want to show you some-
thing that ought to outrage the sensibili-
ties of every person in this coimtry. I
want to preface it by saying I think the
Judge is a good man, but I Jist do not
think the Judge knew too much about
the law. Let me teH you something
about the case of Kasper. I hold no
brief for Kasper. Kasper is from
Brookljm — ^I do not know — ^he may be
good or he may be bad. B\it he is a
human being and he is an American.
Yes. I say to you that case did start out
as a private suit of Joheather McSwatn
versus the Board of Education in Clin-
ton. Tenn.. but the great Attorney Gen-
ial would not let it alone. Tttey or-
dered the schools des^iegated. They
went to the Supreme Court of the State
of Tennessee and the suiacme court
agreed with the United States Supreme
Court Our Southern courts always have
dcme that Our Southern courts follow
thelaw. Our Southern courts have a rec-
ord which is comparable to any court in
this country. It is nothing short of
amasing to me to hear people talk about
our courts because there is no way oo
earth for you to sustain any such al-
legation as that Look i^ the Georgia
decisions. Look at the lauisianat Mary-
land. Tennessee, and Arkansas decisioBS
and tell me — tell me do you have anr
Jurtifleation whatsoever for criticiBtng
those courts? But they ordered the
s^Kxds desegregated. I do not know what
Kasper did. If Kaqper was guiMy. then,
he ought to be in the penitentiary. But I
want to teU you what happened. I think
it was on the 29th day of August, they
went over and got an order restraining
those folks from interfering — and I
want you to hear this. I wish my chair*
man were here. This was an ex parte
order. Tlds is an or€tar without notice.
This is an order tlwt the defendants
knew nothing about. Hie defendants
had no Idea that the FBI had been down
abBn. The FBI had been down there
for days and days and days hunting them
like partridges. Thm they got ttiat

in

m

8700

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8701

n

order. I want you to hear this. This
ia an order by the court:

That the aforementioned penons, their
•gents. acrTants, repreeentatlves. and attor*
neye—

Did you know that their lawyers were
enjoined? Did you know that? Do you
believe in that? Well, that happened.
When did it happen? It happened on
August 29. 1956. Do you know that they
enjoined them from any word or act —
completely violative of the amendment
relating to free speech? Let U5 see what
else happened. The Injunction was is-
sued at 6:07 p. m. At 8:00 p. m. that
night an order was issued directing
Kasper and the other defendants to be
in the Federal courthouse in KnoxvlUe,
Tenn.. at 10:30 a. m. the next mornins?.
In heaven's name do you call that
fair? There was no opportunity what-
soever to prepare a case. They went into
court. There they were tried on the in-
junction and on the contempt order and
although he had a right to a Jury trial,
the poor man did not know he had it
and he did not have time to consult
lawyers to find out that he had it. and
he was put nn trial and convicted and
given 12 months. At no time was he
advised by the court that the law gave
him the right of trial by Jury.

Oh. yes. An indictment means some-
thing to me. It may not mean anything
to some of you folks, but the right of
trial by Jury and the right of indictment
mean something to that man.

But let us move on. Later 18 others
were brought into court under a blanket
order saying that they had violated that
Injunction. They had the Judge there
ready to try these defendants. But some
other lawyers came in and they said.
"Wait a minute. Judge; you are not
going to do that. Judge. We have a right
to a jury trial, to be^ with." But they
did not get it right then. The case was
postponed. Now. listen to me. I want
you to hear this. Along about February
of the ne.xt year the United States Gov-
ernment was made a party to that pro-
ceeding. Does anybody want to chal-
lenge that? Made a party to it. Why
were they made a party to it? The an-
swer is simple. The only excuse for
making the United States a party was to
deprive these people of the right of a
trial by Jury. Do not kid me. There is
no lawyer here who would dispute that.
You are too honest for that. That was
the only excuse for it. But these law-
yers said. "Wait a minute. You cannot
come in here by amendment, you cannot
change this private suit." It was only
about 30 days ago that the Government
said. "Yes. you are entitled to the right
of a trial by Jury. It was like pulling
their eyeteeth to get them to say that.
The Attorney General did not want them
to have a Jury trial. I am going to tell
you that jury trials are constitutional.
I am going to stand to your face and tell
you. I am gomg to prove it. too. I have
got wonderful company with me. Do
you knew who I have? Donald Rich-
berg, Chief Justice Taft. Brandeis. Car-
dozo. Holmes, Al Smith. James Girard,
Easby Smith and platforms of the Demo-
cratic and Republican parties. Yes, I
have Just got what is supposed to be

the cream of the crop. I am not going to
apologize to you for saying that. I am
going to tell you yes, they have got a
constitutional right. This is to deprive
them of that constitutional right. There
is no other argument. You cannot get
out from under it to save your soul. Be-
cause if you did not want to deprive
them of their constitutional rights you
did not have to put the United States in
there as a party. Yes, I am more willing
to give the Government any power they
want about our atomic secrets. I am
wilimg to give them any power for de-
fense, but I am not willing to set up a
dictatorship as a pastime.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Georgia has expired.

Mr. RGGEIRS of Colorado. Mr. Chair-
man. I yield the gentleman 10 additional
mmutes.

Mr. FORRESTER. Will the gentle-
man from New York give me some more
time?

Mr. KEATING. Let us see how we
come out. The gentleman from Colo-
rado has given the gentleman 10 min-
utes.

Mr. FORRESTER. I want to Ulk
about this bill, and I want to lay it on
the line. I am saying to you that under
part IV and part III. you are entirely
preempting the rights of your States.
Do not kid yourselves. I would not have
you Ignorant. If you are going to pass
this legislation. I want you to know that
you are wrecking the rights of your sov-
ereign States. I want to put that on
your conscience. Do not tell me you
are not doing it. See the Cloverleaf
Butter case from Alabama and in the
Nelson case up in Pennsylvania. You
cannot escape now. You are right here
where you are going to decide that issue.
I Just wonder why in the name of God
that we should not be here trying to
straighten up that terrible decision of the
United States Supreme Court that you
have got to turn over all the flies of the
FBI. Why are we not trying to do some-
thing about our mutual security? Why
are we not trying to do something about
the courts that have Just utterly made
wrecks out of our Constitution? Then
we would be proud of ourselves.

Listen, now. Let me tell you about
this part IV. Do you think that just
applies to voting? If you do you believe
in fairies. Part HI and part IV. those
things are so broad that it covers every
civil right, every last one of them; it
gives them the right to go Into all these
school cases. Oh. yes, it does; Mr.
Brownell admitted it. You will find it
in the record.

Yes; you are touching every facet of
your national life. Now, listen. Ejec-
tion. Do you think It refers only to Con-
gressional elections? It refers to all
primaries; it refers to every election:
State, county, municipal, township,
school district; it applies to the election
of a common Justice of the peace. Does
anyone want to challenge that? I say
it does.

I am telling you If you pass this bill,
you will have rung the death knell of
your State and your county election
laws. Do not kid yourselves.

There has been argimaent here about
States having the right to regulate their

elections. Tou know, I am sorry I can-
not agree with them. It does say that
you can do it, until Congress steps in.
And it says that Congress can come in
and exercise — listen to me now; that is
Just exactly what Congress is doing, step-
ping in under that provision of the Con-
stitution that has never been used before.
Now, let us see about injunctions and
talk about them. By the way before I
forget that, someone has said that no
State has any law providing contempt
trial by Jury. Let me answer that; let
me Just knock the stufQng out of that
argument. Now. listen. Let me tell you
something. Down in Georgia, luid every
other State, we have an attorney general,
but that attorney general has got noth-
ing on earth to do with the prosecuting
attorneys. None of them ever tried to
tell me what to do. Is that right or is it
not right? I tell you there is not an as-
sistant district attorney who would even
nol-pros a case until he had the con-
sent of the district attorney. I never will
forget a thing that happened to me. I
got a recovery Judgment in a condemna-
tion case. The asstsUnt district attorney
came to me and asked if I would settle (or
a certain figure. I told him I would. He
asked me to go to Atlanta with him. that
a Department of Justice man from
Washington was coming there and he
wanted to see him. I went up there and
we both met that man. There was that
poor little district attorney shaking in
his boots telling the Department of Jus-
tice man that Forrester has submitted a
proposition to him and he wanted his ap-
proval. I had not done any such thing.
He had submitted it to me, but he was
scared to tell the Attorney General he
had done so. I said no, that he had
made the proposition to me. that I had
made no proposition. I won out and won
the case.

Now let me tell you something else.
You lawyers know what I am talking
about. I want to tell you another thing.
The Attorney General has nothing to do
with the appointment of a Judge of the
Supreme Court of Georgia, has nothing
to do with the appointment of any of
these ofBcers. They are elected by the
people. That is a tremendous difference,
too. is it not?

I want to tell you another thing about
It: Never has the attorney general of
any SUte been given the right to. at the
taxpayers' expense, go into courts and get
injunctions for private Individuals or
against private individuals, and they
never will. There is not a State in th«
Union that would do such an evil thing;
and I tell you here and now if you ever
hear of Georgia going crazy, if you ever
hear of a suggestion of that kind, if It
Is necessary I will resign from Congress
and go back and fight that thing, because
I tell you that we will never let such a
thing occur.

Let me tell you another thing, and
that is about Jury trials on injunctions
in State courts. You have them. Do
you know that? That is something for
you to think about. You cannot get a
permanent injunction down In Georgia
without a Jury trial. So you see with
that argument you are hard put when
you come up with it.

One distinguished gentleman said on
yesterday that time i« of the essence, so
you cannot have Jury trials. You know,
the Jury trial is only for contempt. I
think you can barbecue a defendant Just
about as good on Friday as on Monday.
I do not see why you have got to hang a
man on Monday. Tuesday may be all
right. It has nothing on earth to do
with injunction orders. It Is only an
order where you are going to take him
from his wife and children and put him
In the penitentiary. That is the only
time the Jury comes in.

I want to tell you smnethlng about
Jury trials for contempt and I want you
to listen to me. In 1932 Donald Rich-
t>erg, Judge Frankfurter and those men
I am talking to you about talked about
the evils of the Jury trial and the intoxl-
eating power of the courts relating to in-
junctions. They saK that there never
has been a coxut that did not believe in
the inherent power of the court; yet he
says that It is a figment of the imagina-
tion, they have no such inherent power.
You gentlemen remember when our
Democratic President talked about his In-
herent power In connection with the steel
industry. You did not have a better
friend over there than I. I was chair-
man of the subcommittee and I am the
one who told him he did not have that
power. Now, do not talk to me today
about that, there Is no such thing as In-
herent jwwer.

Let me prove It to you. Go back to
your conunon law. Donald Richberg
said that he had a study made of injunc-
tions and contempts in England t)egin-
nlng back in 1200, up to the time of the
Revolution and he found that all trials
for contempt were before a Jury from the
year 1200 to the time of the Revolution
with the exception of 2 cases. He said
that in the first Judicial Act it may be
inlierent, but the Congress did not think
BO and the Congress said no injunction
shall be granted except after a hearing.
You see, you have It in here without a
hearing. Then he went on and said,
they have always said that they have
that power. But, listen to me. you are
the ones to decide It and have the Judges
quit making the law. Rise up to your
task and you make them. The Con-
stitution says that the Judicial system
shall be composed of a Supreme Court
and such other inferior tribunals as the
Congress shall dictate. You are the one
to say whether they are going to have
Jury trials or whether they are not.

Donald Richberg said that even In
the Michaelson case, even when they
had the law under the Clajrton Act, they
were entitled to trial by Jury, the lower
court said we are interfering with in-
herent rights, the court of appeals said
that is all right, but the United State
Supreme Court said It is not so. that
the Congress has the right to create
you and the Congress has the right and
responsibility to regulate.

Let me tell you something about
Judges. I did not say this, no southerner
said this. It was said that up here in
Ohio during the days of labor difficulty
you granted injunctions without cause.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Georgia has expired.

Mr. CEUXR. Mr. Chairman, I yield
the gentleman 5 additional minutes.

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Chairman, I
am getting right down to the meat In
the coconut on this thing. This Is what
you said and this is why you got that
vote 362 for Jury trials and 14 against.
You said that they were enjoining law-
yen of the labor unions. Tes. But did
it excite you when they enjoined Kas-
per's lawyers? Is that moral, is that
legal? Mr. Richberg said that they en-
Joined the labor union in one case and
said to them they had to work and said
that a man by the name of Clarence
Darrow had to publish a statement In
the paper, that there was no law re-
quirtaig a man to work. Oh. you know
Mr. Darrow and Mr. Richberg would
have been in Jail under this order
granted against Kasper in the year 1956.
You say it is not legal. No. it is not
legal, but this is a manmade law. But
it will Jail you Just the same as If It
was legal.

Now, I want to go back and I want you
to study and see what this debate re-
flects. Here is what Mr. La Guardla
said. Now listen to me. I want you to
hear me now. About these Judges, he
said that the United States was an arch-
offender; that the United States court
was the one that was violating the peo-
ple's rights. That was the language he
used. He was not talking about State
courts. He said that the Government
was the most unfair of all, and he said
that Mr. Daugherty. the Attorney Gen-
eral. In a case made the statement thiyt
he was looking around for a Judge, "and

1 happened to think about Judge Wil-
kerson." He said. "I was delighted to
get hold of him. I talked to him for a
nUnute or two, and he agreed with me
every step of the way." Then my dis-
tinguished chairman, the gentleman
from New York [Mr. Cellkr], said to
him. "Will the gentleman. Mr. La
Guardla. yield?" And be said he would.
And, he said, "Is It not true that about

2 or 3 weeks before that Mr. Daugherty
had earnestly and actively urged the
appointment of Mr. Wilkerson to the
bench?" And Mr. La Guardla said.
"That is true. I had not intended to
bring that up. but it is positively true."
Now, there is yoiur crookedness. And, I
did not expose It Nobody from the
South exposed it. It came from your
section of the coimtry. Yes, the blood
and 6bnes of people cry out to you about
the tyranny of so-called inherent powers
of the courts of the United States.

Now. let me come down to this. I told
you and I said this was constitutional.
Let me tell you why it is constitutionaL
This Is nothing on earth but a subter-
fuge, and you know it is nothing but s
subterfuge. You say that you are going
to emasculate this bill if you take It out
That proves exactly what I am saying.

Now. the Constitution giiarantees to
eyery man accused of a crime the right
of trial by indictment, the right to a
public trial, the right to a fair trial, the
right to be confronted with witnesses,
the right to have an attorney, and the
right to have compulsory processes for
his witnesses. Now, what you are doing,
you are destroying those rights and de-
signedly so. Is that plain enough?

Designedly so. And. ttwre Is not a man
in this Chamber that does not Imow it

And, I will lay down this proposition
of law. and I challenge anybody to deny
It. What you cannot do directly you
cannot do by Indirection. You cannot
do by subterfuge that which you cannot
do when you come out in the open. That
is why I say that the Constitution does
guarantee it. Why. you can take a man
Into court on a contempt proceeding
here. You can put him in prison. You
can go and indict him and take him be-
fore the grand jury simultaneously.
You can punish him twice for the same
offense. Anybody want to dispute that?
Well, I am telling you, and you know it

Yes. my friends, it is reeking with
injustice. You say that you want to cure
prejudice. In the name of God, do not
try to cure prejudice and let the medi-
cine be prejudice. And, I will tell you
what you do. go back and find where my
distinguished chairman said that thia
marks the end of the ex parte injunc-
tion; and I called the Norrls-La Guardla
bill the anti-injxinction biU. That ia
what he said. I want to tell you this:
The right of trial by jury is too precious
for you to tamper with. In the name
of God, I cannot understand how any
lawyer on earth would want to tamper
with it. The evening is late. We are
almost drawing to a close. But. I want
to tell you. the saddest epitaph that
could ever be written in memory to the
vanishing of liberty is that those who
were the creators, those who were the de-
fenders, would not lift a hand to save
it while there was yet time.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
such time as he may desire to use to
the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Hn-

LOKGl.

Mr. HEEUiONO. Mr. Chairman. I ask
imanlmous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point In the RacoRO.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Florida?

There was no objection.

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Chahman. a few
days ago I received a letter which reads
in part as follows:

I am a Megro airman stationed here at
Mather Air Force Base. Calif. I have but
one more enUstment to serve heton retire-
ment from the Air Force. At the present
my plana are to build my retirement home
In West Palm Beach or Miami. Fla. With
only a few more years before my retire-
ment. I would illEe to get started with my
building plan. • • • I ttnd it rather hard to
get aiisigned to any southern base of my
choice. I would lilLe to be assigned to West
Palm Beach Air Force Base. Fla.. not only
because of my plans for buUdli]^ a home
there, but because I was bom In the South
and love the South plus the fact tbat I
respect the traditions and sovereignty of
the Southern States. I have faith in our
southern political leaders and the fight to
maintain and preserve our way of life for
the welfare of all conoemed. I am not
trying to give you a poUtlcal speech, but
it is Just that I can't stand these so-called
Uberal States and their laws.

Mr. Chairman. I quoted these porUons
of this letter so that this Congress and
the world may know as we in the South
already know that there is no problem

S

r

fi ;

9m

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8703

in ttie South that men of good will can-
not aolve, and tbejr can solve their proh-
lema without legialation. I ran a check
on this letter to be sure that It was
authentic and lountl It to be ao. I shall
not give the name of the airman who
wrote the letter for his own protection.
TL took a lot of courage for him to write
me as he did. because he did not know
to what use I was going to put his let-
ter.^ I can tell you that it is my honest
opinion that if the NAACP got hold of
his name and address, he would have
need to be afraid. I have found from
my experience in the South that the
average Negro is more afraid of what
would happen to him in the way of re-
prisals from the NAACP than he is of
anything else In the world. The pro-
fessional Negro is using him in a polit-
ical tug -of -war and against his will. If
this bill should pass he would be the
further dupe of these professional agi-
tators because he would find himself in
court against his will not as a defend-
ant but in an effort to try to support
diarges not made by him but against
his win and without his consent. Talk
about Inhumane treatment — it would
really be cruel and frightening to a
southern Negro to have that happen to
him. and he would, for the salce of pro-
tecting himself, agree with any words
that these agitators wanted to put in
his mouth.

The very nature of this legislation
before us Indicates that no person's
mind will be changed by what is said
here. If we have any appreciation for
the blessings of freedom in this coun-
try, however, we had better pay very
close attention to what is done here. To
convict a person on a criminal charge
without even a Jury trial strikes at the
very heart of our American system. It
Is depriving the individual of a right
that I say is greater than the right to
vote. Please understand that I have no
objection to any properly qualified
American dtizcn voting, but to put that
right paramount to the right of a man
to enjoy being tried by an impartial
Jury is to effectively put the cart before
ttie horse.

I earnestly plead with you to think
carefully of the rights of all Americans
before you vote on the Jiur-trial amend-
ment. If you let logic rather than emo-
tionalism control your vote, you will
adopt the Jury-trial amendment and
our system will be preserved. If you
do not. heaven only knows what will
happen to us.

Mr. KEATINO. Mr. Chainnan. I
yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts [Mr. CttkhsI.

Mr. CURTIS of Massachusetts. Mr.
Chainnan. I rise in support of this bill
and against the Jury trial amendment.

This bill should be called the constitu-
tional rights bill. Its primary purpose
is to protect the right to vote and other
constitutional rights.

The right to vote Is basic to the very
existence of a government which derives
its powers from the consent of the gov-
erned. The right to vote Is the key
which opens the door to the protection of

other rights. Local offlclala. themsalves
dependiivg on the votesof the paople, will
Usten to the demands and protect the
rights of voters, as they will not do for
Donvoters.

There was evidence before the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary that in some sec-
tions of the country people are being
deprived of their right to vote. There
was evidence that better protection of
that right is needed. The Attorney
Qeneral has stated that effective en-
forcement of civil rights is impossible
"with the legal tools now available."

In view of this evidence it is the plain
duty of the Congress to strengthen and
protect the right to vote. There can be
no question here of the violation of
States rights because the 15th amend-
ment of the Constitution of the Dnlted
States, after first proclainung that the
right to vote shall not be denied, pro-
vides:

The OongrcM shall have power to snTorc*

this article by appropriate leglslaUon.

Appropriate legislation to protect this
and other rights is now before the House.
Favorable action is important not only
domestically, but also from the point of
view of America's position before the
world. On his recent return from Afri-
ca. Vice President Nixon reported as fol-
lows on the effect of discrimination in
the United States:

As a result oT sklUf ul propaganda primarily
Inspired by the enemies of freedom, a con-
sistently distorted picture of the treatment
of minority races In the United States la
being effectively presented In the countries
I visited. Every Instance of prejudice In this
country U blown up In such a manner as to
create a completely false Impression of the
attitudes and practices of the great majority
of the American people. The result la ir-
reparable damage to the cause of freedom
which Is at stake.

Under existing law the right to vote
is enforced mainly by criminal prosecu-
tion. That means punishment after the
crime has been committed. The present
bill permits preventive relief by author-
izing the Attorney General to seek in-
junctions forbidding the deprivation of
voting rights when he has reason to
believe, and can prove in court, that
deprivation is about to take place. The
bill merely adds a new method for the
enforcement of existing laws which pro-
tect constitutional rights.

This year much emphasis Is being
placed by opponents of the bill on the al-
leged deprivation of the right of trial
by Jury which would result from this
bill. Amendments are proposed to grant
the right of trial by jury in contempt
proceedings arising under this bill.

Such a right is inconsistent with the
prompt and orderly administration of
Justice. What It means Is that after the
main case in which the injunction was
granted has been tried and disposed of.
a second and separate jury trial must be
had in order to make that decision
effective.

Presidential candidate Taft refuted a
similar suggestion in 1908, saying:

Never In the history of the country haa
ther* been siich an Inaldious attack upon

th9 judicial aystam m th« propoaal to inter-
j«ct a jury trial between all orders of the
ocrart made after full heulnf and the en-
toroOTiwBt of aooti orden.

It is plain that there U no constitu-
tional right to a jury trial In contempt
cases. Indeed. Prof. Paul A. Freund of
the Harvard Law School well pointed
out In his letter printed in yesterday's
New York Sunday Times:

The rval conatltutlonal laaue baa not been
over a supposed right of jury trial in this
claai of cases: it has been quite the reverse,
namely, whether the Judge may be deprived
of bis historic power to punish for contempt
without a jury.

It Is noteworthy that the courts of
many of the Southern States have held
that it was unconstitutional to provide
for jury trials in contempt proceedings.
A further noteworthy point is that when
this same bill was before the House last
year, the argument about deprivation
of jury trials was scarcely mentioned.

It is. of course, true that Federal laws
at one time granted jury trials in cer-
tain contempt proceedings arising out
of labor disputes. The coverage of those
laws has since been greatly reduced by
amendment, if not altogether repealed.

There were special reasons for grant-
ing such jury trials which do not exist
here. Injunctions that were generally
regarded as unduly broad and unfair
had been granted in labor disputes. The
injunctions In those cases sometimes en-
joined acts which might have been per-
formed by hundreds of strikers, and
there was frequently a difficult question
of fact as to whether the Individuel
striker had in fact violated the injunc-
tion.

No such situation could arise imder
the pending bill, and jury trials should
not be granted in cases of contempt
arising under it. Such a grant would
destroy one of the primary purposes of
the bill, which is to give prompt and
effective protection to the most funda-
mental rights possessed by American
citizens.

The real question before the House,
and before the American people, is
whether better methods of enforcement
of the civil rights laws are needed, and
whether Injunctive relief is a fair and
proper method under all the circum-
stances. I am convinced that it Is, and
urge the Members to support this legis-
lation and oppose any crippling amend-
ments.

Mr. KEATINO. Mr. Chairman, I yield
10 minutes to the gentleman from Mich-
igan [Mr. JOHARSERj.

Mr. JOHANSEN. Mr. Chairman. I am
abashed to follow the eloquence and the
brilliance of the gentleman from the
Third District of Georgia; but if it is any
source of cheer or comfort to the gentle-
man from the Third District of Oeorgi*
to know that the gentleman from the
Third District of Michigan shares the
concern that he has expressed over the
burgeoning powers of centralized Federal
Qovemment. the gentleman from tha
Third District of Georgia Is welcome to
that cheer. And let me say further that
apparently there are a few citizens in

the Third District of Michigan who also
share that deep concern.

Mr. Chairman. I voted against the so-
called civil-rights bill In the last Con-
gress.

Thereafter, during last year's primary
and general election campaigns, I made
every effort to apprise the citizens of my
district of Uiat fact and of the reasons
for my vote.

In addition. I apprised them, as I had
done 2 years before, of my purpose to
support the President and the Republi-
can program, if elected. Insofar as my
conscience and judgment dictated, but
without ever being in any sense a rubber-
stamp representative.

Those, then, are the terms and condi-
tions of my present employment. I can-
not and will not seek or accept that em-
ployment on any other terms.

Barring modifications of this bill be-
yond anything I can now Imagine, I ex-
pect to vote against the so-called civil-
rights bill again this year.

And I shall again, to the best of my
ability, apprise the citizens of my district
of that vote and of my reasons therefor.
They will, of course, in due time, again
record — favorably or unfavorably —
their Judgment of my stewardship In
this and other matters.

Because in what I have just said, and
in what I am about to say, I am speaking
with unwonted and perhaps impolitic
frankness, I hope no one will think me
either arbitrary, or flippantly defiant
or unsympathetic to those who would
redress human wrongs, or that I am
professing a purity of motive above any
of my colleagues.

Having said this, may I. In this same
vein of frankness, offer a word to any
fellow Republicans who may think they
see potential party advantage in support
or adoption of this legislation.

Conceivably, tomorrow's election, and
even control of the next Congress, might
be won by today's vote for this bill.

But if perchance today's vote should
hereafter be proven wrong in principle,
it is Inevitable that the wrong will ulti-
mately be discovered and exposed.

Then would certainly follow the sub-
sequent reversal of popular sentiment,
the subsequent repudiation at the polls,
the subsequent condemnation of public
and personal conscience for choosing the
cynical course of imagined expediency
and opportunism.

It is. I suppose, a hopelessly naive
viewpoint, but I can conceive of cir-
cumstances In which the Republican
party could be a far more potent force
for good and greatness in the Nation— «
far more likely candidate for subsequent
and substantial victory — as a minority
party of conscience and principle rather
than as a majority party of expediency.
I merely invite my Republican colleagues
to give that possibility earnest consid-
eration.

My main purpose in adding to an al-
ready overburdened record of debate on
this bill. Is to list and briefly discuss
three areas of deep and sincere concern
on my part with respect to the subject
imder consideration before this House.

I hare no citations of law to quote, no
complex constitutional arguments to
present, no Involved precedents to dte.
I shall not try to explain the difference
between various types of contempt pro-
ceedings, with or without jury trial, or
differences between civil actions in which
the Government of the United States Is
a party and those in which it is not.

All of this is important to this de-
bate and all of it has already been pre-
sented far more ably than I could hope
to do It.

However, I have a very strong feel-
ing that for better or worse, the Ameri-
can pe<^le are going to pass over these
complex and complicated technical is-
sues and react to this whole problem In
much simpler, more commonsense, more
down-to-earth fashion. So It is in these
terms that I want to speak now.

The first area of my deep concern is
the conviction that in dealing with this
problem of civil rights in relation to
race, color, or naticmal origin, we are
guilty of an overrellance upon govern-
ment— govemmmt in general, increas-
ingly centralized and federalized govern-
ment In particular.

Unquestionably government, local.
State, and Federal, has its role to play —
and is already playing that role — ^in this
area of human relationships and prob-
lems.

But I submit that one of the insidious
effects of looking primarily to govern-
ment for the solution of problems is that
it tends to progressively discourage look-
ing elsewhere for solutions.

And very often, if indeed not usually,
the solution, or a very large part of the
solution, does Ue elsewhere.

It seems to me that this principle ap-
pUes with particular force and urgency
to the delicate and complex and diffi-
cult problems of social relationships —
especially problems complicated by fac-
tors of race, color, and divergent na-
tional origin.

Of course, there Is always an area of
necessary and legitimate activity for
government in this field. Just as there
is in the field of domestic relations. We
have laws, and governmental power and
penalties, relative to marriage and di-
vorce and family relations. But siurely
we are all wise enough to know that
there is no law which can compel mu-
tual affection, esteem, and reiq)ect be-
tween a man and woman, and surely we
are all wise enough to know that no true
marriage or domestic felicity could sur-
vive solely on the basis of a govern-
ment-imposed relationship.

It seems to me that the amazing and
to me shocking "General Statement" on
pages 4 to 6 of the Judiciary Ccxnmit-
tee's majority report all too obviously
attempts to equate progress toward per-
fection in the matter of civil rights and
interracial relations, vrith a constant
expanslcm or intensification of gov-
ernmental power and activity, partic-
ularly Federal governmental power and
activity.

I prefer the premise so eloquently
stated by David Lawrence that "Volun-
tarism is freedom's greatest vehicle of
progress." The key to justice, to effec-
tive concern tor hiunan rights and their

advancement, to Improvement of human
opportunities for all. to substantial
progress in more cordial and fruitful
human relationships, seems to me al-
ways to lie first and preeminently in
innate hiunan good will, in individual
initiative. In moral suasion. In the law
written on "the fleshy tables of the
heart," and in the force of high example.

I am deeply concerned over the ex-
cessive reliance upon the power of gov-
ernment— ^particularly because I believe
this proposed legislation demonstrates
the reverse law of gravity In govem-
moit whereby authority and power
seem always and Inevitably to gravitate
to the top. To me there Is and always
will be something incongruous about the
argument that the more we concentrate
power in centralized federal govern-
ment, the more we assure treedam..

A second matter of deep concern to me
Is our seeming determination, with re-
spect to delicate and complex and diffi-
cult problems of human relationships,
to Incessantly, persistently, and Insist-
ently talk ourselves and each other Into
trouble, tension, and controversy.

I believe in freedom of speech and
public expression. I do not believe In
surrendering to some sort of compulsive
urge to constantly and Incessantly talk
about one problem or subject.

I believe in the therapeutic value of
"talking a problem out" but I believe,
also, that we can talk a problem back in
again In aggravated form Just by failing
to recognize also the therapeutic value
of occasional silence.

Reverting again to the analogy of the
husband and wife, there undoubtedly are
times when the partners In a marriage
must discuss problems involved in living
together. However, I know of nothing
more explosive than a continuous and
nagging rehash of those problems.

I believe in the necessity and virtue of
a public expose of evils and abuses so
that there may be brought to bear the
corrective force of the American spirit of
fair play, the power of public opinion,
and, within reasonable Umits. the polic-
ing of necessary legislation.

But I also beUeve that there ought to
be an occasional accentuation of the
positive, an occasional reporting to our
fellow citizens of the gains and accom-
plishments and progress which have been
made in and out of Government with
respect to these problems.

Buried in the hundreds of pages of
testimony before the House Judiciary
Subcommittee and the committee of the
other body Is much inspiring testi-
mony— by colored as well as white wlt-
nesses^-as to progress and gains which
have been made and are being made in
sound, healthy, and mutually fruitful re-
lations between citizens of different
color, race, and national origin — particu-
larly In the South. If I have any majOT
criticism of my southern friends, it is
for what may be their f ailiu-e adequately
and graphically to tell that true story to
the Nation.

My point Is that if we must constantly
talk about these problems, why not at
least occasionally talk about the things
of good report.

6704

CONGRESSICWAL RECCED — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIC»^AL RECC»D — HOUSE

8705

!?

1

Mow. « third and final matter of coq-
cem. Ostensibly the purpoee of this.
and of similar civU rights legislation,
and of the incessant drumfire of discus-
sion and adtatiou, is to miiumlze and
eliminate human intolerance.

I am fearful, however, that in the
seal — however honest aiul sincere — to
eliminate one form of human intolerance
we are in real peril of falling victim.
quite unwittingly, to another and even
more dire and disastrous form of human
Intolerance.

I deplore and abhor the malevolent in-
tolerance of racial prejudice and dis-
crimination and the abrogation of hu-
man and political rights which follows
in its wake.

But I am even more apprehensive —
and I am sure that human history justi-
fies the apprehension — of the potential
intolerance of the righteous — or self-
righteous — ^zealot and reformer, particu-
larly when he is armed and equipped
with the apparatus and awful police
power of centralized federal government.

In a word. I regard as a bad bargain,
indeed, the exchange of ignorant and
Hialevolent intolerance for the intelli-
gent, skillful, and powerful intolerance
of those otxessed with the rectitude of
their cause and the urgency of imposing
their reforms upon their fellow citizens.

Of course, I attribute no such inU)ler-
aixce to my colleagues who favor the pro-
posed legislation. But I do invite your
attention to two sentences from the gen-
eral statement in the majority report to
which I have already referred:

Aitbougli our i«cord as a nation Is defi-
nitely one of progress toward the achieve-
ment of the Ideal for which this Government
was established, it would not be proper to
permit sta^^atlon at any point prior to
reaching, as far as humanly possible, the
true American way of life. As human beings
subject to the frailties of our nature, per-
fection Is something that Is never achieved
but must be honestly and consclentloiisly
striven for during every moment of our
existence.

As personal goals of sincere men, as the
aspiration of voluntarism, as the inner
and spiritual motivation of freemen. I
can subscribe to and applaud these noble
purposes, even though I am human
enough to wonder if this striving for per-
fection must literally continue during
every moment of our existence. But
insofar as the suggestion in these
words — and in their context I think
the suggestion is all too apparent —
is that it is the business of gov-
ernment, and particularly of centralized
federal government, to compel and com-
mand these purposes and this strife for
perfection during every moment of our
existence, I want no part of it.

And I say that to identify such pur-
poses with the power, the authority, and
the penalties of centralized federal gov-
ernment is to toy with a form of intoler-
ance which ought to strike fear to the
hearts of all freedom-loving Americans
without regard to race, color, or national
origin.

I spoke at the outset of the risks in-
volved in sacrificing principles to expedi-
ency. I close with a quotation which
contrasts the attitudes of expediency
and principle with respect to the matter

of concentration of power in Washing-
ton.

Kzpedlency said: "We cannot aUow our
fine new Ideas to be at the marcy of 51 aepa-
rate State and Territorial legislatures. It
Is so much quicker and easier to plan,
finance, and direct all major projects from
Washington."

Principle says: "Oeographlcal balance of
power Is essential to our form of free society.
<f you take the centralization shortcut every
time something Is to be done, you will per-
haps sometimes get quick action. But there
Is no perhaps about the price you wlU pay
for your impaUence: The growth of a swol-
len, bureaucratic, monster government In
Washington, In whose shadow our State and
local i^overnments wlU ultimately wither and
die."

I subscribe wholeheartedly to the sen-
timents so eloquently voiced in his ac-
ceptance speech last August by President
Dwight D. Elisenhower.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr. Chair-
man, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman
from Michisan [Mr. Dices 1.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Chair-
man, a point of order.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Chair-
man. I make the point of order that a
quorum is not present.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will
count. [After counting.) Eighty-four
Members are present, not a quorum.

The Clerk will call the roll.

The Cleric called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to their
names :

(Roll No. 106 j

Alger Ford Multer

Anfu'o Prellnghuysen Norblnd

Ashlry Garmatz Norrell

Averv Gathmgs O'Konskl

Ayres Granahan Osniers

Ba'ley Gray Perkins

Baker Gregory Phllbln

Barrett Oubser Pillion

Baas. N. H. Harvey Poas^e

Eeamer Heaiey Powell

Bennett, Mich. Hill!n.;s Prouty

Berry Hopven Radwan

Bolton Hoi Heid Reece. Tenn.

Boerh HoUzman Reed

Bow HotHu Ro»;ers. Tex.

Bowler James Santangeio

Breeding Jenkins St George

Brown. Mo. Kearney Scrivner

Buckley Keeney Seely-Brown

Budge Kllhura Shelley

Burdlctc Klrwan BUer

Byrne, ni. Krueger Smith. Wis.

Byrnes. Wis. Latham bpence

Cannon LeCompte Steed

Chlpcrfleld Lennon Tnylor

Christopher McCarthy Teller

Chudrff McConnell Thomas

C'.evenger McPall Thompson, N. J.

Cooley McOovem Thompson. Tex.

Ooudert Mclnilre Tollefson

Davis, Tenn. Machrowlea Udall

Dawscn. lU. Magnuson Vinson

Dempeey M.vson Wainwrlght

DolUnger May Weatlnnd

Donohue Meader Wharton

Dooley Miller, Md. Wlgglesworth

Ehirham Miller, N T. Williams. N. Y.

Bberharter Mills Wlthrow

Bngle Montoya Wolverton

Flood Morano Zelenko

Fogarty Moulder

Accordingly the Committee rose; and
the Speaker pro tempore [Mr. KiloayJ
having assumed the chair. Mr. Porand.
Chairman of the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union,
reported that that Committee having
had under consideration the bill H. R.
6127. and finding Itself without a quo-
rum, he had directed the roll to be called,

when 308 llemben responded to their
names, a quorum, and he submitted here-
with the names of the absentees to be
spread upon the Journal.

The Committee resumed Its sitting.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr. Chair-
man. I yield 10 minutes to the gentle-
man from Michigan IMr. Dices].

Mr. DIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I suspect
that at this late hour and also because of
the very thorough discussion of the legis-
lation now before us that there is little
I can do to change anyone's mind. But
as a cosponsor of a similar proposal, per-
mit me first of all to say I am gratified
because of the tenor of the debate up to
this moment. I am gratified because it
has not been generally characterized by
certain kinds of inflammatory statements
and expressions with those few excep-
tions when certain opponents of the bill
felt it incumbent upor themielves to re-
duce the discussion to the usual ha-
rangue about the NAACP and other
right-thinking organizations and their
usual harangue about the relationship
between this subject and so-called racial
superiority. I think the provisions of
this bill have been ably discussed and de-
scribed by Members of both parties rep-
resenting various parts of the country.
May I compliment the opponents of this
bill because I do not believe anyone could
have heard or read their testimony with-
out being Impressed with their adroitness
and their determination in presenting
their viewpoints. As a matter of fact,
they have been so resourceful that they
have maneuvered this entire debate with
httle exception into ar area which is en-
tirely apart from the main objectives of
this bill. I shall not attempt to belabor
the merits of thj bill because I think they
have been ably and amply discus.^ed.

May I Just use this one sentence to
describe how I, particularly, feel about
the principal proposed aniendment?
And when I say that in connection with
the so-called trial by jury proposal, I
hope that all of us who have an open
mind will remember that only when a
person refuses to obey a court injunction
ordering him not to deprive a person of
his voting privilege will this so-called
contempt procedure become operative.
I am not going to endeavor to elaborate
on the siRnificance of this legislation as
It relates to our kinship with other peo-
ple in this world, and especially the
darker people of this world, but may I
remind you of the statement of the Vice
President of the United States when he
returned from his historical trip to the
continent of Africa; may I remind you
of the statements made by our distin-
guished colleague, the gentlewoman from
Ohio [Mrs. Bolton 1, and may I remind
you of the statements that are being
made by our emissaries and our states-
men and certain other Members of Con-
gress week after week and year after
year about the relationship between the
treatment of our so-called minority
peoples in this country and the prestige
of the United SUtes in the Free World.
I can certainly attest to the fact that as
a member, and a privileged member of
the delegation selected from this House
to go to Africa, we were constantly
questioned about the treatment of mi-

nority groups and peo]Hes here in the
United States.

I tell you that I have seen stories con-
cerning racial incidents relating to the
matter on this floor not only in Africa
but also on the European Continent: and
if anyone thinks that their provincial-
ism is going to keep these stories from
being circulated in these particular areas
or keep these stories from affecting the
prestige of our country they are mis-
taken. And certainly these stories are
not of the kind of broad concept of
democracy that justifies their opposition
here in the Congress of the United
States.

I would like to take just a few mo-
ments, because of the tenor of the dis-
cussion up to this time, to give you a
little of the background which gave rise
to this legislation, to bring this particu-
lar measure back Into focus on the ques-
tion whether or not any person any-
where in the United States is permitted
to exercise his most important privilege,
and that is the privilege of the fran-
chise.

On this floor during this debate the
statement has been made: Bring us
some evidence of people who have been
deprived of their voting privilege here
in the United States. We have been
challenged to come forth with evidence
of this deprivation. Let me say that
I am prepared to name you entire coun-
ties in these United States where the
Negro people are not permitted to vote.
I can tell you about counties, for in-
stance, in the State of Florida: Taylor,
Madison, Gadsden, and Jefferson Coun-
ties, where Negroes are not registered to
vote.

I can carry you over into the State
of Alabama and refer you to covmties
in that particular State where Negroes
are not registered to vote, and I have
the information before me where Ne-
groes in Lowndes County — if I pronounce
it correctly — and Wilcox County, Ala.,
are not permitted to vote.

And I can tell you about the subterfuge
that is used in other counties which
keeps Negroes' voting privileges down.

I can tell you. for instance, in the
State of Alabama about certain addi-
tional burdens which are required of
Nfgroes. For instance, there must be
present In some of these areas, when a
Negro is registering, an elector to sign
the lippUcatlon of the Negro, but this is
not required of the other people. The
Negro, consequently, must have a white
person sign his application in certain
areas of this State. A Negro cannot do
this in many counties In Alabama, as
many whites will not sign the applica-
tion of Negroes.

We have a situation in Alabama where
In a couple of counties the members of
the board of registrars have resigned
rather than register Negroes. This has
been the case in Bullock and Macon
Counties in Alabama.

With relation to the processing of ap-
plications, many who fail to receive their
certificates have been told that the ap-
plications have not been processed; but
the white applicants in most inatanoes
receive their certificate* immediately
upon registering.

Many boards discourage Negroes Iroax
voting in Alabama by pretending to be
busy when they come in to register, fail-
ing to recognize their presence, or that a
Negro is applying for registration. In
some instances when they finally recog-
nize him he is told that there is not a
quorum of the registrars present and the
Negro's application cazmot be regis-
tered.

In some instances the place used for
Negroes will accommodate only one per-
son and, therefore, there is a long line
where only one person can fill out the
questionnaire required at a time, and the
long wait discourages some; others must
go back to woiic.

We have a situation where acme
boards make no pretense whatsotnrer
but tell Negroes they are not registering
Negroes while others may be considerate
and pretend that there are just no
Wanks available. Still others are told to
oome back at some future date and are
oontlnually told to come back at some
future date.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Michigan has expired.
Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
the gentleman 5 additional minutes.

Mr. DIGGS. Mr. Chairman, many
times boards will show by their obvious
resentment that they do not want to be
bothered.

I could go on and on and cite these
subterfuges which are being used in this
particular State.

I could also swing over to the State of
Mississippi and point out to you 13
counties in the State of Mississippi that
do not have one Negro registo'ed on
their books. I invite any Representa-
tive from that State to explain why a
Negro in any of these 13 counties is not
registered. I am talking about counties
whose population ranges from 12 per-
cent all the way up to 74 percent in
Jefferson County, and there are no
Negroes registered to vote. I invite the
distinguished Representatives from ttiat
State to explain why there are no Ne-
groes registered in those iMirticular
counties.

Mr. Chairman, on the basis of the
testimeny that was given in the hear-
ings from the people living in these vari-
ous sections, who have pointed out that
through intimidation, coercion, and sub-
terfuge, they are kept from the polls,
this is ample testimony why this legis-
lation is so sorely needed. I have not
heard on this floor during the entire
debate anyone come up wiUi a 8oluti<m
of this particular problem, other than
the solution which is incorporated in
this legislation.

The reason that we are here today
seeking relief on the Federal level is be-
cause the offokling States are not pro-
tecting the right to vote on the part of
these people to whom I have referred.
Tliey do not want that kind of States
rights because they know that once full
participation of the ballot is in the
hands of all the people they will have to.
of course, answer to all of the people as
it relates to matters in which they ex-
press an interest here in Washington.

Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chalmui]. wiU
the goitJemaa yield?

cm-

Mr. DIGGS. I yield to the gentleman
from Pennsylvania.

Mr. FULTON. A statement has been
made to me cm the floor that the Ne-
groes who are not registered were not
interested in voting. I doubted that
because I come from a Northern State.
I would like to have the gentleman, as
he knows so many of them, tell us
whether these Negroes really want to
vote and take an interest in the civic
affairs of their communities, because
there are many of us on the floor, re-
gardless of color or religion, who want
them to have that right and who want
to flnd out how to get them the right to
do so.

Mr. DIGGS. In all fairness to the
gentleman, the question of voter partic-
ipation is approximately the same in all
areas, at least in the northern areas
among a particular group as in any
other particular group. You do not flnd
a marked lag between the participation
of people in the voting processes,
whether they are Negro or white,
when they have the opporttmlty to vote.

I want you to look at the statistics.
For instance, let me cite these 13 partic-
ular counties. In Carroll Coimty, Miss..
which has a Negro population of 57 per-
cent, not one Negro Is registered in the
entire county.

In Chickasaw, 44.5 percent Negroes,
not one Negro registered: Clarke County,
49.7 percent Negroes, not one Negro reg-
istered; Issaquena, 67.4 percent. Inci-
dentally Issaquena Coimty is the birth-
place of my father. Jefferson County,
74.5 perc«it Negroes, not one registered.
lAmar County, 15.9 percent Negroes;
Noxubee, 74.4 percent; Pearl River, 21.8
percent; Tallahatchie. €3.7 percent.

And may I remind you that Talla-
hatchie County is the county where the
Tin trial was held.

When you consider the fact that you
have to be a registered voter In Missis- '
sippi as a condition precedent to serving
on juries, you can see how this can be-
come compounded so far as the Negro
people are concerned, not only as It re-
lates to votkig but as it relates to all
rights in those particular States. I
could go on and on to point that out.

ysx. PULTON. I want to compliment
the gentleman on a brave and fearless
statement, because he certainly has
pointed out instance after instance.
Then, does it not become Incredible when
said by people on this floor that the
Negro in those sections does not want to
vote and does not want to be registered
when not even one Negro is registered In
any of those counties that you have just
Usted.

Mr. DIGGS. The gentleman Is cor-

The CHAIRlilAN. The time of the
gentleman from Michigan has expired.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Ctudrman. I yield
10 minutes to tbe genUeman from North
Carolina [Mr. BardenI.

Mr. BAROBN. Mr. Chainnaa, this
piece of legislation has aroused consid-
erable interest with me. I do not think
anyone would question the fact that
there is a very sharp issue drawn here
over the question of jury trials. I went
to the trouble to look up somethinc

-648

i

*i

a

8706

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RBCORD — HOUSE

8707

about the history of Juries. I Investi-
gated the record in many of the foreign
countries. I went back to the begin-
ning—to the time the British people met
King John and made him kneel and as-
sure them that that privilege — trial by
jxiry — must remain and be a part of
their law. They thought then, and I
think now, that this safeguard of indi-
vidual rights is too precious to bt- batted
around and on trial at this late hour.
We have a great democracy. We have
won the hearts of the world so far as
people wanting to come to the United
States is concerned. We have these pre-
cious institutions designed to preserve
the rights of people, and give them fair
play and fair trials. Unfortunately so
many of our newcomers are misled and
they unthinkingly Join in movements
such as the passage of this bill. We know
what has happened in France. We know
what happened in Japan. That is why
so many good people in America do not
want that boy of ours tried in a country
that does not have trial by Jury. It is not
Just a whim with them— it is serious and
It should be serious to those who prob-
ably have not stopped to think about it.
I have observed in the history of every
single nation, that as the Jury trial and
the courts were whittled down, central
government grew — the rights of the peo-
ple shrank. As far as voting is con-
cerned, with me that is the right of every
citizen in America.

So far as I am concerned. I shall
throw no block in the way of it. and I
have and do encourage it. But now we
will take a country that so many like to
refer to. I do not talk about it very
much because I think there has been
too much talking and not enough done
about it. I refer to Soviet Russia.
When the Russian revolution took place
and the Bolsheviks took over, there has
not been a jury trial in Russia since
that time. When Hitler took over, with
one stroke he abolished the states and
all jury trials. Did this help minority
groups? Did this preserve anybody's
civil rights? Should that be a warning
to people or should we forget history —
forget even our own history and fall into
the same troubles? I want to read you
something now that might be of interest.
This has received oCBcial approval of the
Soviet Government. It was written and
passed out by Krylenko. public prose-
cutor in many important cases and the
official writer on the Judiciary of Rus-
sia. Here is the language:

Our Judge ts above all a p)oll*'lclan, a
worker In the political field; and. therefore,
he must kniiw what the government wanta
and guide hia work accordingly. TbereXore
the court must —

Now listen —

be organized so that there la a possibility
of directing the Judiiment In conformity
with the alms of state policy as pursued
by the government.

Is there anyone in this Chamber who
does not recognize the fact that the
Attorney General is given more power
in this bill than anyone else? Is there
any doubt in the mind of any person
here that the present Attorney General
and those who have preceded him, re-
gardless of the administration. Demo-

cratic or Republican. Is a political figure
and he is the .spokesman who carries out
the administrations policy?

No one would deny that.

Now, Just take this langauage. If you
please, strike out what Mr. Krylenko
said, strike out where he puts "Judge"
and say this:

Our Attorney General la, above all. a
politician, a worker in the political field;
and. therefore, he must know what the Oov-
ernment want* and guide hla work accord-
ingly. The Attorney General must be organ-
ized so that there is a poBslbillty of directing
the Judgment in conformity with the aln« of
State policy as pursued by the Government.

This is too hard to explain and too
horrible to embrace. Frankly the politi-
cal odor of this bill is terrible and offen-
sive.

Now I am forgetting all this tommy-
rot about how many murders took place
in some gentleman's district or other il-
legal incidents which might have oc-
curred. If it is bad we all want to stop
it, but for Heavens sake, let us not be so
drastic that in our treatment for the
headache we amputate the patient's
head: and that is now about the type
of prescription you are attempting to
write.

We must not forget that the Jury
system has played a conspicuous part in
the defense of popular rights against
attempts of tyrannical exercise au-
thority by executive Governments from
the beginning of the Jury system.

I can live under any law the rest of
you can live under; I can live imder
the law with this jury clause in It. but
I want to say to my friends who wrote
this bill, whoever it was that came up
with thi^ lanerua^e probably said, "This
will do it," did not render any service
to this democracy: and I sfy now It
bears every earmark of legislative trick-
ery.

Those are pretty strong words. I have
practiced law a long time. I adminis-
tered the law. It has always been re-
pul.'^ive to me to Pfe any attempt in the
courthouse, or otherwise, to deprive an
American citizen of his rights and to
treat him unfairly.

I am not Kotng to be one to try to
justify my voting for language that fixes
it .so you could do indirectly what you
are just a little afraid you could not do
directly to the extent you wanted to do.

I do not want to see this bill pa.ssed as
It is, and I sincerely hope it will be de-
feated.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from North Carolina has ex-
pired.

Mr. BARDEN. Will the gentleman
yield me 5 additional minutes?

Mr. CETJ.KR. Mr. Chairman. I yield
the gentleman 3 additional minutes.

Mr BARDEN. Now I wiU Just hand
It back to you.

I requested time last week. You have
been very liberal to everyone else. You
can take back your time. I must say
your conduct with reference to this small
request is consistent with the import of
this legislation which you espouse — un-
fair.

Mr CETJ.KR. Mr. Chairman. I yield
5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Georgia [Mrs. BlitchJ.

Mrs. BLITCH. Mr. Chairman, It Is
Incongruous that year after year this
House is thrown Into a turmoil spending
days upon days of Its valuatile time de-
bating the same question of civil wrongs
that certain elements of this country are
determined to ram down tht; throats of
all the citizens of this country; for this
bill under consideration, if passed, will
not apply solely to any one s<ction of the
United States but to all of Its Integral
parts. However, as long as J^e continue
to be faced with this issue we of the
South will not hesitate to be in the van-
guard of those who fight to preserve the
civil rights of the individua;, no matter
where he may live.

I wonder if it has occurred to the
Members of Lhis body that chaos, Ge-
stapolsm. and an utter disregard of the
rights of individuals has been avoided
so far in this country by the thin gray
line from the South? The majority of
the House membership has. time after
time, ridden roughshod over the Mem-
bers of the House whose love of the prin-
ciples upon which this country was
founded has been and is no¥ being dem-
onstrated in no uncertain '.erms.

I have often heard it said privately
and on the floor of the House that this
bill would be decided alo:ig sectional
lines. It is extremely diffici.lt for me to
decipher such reasoning, if it actually bo
true. An American citizen is no less an
American citizen in New York, Illinois.
Kansas. California, and so forth, than
he is in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, or
Virginia. The right of trial by Jury is
as sacred to an American citizen In
Pennsylvania or Ohio as it is to a citi-
zen in South Carolina, North Carolina,
or Tennessee.

In the light of the glorious history of
this Nation, it is heart rending to me
to see this attempt to deprive the Ameri-
can citizen of the rights fcr which the
blood of so many men has been spilled
in places all over the world. With what
spirit can the man in the service of his
country today and in the future fight,
yea, even give his life? How will It be
p>06sible for a mother to give her son or
a wife her husband to battle without
cause?

We have the spectacle ol a Supreme
Court which rules without regard for
the Constitution or the Congress. We
have the spectacle of a United States
Attorney General representing to the
Congress that this legislation, the sole
purpose of which is to take avay the civil
rights of the people of the U lited States.
Is urgent and necessary. We have the
spectacle of the President o.' the United
States saying he will use any means at
his dispo&al to see that this legislation Is
pas.sed. This Is not the same kind of
philosophy espoused by our President
either in his first or seconl campaign
for office.

Shall we now have the Hou'>e of Repre-
sentatives, the only governing body of
this Nation that is really close to the
people, making a like spectacle of Itself
by disregarding completely the civil lib-
erties of the people by passir g the abor-
tive legislation at present urder consid-
eration? In God's name, I pray not

Oh, liberty, how many Injustices are
committed in thy name.

One of the greatest injustices in the
history of our Nation shall have been
committed if this bill finds its way to
the statute boolu.

Seldom, if ever, in the lifetime of a
person, is It given to him or her to rise
to the heights of glorious living as the
opposition to the passage of this bill af-
fords. In our day and age, we usually
look back as far as Washington, Jeffer-
son, Jackson, and Lincoln for our ex-
amples of great courage. These names
will always be revered as long as we have
the courage to hurl back every attack
on the system of government that they
spent most of their lives in establishing
and preserving for us.

If. as has been said, this bill is sup-
posed to capture the minority bloc vote
of the colored people in the Northern
States. It is an insult to the intelligence
and to the Integrity of those colored peo-
ple. It has been my position in life »o
live in the midst of colored people. My
observation is that they love liberty and
freedom of movement Just as well as any
of the white people I know. This bill is
no respecter of persons. The colored
citizen and the white citizen will suffer
under it If it becomes law. In such an
event, how do you who are sponsoring
this bill expect to Justify your action?
Or, do you think that it will be too late
for you to "pay the piper," so to speak,
and it will be upon the shoulders of
those who come after you to bear the
burden of the issue — that is, provided we
still have the representative process of
government as we know it today.

I would rather feel that there are
enough Members of this body who will
fall to bend the knee to a false idol that
will bring about in this country a Hitler
or a Stalin whose oppression of racial
minorities were the cruelest and most
heartless exhibitions in the entire his-
tory of mankind. If this bill passes, It
opens the door to just such a situation.
I plead with each of you who is un-
decided or who has made up his mind to
vote for this biU. to think ot the freedom
that all peoples have enjoyed in these
great United States from the time we
first became a country, and then to
think of the grave threat to freedom
that Is embodied within this bill and
vote against it — kill it— do not let the
cancer of Indecencies that are sure to
arise if this bill is made into law be upon
your handsL

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
10 minutes to the gentleman from nii^
nois [Mr. O'Haia].

Mr. OHARA of HUnois. Mr. Chair-
man, again, as the days of June are rid-
ing toward the longest day in the year
and the beginning of the death of sum-
mer, we are enrapt in the emotions at-
tending the passing of an old order and
the birth of a new. I feel that my dear
frienda from the Southland today, as
they have before, are standing on the
edge of a lost battlefield fighting for
something that they believe in but that
they know has passed forever.

But. Mr, Chairman, we are mAyiny
progress. We are marching forward to
greater heights to advance the dignity
of all men and Xulflil the mandates of
our destiny.

I remember when I was going to law
school we were told that there was a time
when people who suffered from wrongs
for which there was no remedy went to
the king and at^ed the king to exercise
his conscience, to do the right thing even
though there was no approach to the
right in the existing law. And so came
our court of conscience, otir court of
equity.

There have been wrongs. I do not
tiilnk any of us doubts that through fear
or for other reasons many people of the
Negro race in certain parts of our coun-
try have not been voting, certainly in the
nimibers that we would desire and we
would expect in proportion to their pop-
ulation. And our Republic cannot exist
unless we give to all of our citizens the
right to vote. In a representative de-
mocracy that is the most sacred of all
the rights.

I respect the right to a Jury trial. I
think no one loves an American Jury
more than do I; and I have had, in my
humble way, the privilege of talking to
Juries in many cases, and in many States
including the great State of Tennessee.
But I know the limitations of the Jury
system. The right to a jury trial means
the right to a trial by jurors of your
peers and in a climate that is without
bias and without prejudice. That is
the American concept of trial by jury.
And so we have always been very ca.reful
to protect the right to trial by jury with
the right to a change of venue.<

Let a horrible crime be committed in
any county or any community and some-
one who is not popular in that com-
munity is suspected and arrested for the
crime. Because human nature is what
it is, it is conceivable that it would not
be possible to have a fair and impartial
trial in that county or in that community
and a change of venue is granted to an-
other county where such bias and prej-
udice may not obtain.

In our great State of Illinois we imH
tect that right to a change of venue to
the extent that we make it mandatory
upon our judges to grant a change of
venue when a showing is made merely by
affidavit. That I think should be horxM
in mind.

What Is our situation now? We have
in a section of our country — and I am
not scolding; when you are bcNm and
brought up in a social order, it is hard
to change: we all fight change trom the
status quo — so we have in that section
a feeling that white supremacy still ob-
tains, that in a world in which the white
constitutes a relatively small minority,
we can go on living, today as it was
yesterday, on the standard of white
supremacy.

In the section where that feeling ob-
tains, human nature being what it is.
it would be difficult to find a jury that
would pass upon the facts and not the
law.

The Jury Is given the deteimination of
the facts, not the determination of the
law. In Illinois, when an attorney Is
examining the prospective members of
a jmr. he asks If they win reach ISteir
decision from ttie evidence ttiat they
hear in the court and following tbe law
as given to them by tbe judge cm the
bench. It was never intended that Jmws

should pass iqxm the law. Yet it is dilfi-
cult for the layman to distinp^Hah be-
tween what is law and what is fact, and.
no matter how conscientious he intends
to be in ttie performance of his duties
as a juror and in his respect for his oath,
his determination of what is fact and
what is law must subconsciously be influ-
enced, and his confusion multiplied,
when against the law itself, he is strongly
and emotionally opposed.

Once a law of the land is enacted by
passage of a bill by the Congress, and
signatiu-ed by the President, it is effec-
tive upon all persons in our Nation. It
was never intended by the makers of
our Constitution that a law of the land
should be submitted to trial by jury so
that in one commimity it would be ac-
cepted and enforced and in other com-
munities would be rejected. It is self-
evident that government could not con-
tinue to function in such a situaticm.

I should regard it as a splendid trib-
ute to the judicial temperament and in-
tegrity of Southern judges, which should
not go unnoticed by my colleagues from
ttie Southland, that no one from the
North in these many hours of emotion-
heated debate has raised the slightest
question as to how the judges in South-
em districts would act in the judicial
administration of a law that might not
meet with their personal approval It
is hard for me to understand why simi-
lar confideiM^ has not more (tften, in
the debate, been voiced by my friends
from tbe South, unless it be that th^
wish the law itself, and not the facts
as they apply to individuals, to be passed
upon by laymen and not by judges
learned in the law and charged with its
interpretation.

Mr. Chairman, I trust that the bill
will pass unamended, and that our coun-
try will go on in the new day, undis-
turbed by the passing emotions of a
change from tbe status quo, bravely and
wisely meeting in the future as it did in
tbe past the challenges of broadening
borizons.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from Lou-
isiana [Mr. Baooias] .

Mr. BROOB:s of Louisiana. Mr.
Chairman, in the course of my experi-
ence in Congress, I have seen one politi-
cal bill after another pushed forward by
active supporters in the Congress, as be*
ing panaceas for all racial troubles.
These bills have taken Um tana, over the
course of the years, of one type of remedy
or another. They have been termed
force bills, antilylobching bllla. P. E. P. C.
Ulls, antipoiltax bills, and eivil-rl^ts
bills. These bill have all been pushed
with different degrees of vigor over a
period of many years, and finally have
been pushed out of the realm of active
sm>p(Hrt through a change in the politieal
comidexlon of racial minorities through-
out the country.

I have ahrays eonducied mysdf and
my affairs fair^. I have tried to aee that
the remedies given by law amilied to the
colored and white people alike. I have
supported B&any measures of benefit to
the eolored people of Louisiana, as well
aa to tbe whole Onited States. OfaUof
the bills that have come before us in the
time J have been in Onngress, H. K. 6127,

i

8708

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

Introduced by Mr. Ciller of New York. Is
probably the most vicious bill that I have
seen. The bill has properly been termed
"the administration bill on civil rights."
It is clearly directed against the South.
It is pushed forward as a palliative of all
social and racial problems and iniquities.

The bill IS divided into two parts,
roughly speakin?. The first provirles for
a commission to be appointed by the
President and provides powers and
duties. The second portion provides ad-
ditional provisions granting injunctive
relief at the reciuest of the United States
Attorney General.

It is this -econd provision of the bill
which is particularly vicious.

It is not the rmhts which are supposed
to be protected under section 131 of the
bill with which I have the primary con-
cern. It is, rather, the new methods and
new powers granted for the enforcement
of this provision — especially the broad-
enlni? of the injunctive power oi the
Federal courts. Under subsection C of
part 4 of the bill they may have the
Attorney General, and this means all of
his subordinates, if they suspect that a
nght has been violated or is about to be
violated, go into a Federal court and a.^k
for an injunction. There is no limit or
restriction upon the breadth or depth of
the injunctive order. It is left entirely
to the discretion of the court as to how
far it may go in "enjoining the country-
side," and there is absolutely no limit as
to the number of people or the size of
the area which this injunction may
cover. For In.'^tance, as I conceive of
this bill, the Attorney General of the
United States could, prior to election
involvins Federal officials, go into a court
in the District of Columbia and obtain
an injunction covering everybody in the
United States. No provision is made in
the bill for the publication of the terms
of the injunction.

No requirement is made that the de-
fendant must be a party to the injunc-
tion or that he must have willfully in-
tended to violate the injunction. On the
contrary, the whole hiatter is entirely
dependent upon the will of one Federal
judge as to whether or not the order
should be issued, and what should be
the scope of the order.

A defendant, whether he be within the
Jurisdiction or out is bound by this de-
cree which may be rendered at will by
the order issued in chambers without
knowledge or publication. If a de-
fendant violates the injunction, a sum-
mary order may be issued in court, and
he may be tried by a judge without jury.
In a summary proceeding and sent to
jail. His only appeal is to the court of
appeals in cases of violation of injunc-
tions, and this has proven in the past to
be an ineffective and ineffectual remedy
to the defendant facing a jail term be-
cause of violation of any court order of
this character.

The power to punish for contempt of
court under the common law theory has
been left largely, if not entirely, to those
who violate the peace and order of the
courtroom or are guilty of a violation
of order in the presence, actively or con-
structively, of the court. Under the
terms of this bill, no subject restriction
is placed on the court, and the court

could issue an order at the request of the
Attorney General, and followed by sum-
marily placing in jail anyone wiio vio-
lates Its terms.

The power to punish for contempt
should continue to be restricted to those
committing an act within the presence of
the court. Ihe poupr to issue injunc-
tion should certainly be limited in its
scope and under no circum.^tancfs
should one man. even thou:,'h he be a
Federal judse. be allowed to iSHie an
order prohibiting the world, as it were,
from t.ikini; certain actions. If, however,
the injunction is goini; to be eeneral in
scope and cover evervtne. whether cited
by court at the time the injunction is is-
sued or otherwise, the lea.st that we
En:;li.':h-speakins' people should expect
from our Governm- nt is that we should
be tried on a citation for contempt for
violation of such an injunction by a jury
of our peers.

Uot's the bill before us contain this
safeguard'' On the contrary, this
measure in its expressed terms provides
for the trial of our people for violation of
an injunction without a jury. It pro-
vides for trial by iniuncticn as one
would be tried for creating a disorder in
the presence of the court — a svimmnry
method of handling justice. All refer-
ence to jury trial in this bill is
abandoned.

From time immemorial. I know of no
right which has been more jealously
guarded by our people than the right to a
trial by jury. This ri':rht is referred to
in cur Declaration of Independence as
one of the grievances requiring our in-
dependence from Great Britain. I refer
to that sacred document written in 1776,
entitled "The Declaration of Independ-
ence of the United States of America."
wherein the Kin'.,' of England is charved
in that "he has obstructed the adminis-
tration of justice, he has made judcies
dependent on his will alone, he has
erected a multitude of new offices and
sent hither swarms of officers to harass
our people." and further, "for protect-
ing— laree bodies of troops — by a mock
trial from any punishment for any mur-
ders they should commit on the inhab-
itants of these States.

Then, after a long 4-year war had been
brought to a successful conclusion, and
our Founding Fathers gathered in Phila-
delphia to frame a constitution, they
completed that immortal document.
They submitted It then to the several
States for ratification. They found,
however, our States were loath to ratify
even this historic document Without add-
ing to it safeguards for what has been
known throughout history as the Bill of
Rights. The.se States Insisted upon, be-
fore ratification of the Constitution, ten
amendments being added. And one of
these ten amendments provided:

Ampndmcnt VI. The accused shrill be
entitled to speedy and pubUc trial by an
Impartial Jxiry.

And then again, even In civil suits at
common law:

Where the value tn controversy exceeds
S20, the right or trial by Jury shall be
preserved.

Without these safeguards, Including
others just as sacred, such as freedom

of worship and freedom of speech, our
Constitution would never have been
ratified and become tb.e law of our land.
We would not have developel under it
and operated under it almost 200 years
except for these safe^'uards These stip-
ulations were not placed in the Consti-
tution of the United Str.te:. by mere
happenstance. 7hey were placed there
because of basic logic and be^uise gen-
erations of men and women had.
throu:,'hout the a."es, learn* d to fear
despotic power and governnent which
would sometimes terrorize people and
destroy every vostive of liberty for which
free men have fouizht and d.ed. These
t'tates and the p-^ople who controlled
the thinking of the Thirteen Oricmal
Colonics had a fundamental fear of the
King of F'n'-:land and of despotism
wherever it miPht be found.

This fear dates back through time and
the ages to the day when the lepresenta-
tives of the Elnglish people met on the
meadow at Runnymede and forced an
unwilling sovereign. King Ji;:m of Eng-
land, to agree to certain principles. As
all English-speaking people everywhere
know, our forebears demanded of a des-
potic sovereign in what we call the
Magna Carta, that — article 3£ :

Na freeman Bhall be taken or imprisoned
or dls.«Plsed or exiled or in any wi.y drstroyed.
nor will we go upon him n ir send upnn him,
except by the lawful Judgment oi his peers.

Article 40:

To no one will we sell, to no one will we
refuse ur delay, right or Justice.

Further in this same immortal docu-
ment, signed almost 800 yet.rs ago. we
find article 52:

If anyone has b*en dlrpi-issesFeil or removed
by us. without the leeal Judftnent of his
peers, from his lands, castles, franchises, or
from his right, we wUl Immediately restore
them to him.

Thus we see that the right to trial by
Jury has been jealously guarded by Eng-
lish-speaking people for almost a thou-
sand years. In lact. so impartant was
the Magna Carta to the free people of
Western Europe and the Western Hemi-
sphere that, during the cours? of World
War n. the British Government was
persuaded to send this immcrtal docu-
ment to Wa.shington. During: the long
course of the Battle of Britain, when
day and night German boml>'rs strafed
London and other British towns and
cities, reducing them to rubble, this
document reposed in the Library of Con-
gress in Washington, D. C. pnd not until
peace returned to a troubled *-orld was
this document allowed to leave Dur shores
and resume its place of dif nlty and
security in the capital of t^e British
Isles.

This bill Is a political measure. Its
proponents are so anxious to g.iin politi-
cal advantage that they are willing to
sacrifice every one of our cherished in-
stitutions to gain it, and they ere willing
to strike down those fundamentals of
government which almost one thousand
years of struggle by English-speaking
people were required to safeguard and
consecrate. They would tear down all
of this in one measure to be pushed
through Congress under the lash of the

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8709

political whip applied by a minority of
our people. They are willing to destroy
everything for which we and our fore-
fathers have fought for generations. I
know of no more vicious measure which
could be presented to this Congress for
its consideration.

I do not know that the provisions of
this measure may be applied literally, or
the full extent of the authority which
Is given to Federal courts. Federal
judges are, on the whole, men of con-
science and principle. They should,
when they read the broad authority
given the Attorney General and their
own courts, surely feel a revulsion against
the indiscretion of our Congress in pass-
ing the measure, and the willful bigotry
of many of those throughout the Nation
who support the measure and are willing
to urge its adoption.

This statement and this speech are not
meant to give the reasons why this meas-
ure is vicious and why it should be de-
feated. I have merely tried to develop
one particular feature of this bill, which
is that it is unworthy of the considera-
tion of the Congress of the United States.

I hope the measure will be defeated
and our people be allowed to proceed in
their daily occupations without the mo-
lestations of an Attorney Greneral bent
on changing the morals, habits, and
social customs of a great people. No
one man should wish and certainly no
one man should have all the power given
in this measure to the Attorney General
of the United States.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. I yield.

Mr. GROSS. I wonder if the gentle-
man can enlighten me as to the mean-
ing of the language on page 5 of the
bill, reading:

( b I Each member of the Commission who
is otherwise In the service of the Govern-
ment of the United States shall serve with-
out compensation in addition to that re-
ceived for such other service.

Can the gentleman tell me who in
Government it is expected to appoint to
this Commission?

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. I do not
know, of course, who would be appointed.

Mr. GROSS. Would that be some
Member of the House, some Senator, or
some bureaucrat downtown?

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. I do not
know.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield further?

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. I yield.

Mr. GROSS. This appointee would
not serve without pay; he would draw
the compensation, apparently, that he
presently draws in Government, but he
would not be entitled to the per diem
compensation set up under the terms of
this bill. I am wondering, however, who
in Goverrunent would be appointed to
this Commission. Evidently there must
be some reason for this provision.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. The gen-
tlemen who wrote this bill seem all to
have gone. I wish they were here to
answer the question.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from Ala-
bama IMr. Andrews].

Mr. NICHOLSON. Mr. Chairman, a
parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman

will Str&tj^ it

Mr. NICHOLSON. Can the Chair In-
form me when the Committee will rise?

Mr. ANDREWS. If the gentleman
will yield to me, I am happy to report
that I think I am the last speaker.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield to me?

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. Does the gentleman
think a quonmi is present?

Mr. ANDREWS. If the gentleman
makes the point I will yield back the
balance of my time.

Mr. GROSS. I simply asked the
question.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, no
man in America would rather see happy
racial relations in America and especi-
ally in the South, than I.

I say to you that in my humble opinion
this bill will not bring about a happy
relationship between the races but will
add to the tremendous problem that we
have there today.

We had no problem in the South until
the Supreme Court of the United States
in May of 1954 ordered our schools in-
tegrated. Stop and think for 1 nninute
of some of the problems that confront
us in the South. We have coimties there
were the ratio is8tol.7tol.6tol,5to
1, and I think I can say that It will be
years, and years, and years before we
integrate the schools in that section of
the South.

Mr. Chairman, I am worried about
this problem. Last year I had the legis-
lative council draft a bill, introduced it.
but never had a hearing on it. I rein-
troduced that bill this year and still have
not had a hearing on it. But I believe
that my bill is the only answer ta the
problem that you are trying to correct
with this civil-rights bill.

My bill provides for the creation of a
Human Resettlement Commission. I ex-
pect to offer that bill as an amendment
to or as a substitute for the pending
civil-rights bill at the proper time. More
than Hkely a point of order will be raised
against the germaneness of my bill to
the pending bill. But I want to submit
to you that I cannot conceive of a true
friend, not a political friend, but a true
friend of the Negro raising that point.

What does my bill do? It provides
for the appointment of a Commission by
the President, composed of three mem-
bers, to be confirmed by the Senate. It
provides that the Commission will set
up as many regional and district offices
as are necessary; and it provides fur-
ther that any Negro who shows to the
satisfaction of the Commission, first, that
he is a worker — we do not want to place
a charge on any community — he must
first show to the Commission that he is
a worker, that he Is carrying his own
weight. And, second, that he is unhappy
with local laws, customs, and traditions
that prevail in the State where he then
resides. Upon making that proof to the
Commission he will then be eligible for
a long-term, low-interest rate Govern-
ment loan In an amount sufficient to
move himself, the members of his fam-

ily, and his household goods to any State
of his choice. And it will be the duty
of the Commission to assist him in find-
ing that new home where he will be
happy. If he is imhappy in Alabama
because his children cannot go to an
integrated school, let the Commission
point out that in California they have
integrated schools. And, bear this in
mind, those of us in Alabama have no
complaint whatsoever with the way in
which the Calif ornians nm their schools.
The same applies to the other States.

You ask. Why such a bill? There is
ample precedent for this bill. When we
had the Dust Bowl back in the thirties,
this Goverrunent moved thousands of
Oakies out to the west coast because of
economic conditions. And following the
end of World War II, we had the Dis-
placed Persons Commission, after which
my bill is patterned, under which this
Government brought into this country
literally thousands of people from for-
eign countries. Why did they come?
They were unhappy with local laws, cus-
toms, and traditions that prevailed in
the countries from whence they came.

Does the bill make sense? Take a
look at the statistics. Take a look at the
proportion of Negroes and whites in
America. In Mississippi they have 45
percent colored, and I will say that in
many cases those colored are concen-
trated in certain sections of the State.
That is where you find the ratio of 8, 7,
6, 5, and 4 to 1. In my State of Ala-
bama the ratio is 32 percent colored.
Most of them are concentrated in the
southern part of the State, and again
we find the ratio all out of proportion
to what it should be: 8, 9, 7. 6, 5, and
4 to 1.

Now, look at the west coast from where
we have so many advocates of civil-rights
legislation. Take Oregon. The ratio of
colored to white in Oregon is 0.0076, and
I was told about a city in the State of
Washington where the ratio is 0.129.
Do you know what I was told in the city
of Yakima? I was told that a Negro was
not permitted to be on the streets after
dark. Is it true? I was with the gen-
tleman from Houston, Tex., Albert
Thomas, when we were told of it in the
lobby of a hotel there, that a Negro was
not permitted on the streets after dark.
Now, I ask you which is worse for the
Negro, to be denied the privilege of vot-
ing or being denied the use of public
streets after dark? No, my amendment
will put the blood test on the friends of
the Negroes, the blood test of sincerity,
and I challenge the true friend of the
Negro to make a point of order against
it. If you want to help them, here are
the ways and means by which they can
be helped. You are going to hurt them
if you adopt this civil-rights bill with or
without a jury amendment.

Mr. MATTHEWS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Florida.

Mr. MATTHEWS. I appreciate the
gentleman giving me a minute after his
very fine speech to correct the Record.
A few minutes ago, the gentleman from
Michigan [Mr. Dices] remarked that
Madison County, Fla., in the Eighth

R7in

rnivnuFSSiONAL rfcord — house

Jmrp. 10

^^i-\X.T/^T»T?rr'T*~^1k.T i T T»T?^^<'^T»TX

TTy-vrTr'T?

i

8710

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

,June 10

Congressional District, did not have a
Negro vote. I rushed to the closkroom
and called the editor of tbe Madison
County paper, and he told me that last
year there were nearly 1,000 Negroes
registered in Madison County, Pla., and
many, many hundreds of them voted. I
resent very much my district being
pointed out here, Madison County, as a
county that does not respect the rights
of its fine Negro citizens.

Mr. GRANT. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Alabama.

Mr. GRANT. I just wanted to say to
the gentleman from Florida that I am
surprised that he paid any attention to
what the gentleman from Michigan
said. That gentleman and his colleague
here, the gentleman from New York [Mr.
PowKLL ] . have done more damage to the
Negro race in the South than any other
two men since this country was founded.

Now. to come back to the gentleman
from Alabama, does the gentleman seri-
ously believe that any of these people
who are pressing this legislation would
be for this worthwhile amendment that
he is advocating here, because if they
were, it would take a good many of the
people from the South who would move
into their districts and they then could
not tell us how to run things in the
South; they would have a problem of
their own.

Mr. ANDREWS. Let me say in con-
clusion that I earnestly believe if you
went into one of those counties down
there in Alabama or Mississippi or the
other sections of the South where the
ratio is topheavy with Negroes, and went
through there with a flne-tooth comb,
you would not And over half a dozen at
the outside who were unhappy and who
wanted to leave. And, I want to tell you
that my bill is written In all sincerity.
If you pass this civil-riachts bill. I predict
It will not remain the law long, because
I know and you know that it is written
In the heat of insincerity,

Mr. HOLMES, Mr. Chairman, will
the Kentleman yield?

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield to the gentle-
man.

Mr. HOLMES. Would the gentleman
kindly repeat, for the benefit of the
House, the reference he made to the city
of Yakima. Wash ?

Mr. ANDREWS, I stated that 3 years
a?o next September. I was there with
Congressman Albert Thomas, of Texas.
We had lunch at the new hotel and were
told that Negroes were not allowed on
the street after dark In Yakima.

Mr. HOLMES. I am quite familiar
with that city, it bein? the large.st city
In my Con^.Tres.siGnal dustrlct. I have
n"vpr heard of a rulin? or an ordinance
of that 5ort by the city.

Mr. ANDREWS. That was my only
vl.s:t there.

Mr HOLMES. I just wanted to clarify
that remark.

Mr. ANDRFTWS. What Is the Ne?ro
population there. If the gentleman
knows?

Mr. KOL-\tES. I am not able to tell
the gentlem.'.n.
ilr. A:;DnEW3. Percentagewiie.

Mr. HOLMES. Percentagewise It
would be maybe 1 or 2 percent.

Mr. ANDREWS. I thank the gentle-
man.

Mr. CEI.T.FR. I have no further re-
quests for time.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
yield 10 mmutes to the gentleman from
Michigan [Mr. HorrMANl.

Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, the
gentleman did have a request a couple
of days ago. I think the greatest favor
I can do for my colleagues is to say that
I yield back the balance of my time but
sometime tomorrow I shall try and show
what they are trying to do.

Mr. FLYNT. Mr. Chairman. I rise in
opposition to H, R, 6127 and in support
of the jury trial amendment which will
be offered to insure and guarantee a trial
by jury to any person charged with what
is referred to as criminal contempt.
During the 3 days of general debate I
have listened to the remarks of my col-
leagues on this subject and I have not
heard any advocate or sponsor of this
legislation give any evidence that there
has been any deprivation of voting
rights. The broad power given to the
Commission on Civil Rights, to the At-
torney General of the United Statos. and
to an Assistant Attorney General who
will head up the proposed Civil Rights
Division of the Department of Justice
are indeed comparable to the broad pow-
ers which totalitarian dictators have in
the past seized for themselves.

Let us face the facts as they really
exist and I call upon the advocates of this
legislation to concede three things:

First. That this legislation Is alto-
gether unnecessary'.

Second. That its purpo.se is not to cor-
rect any existing wrongs or to create any
new rii:hLs.

Third. That Is simply an attempt to
prasp more power for the Federal Gov-
ernment in a field heretofore reserved
to the several States.

Mr Chairman. I am .sure that my col-
leagues who have h.<tened throughout
this general debate have noted that there
seenvs to t)€ a desire on the part of some
to speak of violation of civil rights and
Civil liberties in areas far distant and
remote from t.he creo^'raphical areas rep-
resented by Members who .sponror and
advocate the pa.sfat;e of thi.s leiii.Uation.
From th:s and thiS alone it seems to be
evident and clear that this Is punitive
legislation a^med at a particular geo-
praphical section of the United States.
Tho.se of us wlio reside in and repre-
sent that scc'.ion are outrai.ed and we
resent any categorical accusation leveled
asainst us, our people, our States, and
our section. We sometimes wonder if
this categorical accusation and mass In-
dictment is not activated by malice or
other equally nefarious motive.'^. Let me
quote the words of the chairman of the
Hou.-.e Judiciary Committee which ap-
pear on pa:;e 8430 in the Record of June
6, 1957, when he quoted an expression
familiar to us all: "Bofcre they take the
beam out of my eye. let them look to the
mote in their own." I therefore return
that same thought to those of you who
cates;orically accuse us and urge that
you look for violations In your own areas,
secic to correct them, and grant to us

the simple fact that we are law-abldlnc.
God-fearlns cltisens who are just as anx-
ious to respect and obey the law as are
the people in any other area not only of
this country but even of the entire world.

There have been more exaggerations,
misstatements, and outright falsehoods
concerning deprivation of voting and
other civil rights than about any other
subject before this Congress or betOTt
the American public generally. In the
district which I represent, I have never
during my service in Congres;; known of
a smgle individual to be deprived of his
or her right to vote nor have I ever
known of any person or persons to be
intimidated or threatened in any way
because they sought to exercise that
sacred right. Before my election to Con-
gress I served as solicitor general (prose-
cuting attorney ) for a 4-coun',y superior
court circuit and during my service in
that office I never knew or even remotely
heard of any citizen in that cucult being
deprived of the right to vote or threat-
ened and mtimidated in any way. In
time of war and in time of peace. I have
devoted my time and my efforts and my
limited talents and abihtles to a protec-
tion of democratic processes and the
rights, liberties, and freedoms of indi-
viduals.

I sincerely believe that this legislation.
If enacted into law. will destroy more
civil rights than it will ever protect and
will create more unauthorized and un-
warranted centralization of power In the
hands of a few than any legislation pro-
posed In Congress of which I have any
knowledge.

If there exL^^ts In this country any per-
son with vile and vicious dreams and
ambitions of dictatorial power he could
wish for no legislation to further those
amb.tions than the pa.ssawe of legislation
such as Is contained in H. R. 8127.

Mr Chairman. In his rise to power tn
Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler could not
have a.'^ked for a better -equipped vehicle
in which to ride to ab.solute power of life
and death over the German people than
a vehicle like this so-called but mis-
named civil-ri;'hts le-nslatlcn. Let me
remind those of you who remember Hit-
lers rise to power that he used the vices
end .schemes which at that moment ap-
pealed to the passions of the German
people, and upon receiving their accla-
mation he gradually made the German
Reichstag completely sub.^ervient to his
dictatorial power and made tlie German
courts va.':.';al administrative agencies
which wrote Into judicial fiat, order, and
decree his desires and his commands and,
having destroyed the liberties and free-
doms of the German people, thereafter
Roueht to destroy not only the rii'ht of
trial by jury but the very right to life
itself without a trial of any kind with
or without a jury of any kind.

Let us give serious thouriht ani con-
sideration to the creation of absolute
powers in any executive department, any
Assistant Attorney General, or any Fed-
eral court which might even conceivably
or possibly destroy any of the rights pres-
ently guaranteed to American citizens
under our Constitution and statute laws.

Ln us remember that the only true
test of thL' propriety of ''ny legislation

X712

rONGR FAS TONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Jmip. in

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8711

Is not what good men will do with It but
what bad men might do with It.

We carmot assume that the men ap-
pointed under the provisions of H. R.
6127 will always be good men, guided
and motivated by the highest type of
thoughts and methods. Let us study
this legislation section by section and
paragraph by paragraph. If there is
one section, one parsigraph or one part
of it which could destroy civil rights
rather than protect them, let us by
amendment eliminate that section, para-
graph and part.

For example, In section 102 (t) the
Commission is empowered to issue sub-
pena to compel the attendance and tes-
timony of witnesses at any point within
a given judicial circuit as defined In the
United States Code. This means that
the Commission on Civil Rights could
issue a subpena to a resident of Florida
or even the Virgin Islands or the Pan-
ama Canal Zone directing the attend-
ance of the person on whom the sub-
pena is served to appear at a point as
much as 2.000 miles away in Fort Worth,
Dallas, or El Paso. Tex. Therefore, by
the simple procedure of harassment.. the
Commission on Civil Rights, if composed
of men of unworthy methods, could har-
ass and hound an individual to exas-
peration, exhaustion, or almost to death
Itself. Therefore, it would seem to be
flttmg and proper that the subpena
powers of the Commission be limited to
a given judicial district within a given
State rather than permittmg It to ex-
tend over a large portion of the West-
em Hemisphere as one or more of the
Judicial circuits do extend.

For another example of patent dan-
gers Inherent In the language of the bill
Itself. In section 101 (b) It Is provided
that the President can appoint 6 men of
the same philosophy and Ideology to be
members of the Commission and leave
unrepresented on that Commission all
citizens whose philosophy and Ideology
may differ with those who are appointed.
The provision that not more than three
members shall at any one time be of the
same political party Is wholly Inadequate
to give representation to the school of
thought represented by both the present
opponents and advocates of this legisla-
tion.

Section 105 tb) of the bill provides for
acceptance and utilization of volunteers
and uncompensated personnel. Why,
Mr. Chairman, It Is self-evident that
such volunteers and uncompensated
personnel would make their services
available continuously and frequently to
air personal grievances and greed to fo-
ment strife and ill will and to contribute
to the perpetual harassment of others.
The language of the bill Itself virtually
admits this by providing that not more
than 15 persons as authorized by subsec-
tion 105 <b) shall be utilized at any one
time. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest
as a proper amendment the deletion of
subsection 105 (b) In Its entirety.

The same can be said about section
105 (d> which exempts such volunteers
and uncompensated personnel from the
operations of sections 281, 283. 284. 434,
an(J 1914 of title 18 of the United States
Code and section 190 of the revised stat-
utes 15 U.S. C. 99J.

Subsection 105 Ce) In providing all
Federal agencies shall cooperate fully
with the Commission to the end that it
may effectively carry out Its functions
and duties clearly indicates doubt In the
minds of the authors of the legislation
that there may be, and probably shall be,
many times and many instances where
no public official and no Federal agency
could in good conscience cooperate fully
with such a Commission on Civil Rights.

Section 121. contained in part III of
H. R. 6127, makes the unusual provision
that private litigation between parties
Involving tort actions shall be Instituted
not by the party aggrieved and not at his
instance and direction, but that such ac-
tions shall be Instituted by the Attorney
General for and in the name of the
United States.

It gives to the Attorney General the
right to ask a civil remedy on the equity
side of the courts for an actual, fancied,
or even fictitious act which may In fact
be a violation not only of a court order,
but Indeed of substantive law — State,
Federal, or both.

Therefore, Mr. Chairman. It is impera-
tive that an amendment to provide for
jury trial in such cases be added to this
bill.

The distingiiished gentleman from
New York, the chairman of the Judiciary
Committee of this House, in relating
other acts which provided for injunctive
relief and denied jury trial, asked, among
others, this question, which appears on
page 8490 of the Congressional Record
of Jime 6, 1957:

Where were those gentlemen, who now
oome forward and who Indicate grave anxiety
alxjut the protection of Ijury trial] civil
rights when we were passing those bills?

In answering that question I cannot
attempt to speak for any other Member
of this House except myself, but for my
part during at least a part of that time
I was In the Armed Forces of the United
States engaged In combat with the forces
of the same Hitler to whom I referred
to earlier as the man who sought to deny
to all members of a certain religious
faith not only the right of trial by jury
but even the right to live without a trial
of any kind.

In complete frankness in answering the
gentleman's question, I want to tell him
most respectfully that If I had been in
Congress during the time that any of the
acts to which he referred were passed,
that I would then, as now, have spoken
out against criminal trials by judges In-
stead of by juries. It is highly possible
that sometimes a jury, ranging In num-
bers from 5 to 12, might make a mistake,
but my experience anr- my lessons in his-
tory have taught me that basic rights
of freemen are safer In the hands of a
jury than in the hands of a tyrannical
Judge.

It has not been too many centuries
since a British judge, named Jefferles,
convened the courts known in history as
the Bloody Assizes and decreed death
penalties for those whose only crime was
daring to exercise their right of free
speech. Let me sound this solemn warn-
ing that if the right of trial by Jury la
threatened that those of you who par-
ticipate In its destruction may help em-
balm our Constitution and inter in the

dark abyss of oblivion the sacred rights
and liberties of a proud and freedom-
loving people.

Mr. Chairman, an amendment will be
introduced to specifically provide for
and guarantee a Jury trial In all in-
stances where a violation of the terms of
an injunction also constitutes a viola-
tion of substantive law, Federal or State.
Its purpose is to amend the bill to spell
out the sacred and constitutional guar-
anty of the right to a Jury trial in
certain cases.

Nothing in this amendment Is de-
signed or intended to prevent any court
from summarily punishing for contempt
any person guilty of a contemptuous act
or otherwise creating any disorder In the
courtroom or in the presence of the
court.

It is fundamental that the court must
have summary authority to punish such
actions of contempt in order to maintain
order and decorum in the court. That
right has never been questioned in the
history of jurisprudence and is not ques-
tioned now. Nothing in this amendment
can be so construed.

Let me also point out that nothing in
this amendment Is designed or Intended
to deny to any court the right to see that
Its orders, writs, and decrees are en-
forced and carried out against whom or
to whom they are directed.

As a lawyer I respect courts and our
system of law, but as an American citi-
zen, first, and a lawyer, second, I feel
that the right of trial by jury is a sacred
and constitutional right which must
never be trespassed upon.

Until a few months ago I thought that
that right was clear, and I did not think
that it had to be spelled out; but In some
quarters that thought apparently Is not
being shared.

Therefore, I believe It necessary to
spell it out and in words that all who
read may understand that the sacred
right of trial by jury shall not be abridged
nor shall it be denied.

It does not take away from any court
or any judge the right to maintain or-
der and decorum within the courtroom
nor does it deny to such court or such
Judge the right to punish willful viola-
tions of the terms of any order, mandate,
writ, process, rule, decree, or command
of the court.

It does, however, provide that no Amer-
ican citizen shall be fined or imprisoned
or both for an act of contempt of court
committed outside the presence of the
court and involving a proceeding to
which he was not a party until a legally
qualified and impartial jury passes upon
the question of his guilt or his innocence.

Absolute power whether vested in an
executive officer or in a Judicial officer
Is a dangerous thing and would most cer-
tainly destroy our framework of govern-
ment and the basic guaranties of Individ-
ual liberties which are spelled out In the
Constitution of the United States and I
believe in the constitutions of all 48
States.

Mr. Chairman, let me call to the at-
tention of piy colleagues a time-honored
statement which was foremost in the
minds of the f ramers of our Constitution
and has been predominant In the mmds
and hearts of generations of Americans

%i]

« j!i *

\ m

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8713

i.i

8712

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8713

since then who have beHeved in consti-
tutional government. I do not ^ow
who authored this thought; If I did, I
would be glad to give this as a quotation
from him and to give him credit for the
statement when he said "power corrupts;
absolute power corrurt* absolutely."

If and when the right of trial by Jury
and other constitutional rights of free-
men are abrogated by men m whatever
position they may serve, then one by one
they will all be stricken down and swept
away; and it will toll the def.th knell of
our constitutional form of government
and our Nation, which was conceived in
liberty and dedicated to freedom.

Those of you who are familiar with the
history of the development of cor jury
system and the n?ht of trial by jury are
well aware of the historical backsround
of ttiis sacred guaranty of freedom.
Many years ago when the Anglo-Saxon
system of jurisprudence was being de-
veloped in England, the powers of a
monarch were absolute and complete,
based partially on the theory of the di-
vine rights of kings.' At one tune the
Kmg of England had the power to take
away the life, liberty, or property of any
of his subjects without consultmg with
or obtainmg the concurrence of anyone
else.

That worked all ris;ht as long as th«
kine: was a t;ood km?, but kings are hu-
man, too. and a bad king had the same
powers and the same autocratic author-
ity that his predecessor, the good king.
had. This right of absolute despotism,
under a bad kmg resulted m many un-
just, oftentimes inhuman executions by
beheading, by hanging or even by dis-
emboweling. One king became so tyran-
nical and his unwarranted executions
were so vicious and flagrant that the
English people decided they would not
put up with it any longer and that hence-
forth no Englishman could be executed
until the question of his guilt or inno-
cence had been passed upon by a jury
of his peers.

In 1215 when the barons wrested the
Magna Carta from King John at Run-
nymede. foremost among the rii^hts se-
cured by that basic instrument of the
rights of man was the right of trial by
jury. Centuries later when the Consti-
tution of the United States of America
became the basic and fundi^mental law
of our land it contained the follow mg
provision:

In all criminal prosecutions the accu.sed
Biiall enjoy tiie rig.^it to a speedy and public
trial by an Impartial Jury of the Sta'e and
Ul.'^trlct wherein tiie crime shall have been
committed, which district shall have been
pre-viuusly a.scert;i!ned by law. and to be tn-
f'^rmed of the nature and cause of the ac-
cusation.

It is basic that a contempt citation
which mvolves a violation of substantive
law IS the same as a crmimal prosecu-
tion. Therefore, the constitutional pro-
vi.sion cited above should apply.

Mr. Chairman, durmg the 3 days of
general drba:e there has boen much dis-
cussion as to whether a trial-by-jury
guaranty is a new concept to crunmal
procedure. I submit that there is noth-
ing new m it: that it is as old as Anglo-
American jurisprudence itself. It is one
of the tiuiits which has distinguished

English-speaking peoples from all oth-
ers and has provided for a Ciovernment
directly close to the people governed.

Let me emphasize tliat there is noth-
ing in this amendment to deny to any
court or any Judge the complete right to
maintam order and decorum in his court
and to force comphance with any order
or decree or oLher mandate issued by
him or his court to parties to pending
hugation.

This amendment Is designed, however,
to prevent any one man from attempt-
ing to enjoin the entire citizenry of a
community, city, county, or State or
even a Nation. If the injunctive power
of any court, either State or Federal,
ever becomes so broad that it can enjoin
any and everybody without nammg, cle-
scnbing. or dea!gnating them, then each
court will become a legislative body and
a law unto itself without regard for
either statutory or consututional safe-
guards of the mdividuals rights to his
life, his Lberty. and his property, and
without regard for established law and
precedent.

1 here are none so blind as those who
will not see. 1 here are none so deaf as
those who will not hear. Mr. Chairman.
I ur.;e my ccllt\i-;ues on both side.s of the
aisle of this House to consider long and
well before they shall vote to deny a jury
trial in wh.it amounts to a criminal
prosecution for an alleged violation of
tile substantive law.

I urge the adoption of the jury-trial
amendment.

Mr Chairman, there is one phase of
this bill which is so dangerous that it
might well serve as the wrecking crew
of ail election and voting laws in all of
our States. In part IV, section 131, In
Its entirety, is so vagm^ and indefinite
that It could, and probably would, under
tl;e docirme of preemption, not only void
all exi.ating election and voting laws,
but. indeed, might at the same time
write out of Uie law all provisions for
punishing violations of voting rights
under the provisions of both Federal and
State law.s nuw in existence and of force
and eflect.

Under subsection 131 tb). It would be
po.s.sible. thou^'h I sincerely hope not
probable, for a person not even registered
to vote under Uie laws of hi.s State, with
the collusion of an unscrupulous member
of the Commission on Civil Righu or an
employee of the Civil Rights Division of
Uie Department of Ju.^tice. seek and ob-
tain an injunction which could com-
pletely disrupt the ordinary processes of
holding an election m any precmct in
this country, and the authority for it and
the power to do it is clearly contained
in lines 1 through 8 on page 12 of this
bill.

We cannot assume that laws will be
enforced as Congre.ss intends and it la
highly possible, mdeed, it is probable.
that this legislation might some day be
used as a weapon of tyranny to destroy
Constitutional rights and guaranties of
liberty and freedom to the Amencau
people.

Mr. Chairman, nearly every single Ime
said every single secUon, part and para-
graph of this bill 13 inherently danger-
ous. There can be no doubt that it
could be used to cripple and destroy the

very same ctvil rights which It Is pre-
sumably designed to protect.

There is no need for legLslation of this
kind and where there Is no need, new leg-
islation ought not to be proposed. It is
punitive legislation. desif:ned and aimed
at an entire region of our Nation, and
It has historically been true from the
days of Haman to the present time that
weapons infamously designed for de-
struction are turned upon and destroy
those who brought them into being.
Edmund Burke, a truly great civil hb-
ertarlan in the highe.st and most noble
sense of the word, cried out In the Brit-
ish House of Commons: "You cannot In-
dict an entire people." No legislation
inspired and drafted to accomplish
punitive aims can long liave hopes of
bringing about a durable solution to the
problems and conditions it erroneously
seeks to correct.

Mr Chairman. I sincerely hope that
this legislation will not be enacted mto
law.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I have
no further requests for time.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I have
no further requests for time.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I move
the Committee do now nse.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly the Committee rose; and
the Speaker pro tempore I Mr. KildayJ
havmg resumed the chair, Mr. Forawd.
Chairman of the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union,
reported that that Committee, havmg
had under consideration the bill <H. li.
6127) to provide mtans of further se-
curing and protecting the civil rights of
persons withm tlie jurisdiction of the
United States, had come to no resolu-
tion thereon.

CONGRESSIONAL POLICY ON
POSTAL RATES

Mrs. PPOST. Mr. Speaker. I ask

unanimous consent that the gentle-
woman from Pennsylvania [Mrs Ghawa-
HANl. the gentleman from New York
[Mr. Sant.angeloI, and I may have per-
mission to file additional minority views
to accompany the bill H R. 5836. read-
justment of postal rates and establish-
ing a congressional policy for determl-
nation of postal rates, and for otlier pur-
poses, to be printed as Part 2 of House
Report No. 524

The SPEAKER pro tempore. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.

There was no objection.

THE NEED FOR BALANCE IN OUR
FLOOD-CONTROL PROGRAMS

Mr. EDMONDSON. Mr. Speaker, I
ask unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point m the Ricord and
Include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER. Is there ob)ection to
the request of the gentleman from
Oklahoma?

There was no objection.

Mr. EDMONDSON. Mr. Speaker, I
have already addressed this House upon
the subject of the temble flood disaster
in Oklahoma ai^ otir neighboring
SUtes which has inflicted an awful toll
In bvea loat and property damaged
throughout the Southwest.

One of ttve unfortunate results of this
tragic flood has been the attempt by a
few people to place the blame for this
disaster upon one of the great services
of this Government, the Army engineers,
and to discredit the role of large dams
&nd reservoirs in flood control and pre-
vention.

Army engineers' estimates that more
than $118 million in flood damage in
Oklahoma and Texas was prevented by
existing dams and structures have not
been successfully contested, but the fact
of flooding below some dams has been
used to argue that "big dams will not
do the job."

It would be just as fair to argue that
"little dams will not do the job, either."
because they did not prevent down-
stream flooding In areas where some
small dams have been constructed.

The obvious answer to both of these
unfair charges is the simple fact that we
have barely made a start on our flood-
control programs, both on the watershed
and downstream. Had the authorized
programs been completed, both up-
stream and on our main stems, we migiit
ha\e had a fair test of the programs.
but no such test has been afforded in the
piesent flood.

On Uie Aikansas River, for example.
engineering plans call for a great reser-
voir at Keystone and tributary protec-
tion by dams at Eufaula, on the Cana-
dian, at Oologah. on the Verdigris, at
Markham Perry, on the Grand — and at
a numlx,'r of other points upstream on
these tributaries.

Can we say that big dams have failed
in the floods on the Arkansas, when only
two dams now stand in ea.stei-n Okla-
homa where half a dozen are needed?

All the present floods have proved
is the need for a completed control sys-
tem, both on tlie watershed and the
main stem, if the Job is to be done
ellectivcly.

Oklahoma's delepation in Congress has
been united in support for a balanced
fiDod-control program, giving strong
fcjpport not orily to tlie projects of the
Army engineers, but also to the water-
shed pro::rams of the Soil Conservation
Service, and to the reclamation projects
of the Department of Interior.

In this kjalanced approach Lies the best
promise for real success in the all-im-
portant battle to control and conserve
both our soil and our water — and the
sooner we join ranks in this battle, the
beUer off our State will be.

One of the best editorials I have read
on this subject appeared recently In the
Sapulpa Herald, by R. P. Matthews, and
was reprinted in the Tulsa Tribune of
June 4. 1057. The text of this editorial,
entitled "Lets Avoid I>am Foolishness,"
follow.s:

Lirr s AVOID Dam Foo!.T«rHNiss — SApm-PA Pttb-

i.isHTR 3a Ts Both Big awd LmxE Needed

To Halt Floods

(By R. P Matthews)

The "big dam-little dam" controversy is
tU^Tin^ Up af;axn over OiUahoma In the walce
(jf the torrential rains which are drenchlug
the Ktate periodically.

The "big dams" pooh-pooh the "Uttla
dams" and tiie "little danu" beiittle thm
"bi|^ dams" and everybody get* into tlie
act mostly. It seems In some cases, as an
outlet to take their prejudices lor a gallop.

"Hie truth oT the matter U«b not in eltber
xlamantlne itand.

For when Mother Nature worka herself
into a "mood" she tosses theory ont the
door and breaicfi every tradition in tlie book.

Man is stUl a mere infant In knowledge ee
far as analyzing the actions of the elements
are ooncerned. at least of analyzing them to
the point wiiereln he can eay "This I know
and thla wlU happen."

Little dams are good; they are a part of
good farming and ranclilng. They Impound
needed water for animal husbandry. Prop*-
erly built and managed, they furnish a fish
supply for the family owning them, and
recreation.

They help to impound the ordinary rains.
even help confine and constrict hard rains.

The usages, plus good soil practice such as
keeping It filled with humus to store water,
comprise a sound program.

But, drop a cloudburst, or any rain of ab-
normal proportions ana the volume of v.ater
failing on a given area Is going to fill the
Uttle ponds quickly and lead to fiash fioods
of disastrous potentials.

In weather alsnormalities you cant build
enough little dams to stop and Impound the
luU force of the huge tonnage of water that
fails on an acre of land.

Neither can the large dams completely
contain the fur\' of the tempest.

The value of big dams is often nullified
by improper management of the surplus
waters but that Is a human trait we are
compelled to accept.

Human errors afflict every field and we can-
not. In Justice, then listen to those who
analyze half way into the situation and trot
out theories when It's our homes t>eing used
as guinea pigs.

The fioods of this spring season In Okla-
homa have wrought much damage. Minor
control floods have occurred in the Grand
River Valley and other low spots in eastern
Oklahoma under that valley's Infiuence.

Those floods were controlled and were Just
the top of the huge waters that were stopped
cold.

Tiiink what would have happened If the
Grand River Dam had not been in place.

I mention it but the same premise is true
below every other great reservoir In Okla-
homa.

ITie misery and damage that Tulsa had to
undergo for a couple of weeks and which
was passed on down the Arkansas River to
tlie sea would have been largely thwarted
If Keystone Dam would have been in place.

Oklahoma needs big dams.

Oklahoma also needs little dams.

Oklahoma ts going forward to great things
and water, the "white horses ' of Mother
Nature, will be the determining factor.

Let's not listen to these "Uttle voices" who
■eek to stop the "big dams" with plausible,
but uncertain theories.

Let's be equally assertive of the values of
little dams, thousands and thousands of them
scattered in the upper reaches of the water-
shed.

Let's quit our dam foolishness.

We can be big about little dams but we
don't dare l)e little about big ones.

It'll take both to stop a 6-inch rain.

MISSILE JUPITER

Mr. SIKES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani-
mous consent to extend my remarks at
this point in the Record.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Florida?

There was no objection.

Mr. SIKES. Mr. Speaker, the Army's
Intermediate range ballistic missile. Ju-
piter, has flown successfully. There can
no longer be doubt about its possibilities

as sn effeetiT« weapon. Behind it is the
finest team of ballistic missiles experts
assembled outside the Iron Cttrtain.
The Secretary of Defense should
promptly order full speed ahead on t^is
project, subordinating it to no other.

To do so will require some backing up
on the part of the Secretary of Defense
on what must appcEir as a poorly consid-
ered order. He took jurisdiction of this
version of the IRBM from the Army
some months ago, stating that future
development of such a missile would be
carried an by the Air Force after July 1.
To have the rug jerked out from under
them in such a fashion undoubtedly was
a severe morale blow to th^ team which
was developing Jupiter. Regardless of
who is to have Jurisdiction of IRBM
after its development is complete, there
should have been no interference with
the developmental processes of such an
important weapon. Yet. despite this
morale blow, the guided missiles team
behind Jupiter continued to press for-
ward with outstanding success.

Now Jupiter, the only successful
IRBM outside the Iron Curtain is
dangling in midair. The Secretary of
Defense has stated that he will continue
its development as long as it is justified
from the emergency fund voted to him
by the Congress. To me this is poor re-
ward for successful effort. But pursuant
to his recommendations. Congress thus
far has budgeted no money for the con-
tinuation of Jupiter and unless funds
are forthcoming from the Secretary's
emergency fund, the project automati-
cally will die on July 1. A realistic ap-
praisal of the accomplishments of the
Jupiter team and the success of their
missile should bring an immediate
about-face and an announcement that
■work will continue on Jupiter under the
jurisdiction of the Army's team. Our
position in the field of guided missiles is
altogether too insecure to warrant tak-
ing a chance or to justify jockeying con-
trol between branches of the service.
There is much evidence that Russia has
a head start on us in the IRBM field.
Evidently, Russia entered upon a crash
program for the development of a
weapon approximating the IRBM short-
ly after World War II. Fy«- this purpose,
she had the services of many of the
leading German scientists who were in-
strumental in developing the V-1 and
the V-2 weapons. From the great land
mass which Russia controls, she can
and undoubtedly has positioned IRBM
launching sites to reach all of Europe
and much of the Mideast as a counter-
threat to the ring of American bases
which surround Russia. A successful
and usable American IRBM is a nece&*
sary answer to Russia's missile potential
while we wait for an effective inter-
continental ballistic missile.

Wk.^

TRANSFERRING TO FTC AUTHOR-
iry TO PREVENT UNFAIR TRADE
PRACTICES BY MEATPACKERS

Mr. DIXON. Mr. Speaker, I ask
■nnanimo'us consent to extend my re-
•marks at this point in the Record and to
Include extraneous matter.

\\

8714

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request ol the gentleman from
Utah?
There was no objection.
Mr. DIXON. Mr. Speaker, consumers
and livestock growers throughout the
country express concern about the in-
creasing spread between what house-
wives pay for meat products and what
the livestock producers receive. The
producers complain especially about the
unfair trade practices in the purchase ol
and distribution of hvestock and llve-
atock products, and insist upon corrective
legislative measures.

Senate bills 1356 and 405 by Messrs.
O'Mahoney and Watkins. and House
bills 5282 and 5283 by Messrs. Celler and
Dixon are designed to improve the situa-
tion. The packers and the stockyard.s
appear to be the only industry not under
the supervision of the Federal Trade
Commission, and as a result there are
Indications that Federal Trade Commis-
sion defendants are acquiring 20 percent
or more of the stock in meat packing
firms in order to escape prosecution by
Federal Trade Commission for unfair
trade practices.

Cases in point are FTC Document No.
6409. Armour & Co.. 1956: FTC Docu-
ment No. 6172. Carnation Co et al..
1956; FTC Document No. 6458. Food
Fair Stores. Inc.. 1957: Blanlon Co.. St.
Louis. 1957; and PTC Document No.
6555. Renaire Corp.. 1957.

The above-mentioned bills are all de-
signed to give the PTC authority to regu-
late unfair trade practices by meat-
packers, as was the case before 1922; but
also to permit the United States Depart-
ment of Agriculture to retain regulatory
control over the industry. It is my
pleasure and privilege to include in the
Record the testimony of Senator Arthur
V. Watkins before the Hoase Antitrust
and Commerce and Finance .Subcom-
mittees on the above-mentioned bills to
transfer to PTC authority to prevent un-
fair trade practices by meatpackers:
B1L1.S Have Bipartisan Sponsorship
(Statement before House Antitrust and Com-
merce and Pinanoe Sulx'ominlttevs on bills
transferrin.^ to FTC autnonty tj prevent
unfair trade practices by meatpacliers)
Mr, Chairman, the public has come to ex-
pect and demand tliat Government reinstate,
where posslb'e. and maintain by law as much
price and other competition as th^ public
interest neces. irates in tiiose areas of the
economy in which It worlcs badly or where
little of it exists. This public ojncern Is
reflected In the platform of both political
parties. It is a matter of bipartisan concern.
For e.\.tmple. the lyo6 Kepubiioau pUt-
form declares

"The Republican Party has as a primary
corcern the continued advancement of the
well-being of the individual. This can be
attained only In an economy that, as today.
Is sound, free, and creative, ever building
new wc.ilth and ne* Jobs for all the pe'ople.
•We believe In cuod business for all bual-
noss — small, medium, and large. We believe
th.it cmpetait.n in a free economy (,iens
unrivaled uppcrtunlty and brings the great-
est «! )()d r.i the greatest number."

Republicans also at that time pledged
themselves to "a continuously vigcjrous eu-
rorcemer.t of the antitrust laws" (p. 7).

On the other hand, members of the Demo-
cratic Party at their 1956 convention pledged
themselves to maintaining "competitive con-
ditions lu American industry," and likewise

"to the strict and Impartial enforcement" of
the laws "designed ti) prevent monop)olle«
and other concentrations" oX economic
power (p 18).

Thus both of our m.tjor political parties
are committed to the c^ bjective of maintain-
ing a free and expand;r;^ economy by f(38ter-
ing the growth of C'lnipetition. For this
reason, among others. I was happy to Join
With Senator O'Mahonct In sponsoring
S 1356 In the Senate The five bills which
constitute the basis of this J.'int hearing
also reflect the .s.inie bipartl.san C'lncern.

S 1J56. as well as tiiose bills before this
Joint Committee, is designed to prevent
ui.r.iir tr;\de practices and (Hher unlawful
restraints In Interstate commerce by persona
engaged In pmoessliij; and distributing meat
and meat prtid-.icts. This they do. individ-
ually or ci)r.ecti\ely. by amending either the
Federal Trade Commission and Clayton Acts
or both, s.) as to return to the FTC Juri.sdir-
tion over t!:e me.itpHckii'.g and distributing
industry, atid by amending the Packers and
^^toclcyards Art so as to eliminate the au-
thoritv the United States Department of
Agriculture h is to prevent unfair trade prac-
tices under title II of th.it a^t. but which
it has not efTectivtly administered fur thirty-
odd years.

fSDA E.NfoKCEMI.VT HAS BEEN INADrQLTATE

In the years prior to 1921 and before
pa.s.sige (.if tile Parkers and Sti5c!tyards Act,
the FlCs mvestigat. on of packers resulted
in t.^ie tiling of antitrust suits by the Justice
Department against some hve national
packers. Apparently rather than fare prose-
cutiin. these pac;<ers signed a con.sent de-
cree which since then has prevented them
f.' m. deal.iu: la 140 f.x'd and nonfixjd pr-.-d-
ucts. chiefly ve^-etables. fruit, flsh. and
groceries, using their distribution f u-ilities
tor the handling of any of these 140 pr- d-
vict.';. owning and operating retail meat mar-
kets, and dealing in fresh milk or cream.

In 1921. wlien the Congress was consider-
ing pas.vage of legislation to regulate stock-
yard.s. the five n.ition.u packers, w.ho had
s'gr.ed the consent de. rt-e. were able to con-
v.iK-e Congre.'is that preventUm of unfair
trade practices in tli.it industry should be
trans.'erred from the FrC to th" USDA.
M tterials which have been circulated in op-
position to the bills now beit:g considered
by this Joint committee by the a.^aix-iatlon
representing these large national packers.
listed several reasons *liy a transfer was de-
sirable then, and why such authority now
sliould rem.im wit a the USDA. Consider
these re.isons

"Me-^tpackirg. being at the time the coun-
try's largest single Industry, was of sufficient
Importance to warrant esuiblishmeni of a
separate. spec:ali7ed aeency; the PTC was an
Investigative rather tnan an administrative
b.>dy and hence d.d not have tlie power nor
the speci il.zed kiio-Aletik-e necessary to do an
effective job of administration, the Depart-
ment of Agriculture had In exutence the
necess.iry bureau? and pervinnel to under-
talve administration of the act. Moreover.
existing personnel were well equipped to un-
dertake supervision of the complicated rela-
tionslups characteristic of the livesUxk and
meat liidusiiy "

Regardless if the merits these nrgun>*ijts
may have had in 192 1, it is evident that 39
>ears of Ineffective administration or non-
enforcement of title II renders them com-
pletely valueless today. Experience clearly
indicates that the Congress made a mistake
when It transferred authority to regulate
trade practices of packers from the FTC. a
speclali/ed agency handling antitrust mat-
ters, to the USDA, which did not then and
d.)es not now have a separate regulatory
agency. On no less than four occasions
since 1935, bills have been Introduced to cor-
rect this mistake. The question of Jurisdic-
tion over meatpackers thus Is not of recent

origin as opponents of thes« bUls have
contended.

Mr Chairman, a review of D8DA experience
In the administration of the Packers and
Stockyards Act will make this conclusion
more obvious. The best general summation
of this matter was given the Senate Antitrust
and Monopoly Sutx-ommlttee la.^t June by
Mr Millard J Cook, who for 25 years — 1929
to 1955— wiLB employed by the USD.A in the
enforcement of the Packers and Stcx-kyards
Act. During the last 10 years of his service,
he was the head of the unit doing this en-
forcement work. Mr Cook told the subcom-
mittee

"In the early years of the administration
of the act • • • they | USDA I undertook
rather extensive studies of the operations of
packers. • • • They brought quite a few
actions. • • • They brought quite a few
employees, and ttxjk on as many as 30 part-
time employees I hey had relatively a large
appropriation. • • •

hTom 19J1. »hen the act «as passed, uo
until about 1928 < r 1929, they [Packers and
Stiokvurds Administration | were an Inde-
pendent agency, and they rep irted directly
to the Secretary or Agriculture • • • In the
late XjMjs prior to my Ijecomln? an emplo>ee
of the Division. It was made a division of
the old Bureau of Animal Incu.stry" (Irun-
script, June 28, ln56. pp 336 3:-7).

Wnen a^ked why this transit r of Its sUtuj
was made. Mr C.iok replied:

"Well. I know only from conments thst 1
have heard made. I was new n the organi-
zation, and the commenu wer? made to ine
effect tliut the Secretary at th« time was not
favorable to the act. He dlsllied the act.

"And I think that some of the feeling of
Secretary Jardine boiled over Into the Bu-
reau of Animal Industry, because there-
after there was not the Inclination Ui go out
and Initiate investigations of monoiwlistlc
practices" ( transcript. June 28 1956. p 379).

By contrast with the vigorous activities
of earlier years under title il. which Mr.
C(X)k has so vividly described the laxity of
USD.\ enforcement since tlie late lUJOs Is
attested to by (1) its failure to ask for
adequate funds; (2) its failure In turn to
maintain an adequate stafT. (3i Its failure to
acquire adequate ectmomlc dat i alxiut packer
actiMties and to use it for cnf ircement pur-
poses; and. under these circumstances. Its
failure to er.'orce the act is Indicated by
(4 I the paucity of significant cease and de-
sist orders In areas of regulation, which the
USD.A now a5ks the Congress to leave In Its
hands on the promise to repent and "admin-
istratively sin" no more.

USDA HAS NOT 80VCHT ADEQCAn APPROPKIA-

noNs

In answer to questions of committee mem-
bers concerning requests for funds made by
the Packers and Stockyards Division during
the 10 years he w.is head (»f it. Mr Millard J.
CcKik replied as follows to th-j Senate Sub-
committee oa Anuirust and Monopoly last
June:

"I made m.Tny recommend. itlons; yes. I
xi.sually met with a pessimistic approa h that
it was useless to attempt to get any more
money and that the explanation given U) me
was that Congress wcjuldn t bt- Interested In
appropriating more money ft r us to do a
bettor Job than we were doing

"I think you will find la the Department's
records that there are numerous recommen-
dations for Increased approprlitions. There
were Innumerable oral confer* nces with my
superiors on the need for Increased appro-
priations.

"I think there were a few Instances In
which my immediate superiors recom-
mended increases, but then when It got Into
the hands of the budget peofle in the De-
partment, they scaled down those Increases"
(transcript. June 29. 1956, p 3 56).

This Is a story of lack of ci ncern by not
only the superior admlulstratlve but also

OT-*/?

r'r\K.^r^n•ccc^r\^^ kt ■Dt:/^/-M>r\

urMTCi?

1 ^ I \'% ji "1 ^

1057

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8715

budget officials of the USDA. Recent expe-
rience by the Packers and Stockyards
Brsnch In this reepect t« not unlike the
resounding eclio ol a broken pbonogrsph
record

On July 6. 1966. I Introduced 8 4177 in the
Senate The Senate Agriculture Committee
to which It WHS referred requested a report
frnm the ^SDA en July 10. 1956. In the
menntlme, the USDA's 1968 fiscal year
budget request went to the Bureau of the
Budpet. Its requeft for new obligatory au-
thority amounted to $4 7 billion. Of this
request. $178 000 was for the purpose of
p<>?t!ng additional stockyards under title III
of the Packers and 6t/';ckyardg Act. Not oiie
dollar of new obllgntory authority was re-
quested by the U.'-DA for expansion of Its
enforcement activities under title 11 of that
act for the 1958 fiscal year.

Did the Packers and Stockyards Branch
request additional new funds for tlUe II
enli rccment? If so. what happened to that
request^ The answers to these questions
were given to the Senate subcommittee dur-
ing the hearings on S. 1356, a companion
bill to those you have before you now, a
few weeks ago by one witnees who stated:

"It was reported the Packers and Stock-
yards Br.Tnch re<iuested $200,000 be placed
in the USDA budget to employ personnel to
start enforcing the meat packer proTlslons
of the act. The entire amount requested
by the Branch was knocked out of the budget
by the Department Itself" (transcript. May 2,
1957 K

Notwithstanding this background the
USD.'K on December 21, after the Depart-
ment's 1958 fU:cal year request had gone to
the Bureau of the Bvidget. rendered a report
recorrnnendlng against enactment of S. 4177.
In fpite of this negative report on a bill to
Uansfer title II authority back to the FTC.
and In spite of the Senate Subcommittee's
hearings on the meat industry of a year ago,
the testimony of the USDA before the House
SutKomnuttee on Agrlctiltural Appropria-
tions makes It plain that the Department did
not. until S. 13^6 and the biUs now before
this Joint conunlttee were Introduced, In-
tend to pay more proper attention to the
enforcement of title II.

On February 7, Mr. Roy D. Lennartson,
Deputy Administrator. Agricultural Market-
ing Service, tuld the House Appropriations
Subcommittee:

'We are asking for $178,000 to provide for
additional posting and supervisory activities
under the Packers and Stockyards Act.

"By the end of this fiscal year, we are
hoping we wiU have something like 70 per-
cent of the eligible yards posted. Granted
this Increase * * * at the end of t2ie fiscal
year 1958. we will have about 94 percent of
ail the eligible yards posted.

"The reason we have directed our atten-
tion at the yards. Is because it Is essentially
down at this level where the Impact Is great-
est on the producer. The act requires of the
yards posted under the act, that the market
agencies be bonded, that the yards provide
adequate facilities, that their rates be rea-
sonable, that their scales be checked, and
that their trade practices be reviewed con-
stantly.

"Although we have been criticized recently
for not devoting some of the funds under
this act to explorations Into trade practices
en the part of packers and others outside
the yards, I think our policy has been sound
In attempting first to use our funds to bring
the Impact or benefits of this act down
closest to where the producer can obtain
them" (hearings, pt. 2. p. 946).

The Department, of course. Is to be com-
mended for having concern and determina-
tion to effectively enforce title in. This Is
recognized by the bllU before this Joint
committee, since they leave undisturbed the
USDA's responsibility In the area which, as
Mr. Lennartson pointed out, most concerns
the livestock producers — namely, the regu-

lation of all activities at stockyards includ-
ing the buying and selling oT IWeetocA, rates
paid for stockyutl eerrloes, etc.

But. oonoem about title in acttTlttee la
not an aoceptable cobetltute for lack of ef-
fective eaforceoient of the unfair trade
practice provisions of title n relating to
meatpackers. It has been only since the
introduction of 8. 1S56 and the bills tafore
tlila }olnt committee that the USDA has
stiown any renewed Interest In attempting
to enforce title II.

Assistant Secretary Bute, before the Sen-
ate subcommittee on May 22, 1957, Indicated
that the USDA recently had "redirected an
additional $20,000 of Department funds for
Packers and Stockyards Act enforcement
during the last part of this fiscal year"
(transcript, p. 676) , and that "we have made
tentative provision to transfer some $75,000,
If we can find the competent personnel to
strengthen the work next fiscal year" (tran-
script, p. 676).

Should this tentative provision even see
reality, these funds transfened would be
$125,000 less than the Packers and Stock-
yards Branch requested but which the De-
partment Itself denied. Yet Mr. Butz also
told the subconunlttee that the Department
would not make a supplemental request for
title II funds, but that "we anticipate re-
questing from Congress additional funds
for administering the act, particularly title
U, la our next budget request" (formal
statement) .

These facts concerning the appropriations
history of title U enforcement make it plain
that USDA plans for more vigorous enforce-
ment continue to be merely tentative and
anticipatory, as they have been for 30 years.

ADKQUATX TTTLk n XNTOKCKUENT STATW
LACXINC

By contrast with the rigorous activities In
earlier years under title n as described by
the former head of the Packers and Stock-
yards Branch, responsibility for prevention
of unfair trade practices by meatpackers
today not only under title II but under title
III as well here In Washington, D. C, is
vested in the Trade Practices Sectlor. of the
Packers and Stodcyards Branch of the Live-
stock Division of the Agricultural Marketing
Service. A separate and specialized Packers
and Stockyards Agency has long since been
dispensed with, although the Hoover Com-
mission made such a recommendation in
1M9. This Trade Practice Section waii staffed
by two marketing specialists and a stenog-
rapher at the time the bills before this com-
mittee were Introduced, and I presume the
Section Is stUI so staffed, since I have not
received information to the oontrary.

Not even one of these two marketing
specialists, or a single employee In any of
the 20 understaffed field offices malntiilned by
the Packers and Stockyards branch is en-
gaged fuUtime In title n enforceirent. A
review of the USDA's AprU 4, 1957, self -ap-
praisal report on the Packers and Stockyards
Act administration indicates, in addition, as
does the Department's appropriation request
that the great bulk of the work of this sec-
tion and the Packers and Stockyards branch
itself — nearly 90 percent — is spent in title
m enforcement.

Now, these remarks are not to be deemed
criticism of the personnel of the trade prac-
tice section of the Packers and Stockyards
branch Itself. The personnel of the Packers
and Stockyards branch are to be commended
for their efforts to obtain more fluids and
to expand their title n activities. But it
is meant to be criticism of several national
administrations for the almost complete
lack of action in the p)ast to support the
Packers and Stockyards branch and tbercby
to comply with the congressional mandats
given the USDA In 1021 to prevent imfalr
trade practices in the meatpacking industry.
TtXB simple facts are that the Packers and
Stockyards branch has not been permitted

to obtain an adequate enforcement staff for
administration of Che fair trade practloea
provMons of title II of tbe act relattef to
amatpeokers.

This Eelf-sppraUal report I haw referred
to states that "the organization that to
maintained In admlnlstertng the Packers
and Stockyards Act permits a high degree of
fiexlbility in planning and conducting oiajor
Investigations and in meeting the fluctuating
demands of different district offices. Iliis is
because the entire field force may be actively
utilized in such an investigation whenever
necessary" (p. 8) .

This statement appears to be a self-di-
rected gratuity rather than a fact, as Is
revealed by examination of Mr. Butz and
Mr. D. M. Pettus. Acting Director, Livestock
Division, Agricultural Marketing Service be-
fore th3 Senate subcommittee. Consider
the following colloquy between these gentle-
men and myself:

"Senator Watkins. Mr. Secretary, • • •
Is It not true that In the Ogden, Utah, area
you have 2 marketing specialists and 1
clerk — 3 people to regtilate 26 packers In 3
States, 12 ol them In Utah, 13 In Idaho, and
also 1 in Oregon?

"Mr. Ptttus. Those are the people perma-
nently assigned to that location. When we
have an investigation underway, we fre-
quently bring in people from other markets
and from otir Washington area and add to
our staff.

"Senator Watkins. If they do not have any
bigger staff in other areas than In this, what
would you have to enforce the law where you
are moving them from?

"Mr. Pmrrus. We leave a reduced staff.

"Senator Watkins. For instance, in Bill-
ings, Mont., you have one marketing special-
ist and 1 half-time clerk, as I get it, to
regulate 6 packers in Utah. 8 in Idaho. 2 in
Wyoming, and 11 in Montana, 21 altogether.
How in the world can you take anybody
from that area to help somewhere else such
as the Ogden, Utah, area if the others are
manned in the same way?" (transcript, pp.
69S-696).

At this point, Mr. Butz asked Acting Di-
rector Pettus to eii^plaln how a case 2 years
ago in the Ogden, Utah, area was bandied.
In part Mr. Pettus replied:

"Mr. Pettus. I cannot recall at the moment
bow many people we had looking Into the
particular transaction, but we try to operate
it with as few people as possible because we
are spread so thin. Senator" (tranacrlpt, p.
667).

To which I replied, with the colloquy con-
tinuing as follows:

"Senator Watkins. I recognize you are
spread thin, and that Is our complaint — that
you do not have enough force to do the Job
in title n.

"Mr. Prmis. We agree with you, and I
think that is pointed out.

"Senator Watkins. You have not had for
nearly 38 ye«u^.

"Mr. Petttts. I agree with you, sir.

"Senator Watkins. We think that Is a long
enough trial period. With all the problems
that have been handed to Agriculture, we
thought we would certainly find someone
who would be glad to get rid of this matter
of law enforcement In the field In which the
FTC has a special Interest by reason of the
act of Congress creating It as an Independent
regulatory agency — a special arm of the
Congress.

"Mr. Butz. It Is quite true for 26 years
[that J It has not been adequately enforced,
but don't you think when the sinner con-
fesses and resolves to do better he should be
given a chanceT" (transcript, pp. 697-698).

In a few words, the Department admits
that title n has not received adequate en-
forcement: yet, paradoxically. It has not
asked for and apparently will not ask for
adequate appropriations. Under these cir-
cumstances, what reasonably prudent person

^ u

^^^^^.T.^^ T* W^r^ O Trf-X^T A ■»

r\mm-m tm

8716

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8717

would not conclude that responfllbllltT for
prevention of unfair trade practices Involv-
ing meat packers should be returned to the
Federal Trade Commission, where It was be-
fore passage of the Packers and Stockyards
Act of 1921? Is not 25 or 30 years of Inade-
quate enforcement a long enough trial
period?

C80A DOKS NOT ATTTMPT TO OBTAIN DATA M-
BKNTIAI. TO DETEXMUTATION OV TnXX n
VIOLATIONS

During the course of the Senate sub-
committee's hearings on S. 1358. Mr. Butz.
the major spokesman for the USDA. indi-
cated that the Department, while willing
to give the PTC Jurisdiction over the whole-
saling and retailing of meat, nonmcat food,
and nonfood products of a Qrm not prin-
cipally engaged In meat packing and pro-
cessing, nevertheless would not voluntarily
give up Jurisdiction over such activities by
a einn principally engaged In meat packing
because:

"In that case it Is necessary to have gen-
eral supervision over that because Fome-
tlmes, as has been alleged, they may use
proflts in their nonmeat activities, you see.
to engage in discriminatory pricing practices
on meat" (transcript, p. 751).

But In fact, does the USDA obtain such
data from meat packers? No. Mr. Chaimum.
on a regular basis they do not. nor dies
the U.SDA even require packers to report
their losses or profits en their nleat opera-
tions or any nonmeat food product or non-
food product operation. As one witness
summaruea this administrative shortcoming
to the Senate subcommittee last summer:

"Under the Packers and Stockyards Act
every company doing an Interstate meat
business has to report a financial statement
as cf the end of each year but never have
the packers and stockyards administration
required the national packers to submit a
statement of their meat operations separ-
ately from their total operations. That h.is
been one of the failures of properly admin-
istering the Pac.-cers and Stockyards Act.
In that you cannot get the dfflnite informa-
ti<in" ( t."anscriut. June 21. 1956. p. 2H.

The statement of this witness Is sub-
stantiated by the USDA's Packers and
Stockyards Administration seif-apprai.^al
rep<irt of .•\pnl 4. li*57. to which I have al-
readv made reference, as I shall potiit out
shortly.

When asked during the Senate hearings
on 6. Ui.3'3 a few days aijo whether the USDA
was continuln-? to Investigate char^ea of
market sharim^ by p.^r;<ers. since the IXpart-
inent of Justi.-e dropped its major su»t In
li^53 ai^aln.st several national pacicers based
on this practice. Mr. Fettus. actiii.; direcur.
Iivestooic Branch. Agricultural Marketing
Service, replied .

"Not as a ..peciflc follow-up of that overall
case, but m our various types of records that
we i;et oa parkers, the reports that we get
e.ich year, and our observat.o'is, we have con-
tmutd t ) loos over the entire quebtlon of
sharing (transcript, p. 664 i .

Great stress was placed by Mr Pcttus upon
Iniormation contained in packer reports, or
as he put it informati.;:! "that we get our-
fi:.'lves directly fmm the packers, under the
act" I transcript, p. f65).

N...W, what docs tlie self-appraisal report
say about the content and use m.\de of re-
ports submitted annually by packers to the
P.uktrs and Stockyards Branch? Namely

this:

"The annual reports of meat packers are
rece.ved by the 20 district offices th.it are
maintained by the Packers and Stockyards
B aiKh • • • Information contained In
these reports is primarily concerned with
ownership, orj:an:zatlon. and financial con-
ditions. • • • The annual reports of tho
top four packers are forwarded to the Wash-
Inijtriu office of the branch where they are
retained In a permanent file.

"Although the annual reports of packers
are received, there Is no tabulation or statis-
tical analysis made of the Information con-
tained In them for the purpose of determin-
ing Industry trends, problems, or condltlona"
IP 14)-

Might one not logically ask. as a result:
Why, In fact, are these reports not reviewed
for the purpose of determining Industry
trends, problems, or conditions? Why even
require reports In the first place unless they
are reviewed In order to further the carrying
out of specific objectives of the Packers and
Stockyards Act?

Insofaj^ as title 11 Is concerned, the De-
partment is charged with the responsibility
of preventing unfair trade practices by meat-
packers, yet these reports do not even re-
quire packers to show losses on their meat,
nonmeat food products, and ncjniood prod-
uct operations. Such information, however.
Is t-.^eiit;al to determine whether a firm is
absorbing losses in one area or line of oper-
ation in order to eliminate competitors, but
making up ti.e loss in other areas and lines
of o'-eratun where its poslti(in Is better
established in the market. If none but the
repKjrts of the top four packers are sent to
Washington, how could the Department
ever detect various market-sh;\rln; arrum^e-
nient.s which limit conrpetitlon for Uvesfuck
and mean lower prices to producers? The
odds are that It could not make such a de-
tection, let al fine priuuce evidence sustain-
able In a court of law.

The self-appralsal report confirms these
observations by correctly su^siestlni? that:
"Effective administration a::d prompt en-
forcement of any re^fiil.itiry measure such
as the Pacicers and Stockyards Act are
hl'hly dependent upon the availability uf
adequate information and the use made of
this information in the Job that must be
done. Packers and otliers subject to the act
are no* required to file annual reports. In
the past, the Dfj .irtment of Agriculture h.is
cjns;>tently adhered to a policy of request-
li'j; UMni tt'.o-e ou!;jeot to this act a nuril-
Hiiim of In; ;rm."it;on in their reports.

"Fhis raises the question as to whether
both the timeliness and the content of these
reports frim part:c.-s might be Improved
and whether the infLirmatlon fuppi.ed
sh i;!d be in m >re pertinent detail for analy-
s.s .'.I'.d mteroretation. Such reptjrts would
help pinpoint industry or mdivulual pmb-
lems and assist In bnr.ging about m )re ef-
fective and economical administration of
the act. This is so, particularly in view
of the Information such reports can re-
veal relating to trends, shift.s. emphasis,
ries^ree of c.jncentrat.on In the Industry,
etc " ( pp. 2i>-21 1 .

But more disturbing. Mr Chairman, than
failure as a m:Ltter of routine to get such
data. 13 the rcfu.«ial of the Depart:. .••nt of
Agriculture at the policy level to taKe ac-
tion against a packer e\en when the Pack-
ers aiKl St xkyards Branch's TraUe Prac-
tice Section has developed adequate Inior-
matlun to warrant full-scale investigation
and perhaps formal charges. Such a recent
cxse Involved certain alleged unfair trade
practices prohibited by title II of the Pack-
ers and St.ickyards Act on the part of Safe-
way Stores, which, if su.>!tained would b«
violations of that act. The following col-
loquy between the Senate subcommittee
counsel, Mr. McHugh. Mr Pettus, and Mr.
Lee D Sinclair. Chief. Packers and Stock-
yards Branch, clearly develops this fact. Mr.
Sinclair recommended to his superiors:

"That the case be fully Investigated and
that we attempt to get sufficient funds to
carry out that investigation.

"Mr McHrr.H. You were overruled In this
recommendation ?

"Mr SiNCLAOi. In effect there was an over-
ruling; yes.

'"Ux. McHuoH. Waa the matter considered
again after It was returned to you wlUk
this notation for conducting: a study?

"Mr. SiNCLAim. Well. I brou»{ht It up again
about January of thla year with Mr. Reed,
the Director of the Livestock Branch. Mr.
Reed told me later that be had taken It up
again and that we should no'. Investigate It.

"Mr. McHucH. Well, what did that mean
to you? With whom?

"Mr. SiNCLAim. Well. I understand It to
mean his superiors, who would be Mr.
Lennartson, Mr. Wells, and Mr! Butz.

'Mr. McHuGH. After that, ild you concur
in the decision that was made not to go
forward with this investigation, but to con-
duct this research study?

"Mr. SiNCLAia. Well, we weren't asked
about that

"Mr. McHucH Did your opinion as to the
best manner of handling this jiroblem change
any""

"Mr. Sinclair. No "

Now, I am not critical of -.he decision to
tindertake a broad economic study of the
practice involved in the Safev ay case. How-
ever, I am critical of the lack of action to
stop such a practl-» when Mreliminary In-
vestigation by the Trade P-actlce Section
seemed to verify a violation o' title II. Both
actions could, and sliould, have been under-
taken

M.iiiy witnesses who appet red before the
Senate subcommittee listed lozens of simi-
lar Instances involving practices carried on
by packers which the USD.A has not even
bothered to investigate This is nut an iso-
lated case, as these game witi es.'e.<:, I believe,
have told, or will tell, this Jc Int committee.

PSOPOSCD USDA AMENDMENTS lO S. 1358 AND
RELArED BILLS

The Packers and Stcvkyare s Act ve.'<ts the
Secretary of Agriculture with authority to
ls.sue cea.>;e and desi.'<t orde^ with re.'pect
to packers wiio eneaL'" In unair trade prac-
tices under title II While n fm. 'll number
of such cease and desist orde-s, in and of it-
self, obviously is not a p-Kd Indicator of
whether tit'e II h is been ai d Is bf-ing en-
forced, a rmall number of case and desist
orders, under title II. howe\ er. do Indicate
nonenf Tcement, in my Judgment, when cru-
plPd with these lacts: ill I SDA has never
nsked f >r sulTlcient funds to -nforce th" act;
CJi the Pa-kers and -•- 1 jckyanls Branch since
the early 19J0'a, has been u iderstafTed and
spread too thin to do the |ob title II re-
quirt's: ard CD the growing volume of com-
plilrts of uniair tracie p.-aciicps by pr-.cKcrs
which, due to lack of derin at.d fricilitles,
the U.^DA has done little or nothlnp about.
No. to say the least, it is uilikely that the
small number of o^ase and d.v,st orders 32
since 1021 — is attrlbuf^d to any other fact
than n'nint<Test and c T.cfrr on the part of
the U-DA since the early 1930-s.

The U.-DA reports on S. 1:56 and the bill
before this Joint committee ; u.'^^cbt amend-
ments uhich w uild. if accept^-d. t.ike the
very heart cut of the bills The heart of
these bills is to place mea -.packers under
effective enforcement by pivlng back to the
I- iC- where It was before l&l'l — the author-
ity contained In title II of tae Packers and
Stockyards Act to prevent un'alr trade prtio-
tlces by packers. With respect to prevent'ng
unfair trade practices by mcatpackers In the
buylnir and selling of llvestnc;; at stockyards,
the I SDA, by these bills, ke^ps It3 present
Juri.'sdictlrn. Exclu-ive Jurisdiction with re-
spect to the prevention of uniair trade prac-
tices by packers In the wl.oli sallns; and re-
t:Ulln? of m.cat. nonmeat f )0(l products and
nonfood products is given to the FTC. which
now has such authority with re^^pecl to all
other firms.

Since 1921, 18 of the 32 c< a.se-and-deslst
orders have been Issued until title II to
packers for refusal to pay for or accept live-
stock. Ten such orders have been directed
against this unfair trade pranice Involving

■tockyards. Under the bills before the com-
mittee, the USDA can, if It will, prevent such
practices.

Now the major objection the USDA had to
8. 1356 was that it, as do the bills before
this committee, glvea excltislve Jurisdiction
to the FTC over the buying and selling of
livestock away from stockyards. This Is true,
and there appears to be good reason for it.
The remaining six cease-and-desist orders
Issued for refusal to pay for livestock took
place away from stockyards. All 6, however.
were Issued In 1938 — 19 years ago. In only
1 out of 36 years of jurisdiction, therefore,
has the USDA Issued such an order which
Involves off-yard buying and selling of live-
stock.

Additional reason for giving exclusive
jurisdiction to FTC over packer buying and
selling of livestock away from stockyards is
found in the USDA testimony before the
House Appropriations Committee, to which
I have already directed your attention. Mr.
Roy D. Lennartson, Deputy Administrator.
AKrIcultural Marketing Service, you will re-
call, told the House Appropriations Commit-
tee on February 8, 1956, that the USDA
wanted 1178.000 to post 150 additional stock-
yards, which then would bring the number
uf eligible yards posted up to 94 percent. He
then continued:

"Although we have been criticized recently
for not devoting some of the funds under
tins act to explorations Into trade practices
on the part of packers and others outside
the yards, I think our policy has been sound
In attempting first to use our funds to bring
the impact or the benefits of this act down
closest to where the producer can obtain
them.

"In addition to the posting of the 150
yards next year, we are hopeful that some
cf the funds requested would be available
to begin Fome Investigations Into the buy-
ing practices of packers off the yards; In other
wrirds, into the feed lots. Into the direct-
buying areas, and so on. In the concentrated
areas of livestock production"' t hearings,
pt. 2. pp 946 947),

Not being able to post even all the eligible
Btockvards. this appears to mean that dur-
liiK the 1958 fiscal year, the USDA Is only
h( peful that it can begin looking Into off-
yard packer buying activities. USDA's con-
cern about country buying seems Indeed to
be a potential and anticipatory one. rather
than one which will result In Immediate ad-
niliilsirative action.

Based upon these facts, I have re-servatlons
PS to why the USDA. after little concern for
36 years about off-yard buying and selling
activities, should be permitted to keep such
Jurisdiction. In addition, consider these
lacts: In the last 36 years the USDA has Is-
sued 5 cease-and-desist orders Involving
weii;ht and grade frauds In the buying and
selling of livestock, 3 of which were Issued
to packers operating at a stockyard. Now,
under the bills before you, the USDA can
still Issue such orders against packers. Its
exclusive Jurisdiction over packer activities
at stockyards under title III is not Impaired
by these bills. But what Is Its off stockyards
record where weight and grade frauds are
lnv(jlved? It has Issued only two such or-
ders since 1921 and not one In the last 20
years.

So why. In light of this and of the fore-
going facts should the USDA complain that
to give FTC Jurisdiction over off-yard buy-
ing and selling by packers would Impair Its
effectiveness? It seems to me that It has a
p>.>or record to base this contention on.

The remaining 11 cease and desist orders
issued Involved restraints, preferences, price
fixing, and discriminations. Of the 11, the
USDA has not Issued one against a packer
at a posted stockyard Involving the buying
and selling of livestock. It did Issue one
against Armour & Co. In 1922 In the con-
duct of a nonpoeted yard which gave cer-
tain privileges to a few shippers. In the cor-

rect sense of the term, it has never laaued
Bucb an order against a packer for euch
unfair trade practices off yards. Why should
It complain that the bills before thla com-
mittee deprive It of needed authority to reg-
ulate off-yard buying and selling of Uve-
Btock?

The USDA, while it would give the PTC
Jurisdiction over the wholesaling and re-
tailing activities of a firm not principally
engaged In meatpacking as to Its meat, non-
meat food and nonfood products, will not
consent voluntarily to giving the PTC ju-
risdiction over the wholesaling and retailing
activities of firms principally engaged In
meatpacking and processing. Bated upon
the USDA's record of nonenforcement In
this area, such Jurisdiction, in my opinion,
ought to be returned to the FTC where such
authority was before 1921.

The remaining 10 cease-and-desist orders
were Issued against packers Involving re-
straints, preferences, price fixing, and dis-
criminations In the wholesaling of meat.
But it is Important to note that In the last
18 years the USDA has Issued only one such
order. Not since the mld-1930's has the
Department evidenced any concern In this
area.

But more significant still Is the fact that
the USDA has never Issued a cease-and-
desist order against a packer which In-
volved the wholesaling or retailing of non-
meat food products or nonfood products.
Yet the Department of Agriculture Insists
on keeping this jurisdiction and at Its dis-
cretion permitting the FTC to handle such
a complaint when the USDA wants to permit
It.

The transfer of jurisdiction to the FTC
over the wholesaling and retailing of meat,
nonmeat food, and nonfood products Is the
very heart of the bills before this committee,
since these bills do not disturb the USDA's
authority to regulate stockyards In every
respect In which they can now regulate them.
The very statements I have quoted of USDA
spokesmen Indicate that this area — title III
of the Packers and Stockyards Act — has been.
Is, and will continue to be their area of major
concern. None of the bills before this com-
mittee disturbs the USDA's authority under
title III to regulate the buying and selling of
livestock at stockyards.

On the other hand, the great majority of
the groups which have either testified before
this committee or who I am sure will yet
testify or file statements have or will urge
you to give the PTC such authority over
the wholesaling and retailing activities of
packers. Why? Because the firms they
represent must compete with the packers In
the wholesaling and retailing of meat, of
nonmeat food products, and nonfood prod-
ucts. Yet, as they have told you, while
they are subject to the effective enforce-
ment of the Federal Trade Commission Act,
as were the Big Five packers before 1921,
these packers and others as well are subject
to the Packers and Stockyards Act under
which the USDA has not Issued a cease-and-
desist order Involving the wholesaling and
retailing of meat in the last 10 years. Under
this authority also, the USDA has never Is-
sued a cease-and-desist order against a
packer In the wholesaling of a nonfood or
nonfood product.

These witnesses and the firms they repre-
sent are concerned under these circum-
stances, because 3 of the 1920 consent-decree
signers recently have petitioned the courts
to set aside those portions of that order
which would permit these packers to process
and sell 140 food and nonfood products, own
and operate retail meat markets, sell fresh
milk and cream, and operate dlftrlbutlon
facilities for handling these product*.

Should this petition be granted, these
firms fear, and rightly so, the ramifications
continued USDA nonlnterest in th<! enforce-
ment of the unfair trade practices of title II

would have upon their businesses, since to
all intent and purpose these 8 of the biggest
10 packers would be free, as are other
packers, to expand into every segment of the
food Industry and nonfood industries aa
well.

But whether the consent decree is granted
or not, the activities of these packers out-
side the area prohibited by the consent
decree are so extensive that their competi-
tors are likely to be hurt unless packers are
put under the same set of trade-practice
rules to whose jurisdiction they are subject.
In this respect. It should be noted that in
1950 one or more of the 4 largest packers
shipped 21 classes of food products in inter-
state commerce and 58 classes of nonfood
products. Nonmeat food products com-
prised 6.6 percent of their total shipments.
Nonfood products, exclusive of the bjrprod-
ucts of their meat operations, constituted
6.7 percent of their total shipments In inter-
state commerce, and nonfood byproducts
shipped accounted for an additional 4.9 per-
cent. Thus, 18.2 percent of their total
shipments comprised nonmeat food and non-
food products.

Yet, these packer-owned operations now
are not subject to the FTC, but their
competitors are subject to the jurisdic-
tion of the PTC. This without doubt
gives an unfair competitive advantage
to packer -owned enterprises. Under these
circumstances who. as a competitor of Swift
& Co., wouldn't be concerned about this sit-
uation when in 1955 that firm, for example,
produced 4 percent of the Nation's butter;
87 percent of the cheese; 9 percent of the
margarine; 19 percent of the j)eanut butter;
14 percent of the refined lard; 6 percent of
the salad and cooking oil; and 15 percent of
the shortening?

Why, these witnesses ask, and rightly so
in my opinion, should the trade practices of
a firm like Wilson Sporting Goods, selling
nonfood products, be under USDA while Its
competitors like Spauldlng, under the USDA
proposal be subject to the PTC? Why, they
ask, should Swift and Armour In the whole-
saling of nonmeat food products such as
cheese, canned milk, eggs, Boup>s, etc., be
under the USDA and their competitors like
Campbell Soup Co. and Safeway Stores be
under the FTC, as the USDA proposes?

In closing, let me say that I agree with
Mr. E. M. Norton, the spokesman for the
National Milk Producers before the Senate
subcommittee, who. on that occasion, said:
"The only conclusion we are able to draw —
is that the Packers and Stockyards Act has
effectively shielded the packers from regula-
tion under the Federal Trade Commission
Act and that the unfair trade practices of
the packers have not been subject to ade-
quate control under title 11 of the Packers
and Stockyards Act." Enactment of the bills
before you In a large meastire will remedy
this situation.

i^2

PERSONAL AJTNOUNCEMENT

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker. I ask
unanimous consent that the gentleman
from Massachusetts [Mr. CtrRTis] may
extend his remarks at this point in the
Record.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
New York?

There was no objection.

Mr. CURTIS of Massachusetts. Mr.
Speaker, because of necessary absence,
I did not vote on rollcall 96 in the House
on June 5, 1957, on the question of
passing House Resolution 259 for the
consideration of the civil rights bill,
H. R. 6127. Had I been present, I would
have voted "yea" on this rollcall.

8718

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

'June 10

PROTECrnON OP AMERICAN
SOLDIERS ABROAD

Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman
from Ohio [Mr. Henderson! may extend
hJs remarks at this point In the Record.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the reo.uest of the gentleman from
California?

There was no objection.

Mr. HENDERSON. Mr. Speaker.
the time has come for the Congress of
the Umted States to take active steps
for the protection of American soldiers
abroad. For several years, several
Members of Congress have warned the
people of the United States of the grave
Injustice which has been made possible
by the status of forces agreements and
treaties we have made with the other
nations of the world.

In an effort to defend ourselves and to
assist other nations to remain free and
Independent, we have stationed Ameri-
can troops in more than 40 nations of
the world. In most cases, our troops are
on foreign soU at the request of the host
nations.

Some of the troops that are stationed
there are volunteers who have made the
Armed Services a career. Others are
younK men who have been inducted into
the Armed Forces and are serving will-
ingly but not necessarily voluntarily.
Certainly, they are not volunteers when
It comes to the question of overseas serv-
ice, particularly when that overseas
service Involves them in a diplomatic.
International arrangement whereby
they are deprived of their rights as
American citizens. Those men are de-
fending, or standing ready to defend, the
principles of Americanism, including
rights to American type of justice. Yet
In so doinpT. they are bemg depnved of
those same rights.

The incident which occurred recently
in Formosa was generated In part be-
cause the Formosan Government has
not had the rit^ht of trying American
GIs for incidents committed during
off duty time. Status of forces aerree-
monts have granted that ri^ht to other
nations. The Girard case in Japan,
which is receiving so much attention, is
a most unfortunate incident in which it
now appears that the American Govern-
ment has relinquished jurisdiction of an
American GI to the Japanese for trial
evr-n thouKh hi.s commanding officer cer-
tified that he was on duty at the time.
These developments point up the urgent
ncces.<=:ity for brm,i;ing to the fioor for
immediate action House Resolution 16,
introduced by my colleague from Ohio,
Mr. Bow.

This Congress, and we as Members of
It, cannot permit lives and hberty of
American soldiers to be jeopardized in
this way. If the nations of the world
wiiich are reaping the benefits of having
Araencan soldiers stationed on their soil,
V .il not accord us the privilege of being
responsible for the conduct of our own
soldiers, then we need also to give grave
consideration to the question of whether
or not those troops should be permitted
to remain there. It Is time that Amer-
ica regamed Its old prestige and became

again a dynamic force for liberty and
right. Instead of a simpering, pasty-
faced subordinate. It Is mo6t question-
able whether the flag of the United
States should fly In areas where Ameri-
can rights are not accorded those who
bold that flag.

In these remarks. I do not mean to
Imply that we as a nation wish to mini-
mize or discount In any way offenses
which are committed by United States
troops against the civilian populations
of nations ai which Americans are sta-
tioned.

When such unfcrtunate developments
occur, the guilty must be punished. Our
system of law Including the Code of
Military Justice includes as a bxslc con-
cept the respect for human rights.
These rights are universal and do not
discrimmate again.st any nation or
people.

Mr. Speaker. I am confident that I am
not alone in my feehngs. I am con-
fident, too, that my colleagues are re-
ceiving many letters from constituents,
as I am. protesting the position this
Nation has taken in the Girard case.
The following are e.xcerpts from letters,
representative of the feeling, which I am
receiving.

The first reads as follows:

Either the nrwpapfrs are gravely mis-
represent ini; the f:\ct3 nr we ore doln? a
very ^:ive ir.Just: -e tn th»« h. 'jr Oirard and a
very dampen us th'.ntr to the nverall welfare
of the United States. \1 we permit J.iptin
to try this boy

Do«*8 a boy who has b^en forced Into the
armed serv'.res. and forced to go overseas,
also surrender all the rlghta. privilege**, and
Immunltlea of a citizen of the United States
guaranteed him under the ConstltuMnn?
Thi.s principle c»^uld apply to evry country
of the world, even to Saudi Arabia where a
bo7 steaUni? $.5 may have his hands cut utl.

Certainly Cont^ress can do something
about this matter I can tell you that
pvnrents rf bf)ys In the service ar.d bovs who
h.ive served of will serve are j^reatly dls-
tiirt)ed over this situ itlon. Thaiik yuu f.r
your kind consideration.

The second one Is longer and by a
man with deep di.^ appointment at the
recent turn of event:^. :

This particular letter I write to you Is in
regard to the lad who U up for trial in the
courts of the country of Japan for a cer-
tr\ln deed that resulted In the death of a
Japan-se

I only wish I were In a pjoaltlon to say my
piece where U reaMy c unt.s

I have a br-^'ther who s'lff^r^d dreadfully
at the hands of the 3?ir^ In the last war and
Is now dead from the results of this treat-
m.ert My brother was not In the service at
the time, but w.is a civilian in the pursuit
of h!« work on Wake Island.

On beh.ilf ( f mv brother and all thone who
BU.Tered and died from the terrible treatment
the Japs ^.ive them. I ask the question —
who's ta'k.rig'

It was not my endeavor to seek revenge
after the war. but when the people of Japan
plus the Government of Japan make an Is-
sue of this kind and my Government lets
them get away with It. I )ust lose this much
faith In my Government, at least In its
elected representatives

I want my Government to stand back of
the boys It has called Into the service to its
very limit.

I want my Government to say what It
means and mean what It says to all coun-
tries, especially In this instance.

CONVERSIONS OP MUTUAL SAVINGS
AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr. Speaker.
I ask unanimous consent to extend mjr
remarks at this point In the Record.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
IlUnols?

There was no objection.

Mr OHARA of Illinois Mr. Speaker,
I am addressing my remarks to H. R.
7629, a measure that I Introduced on
May 20. 1957. and whlcli is now under
reference to the Bankint and Currency
Committee. Because of the wide pub-
lic Interest in the subject matter of this
proposed letzlslation. I think it proper
that I should now exph.in Its purpose
and the urgency of its er.actment.

During the 84th Congiess, 2d session,
bills were introduced in both bodies pro-
posing amendments to rxisting law in
order to protect shareholders of mutual
savings and loan a.ssoc ations Insured
by the Federal Govcrnm-nt from losses
and abuses attendant tc conversion of
such associations into permanent stock-
type institutions. The e conversions
are permissible in some States.

Views of re.<^pon.«lble Federal agencies
and of Members of Conprcss were sum-
marized in statements made In the
House by me on July 5, 1956. and in the
other b<:;dy by the .senior Senator from
Montana [Mr MtJl^R^Tl. on Ju!y 20.
1956. at the time of intriduction of our
respective bills. H. R. 12058 and S. 4255.

La.st year when the Senate Banking
and Currency CommiUec was consider-
ing recodification of Fed* ral statutes re-
lating to financial Instlti tions. the Fed-
eral Home Loan Bank Board renewed
earlier suggestions that the Congress
consider the problems liivclved In mu-
tual savings and loan a.'sociatlons that
seek to convert to nonmutual stock
companies.

Specifically, the Board suegested that
the Senate committee crn«ider whether
the Board should not be empowered to
regulate conversions of r>tatc-chartered
mutual institutions into Jtock-type non-
mutual Institutions where the mutual
accounts were Insured l.y the Federal
Savings and Loan In.'^urance Corpora-
tion. The Board pointed out It had
such authority where the converting
Institution was a Federal savings and
loan a.ssociation and sought to convert
into a State-chartered nonmutual Insti-
tution, and that the Board was actively
considering adoption of procedural
standards in such cases.

The Board was of the opinion, how-
ever, that the same problem was In-
volved in the case of an insured State-
chartered mutual seeking to convert in-
to a nonmutual Institution as in the case
of conversion of a Federal chartered mu-
tual Institution into a State-chartered
nonmutual Institution, and suggested
that it be given comparable power to
regulate conversions of State-chartered
mutual In.stitutions whose accounts are
Insured by the Federal Government —
committee print. Octobf*r 12. 1956. pages
150 to 151. Senate Banking and Currency
Committee. Study of Banking Laws, Leg-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8719

Islatlve Recommendations of the Federal
Supervisory Agencies.

The Advisory Committee for the Study
of Federal Statutes Governing Financial
Institutions, in its advisory report to the
Senate committee, disapproved the rec-
ommendation of the Federal Home Loan
Bank Board In the following language:

The Committee disapproves the requested
extension of the power of the Board over in-
sured State-chartered mutual associations
on the ground that control over such a con-
version of a nonlnsured Institution should
lie with the authorities of the State con-
cerned and not with Federal authorities.
(Committee print, Dec. 17. 195fl. p 36. Senate
Committee on Banking and Currency, Study
of Banking Laws. Report of the Advisory
Committee for the Study of Federal Statutes
Governing Financial Institutions and Credit,
p. 36).

The Chairman of the Federal Home
Loan Bank Board, in subsequent testi-
mony before the Senate Committee on
Banking and Currency, pointed out the
manifest inconsistency between the Ad-
vi.sory Committee's disapproval of the
FHLBB recommendation, as stated by
the Advisory Committee, and what the
FHLBB had in fact suggested in the way
of broadening its powers over conver-
sions. What FHLBB was seeking was to
have Congress spell out clearly Its right
to regulate those State-chartered mu-
tual Institutions whose accounts were In-
sured by the Federal Government and
which sought to convert to stock -type in-
stitutions of a nonmutual character.

Thus it would appear that the advisory
committee mistakenly broadened the
scope of regulatory power the Board
suggested be given Jt. Be that as it
may, the problem is still present and Is
not solved In S. 1451, which bill is
largely a recodification of and elimina-
tion of obsolete provisions of existing
laws. Fundamental changes were
avoided to achieve this objective.

In summary, the Board has Indicated
to Congress that It is disturbed about
the potential for abuse In conversion of
mutual savings and loan associations
Into nonmutual institutions. It has
taken precautions to prevent abuse in-
sofar as It has regulatory powers, and
it has brought to the attention of Con-
gress that area where it feels it needs
additional powers — that is, where fed-
erally insured State -chartered mutual
Institutions are involved. If the situ-
ation needs corrective legislation, only
the details of lang:uage remain.

H. R. 7629 Is Intended to resolve the
problems.

The law now requires a State-char-
tered savings and loan association, when
It applies for Federal insurance of its
accounts, to agree that it will not. after
it becomes Insured, Issue a form of se-
curities not approved by the insuring
Federal agency. This requirement is in
subsection (b) of section 403 of title IV
of the National Housing Act, as amend-
ed—title 12. United States Code, section
1726.

Section 1 of the bill proposes to add
a new sentence to the above subsection
making it mandatory for the insuring
Federal agency to disapprove an issue of
securities by. or a change in organiza-
tion of. an Insiired State -chartered mu-

tual Institution that undertakes to con-
vert into a stock-type company. If the
Insured institution persists in doing so,
the Federal insurance is required to be
terminated. This would not be an en-
croachment of the Federal Government
upon the power of States to regulate
their own Institutions. All section 1 of
the bill proposes is that If an insured
State-chartered institution follows a
course of action susceptible of abuse
and injury to its shareholders, it will
no longer be entitled to the benefits of
Federal insurance.

Similarly, section 2 of the bill pro-
poses to strike out that portion of ex-
isting law which permits a Federal-
chartered savings and loan association
to convert to a State institution upon
an equitable basis — that is. to a non-
mutual-type institution.

CHRYSLER CORP. POUR -STAR
TAXrCAB DRIVER PROGRAM

Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr.
6E>eaker, I ask unanimous content to ad-
dress the House for 1 minute and to in-
clude extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentlewoman from
Massachusetts?

There was no objection.

Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr.
Speaker, I am including in my remarks
a description of the Chrysler Corp., Ply-
mouth and Fargo Divisions, four-star
taxicab driver program for 1957, also a
brief description of the rating given Mr.
Edwin R. Elrickson, from my district, as
a driver-nominee in this program. He
is a wonderfully fine man and an excel-
lent driver. May I say also that last
year there was also a very fine taxicab
driver from my district who was a four-
star winner.

The documents to which I have re-
ferred are as follows :
NiNrTTEN Fiftt-Seven Fotth-Star Taxicab

Driveb Program — SArmr, CotraTEST, Sebv-

iCE, Citizenship

TVBT7TE

The taxicab drivers of America have be-
come an institution and an Important con-
tributor to our everyday life, adding to oiu:
pleasure and convenience — and are an ever-
ready part of our civilian defense structure
In case of emergency.

The taxicab driver, as an individual, is a
substantial member of his community. His
contribution in safety, courtesy, service, and
citizenship serves well his community and
the public.

The taxicab owner has for years exerted
every effort to improve his service to the
American public, and to increase highway
safety by example and instruction.

In recognition of these facts — and In trib-
ute to the profession — Clirysler Corp.,
through its Plymouth and Fargo divisions,
salutes all taxicab drivers through the four-
star driver awards.

Plymouth and Fargo divisions of Chrysler
Corp. announce fourth national four-star
taxicab driver program. Thirty "four-star
taxicab drivers" will be chosen to be guests
of Plymouth and Fargo divisions of Chrysler
Corp., for a 3 -day visit to Detroit in June
of 1967.

1. The basis of selection will again be the
same four-star principles which governed the
selection of the four-star drivers in previous
years — safety, courtecy, Bervice, citlcenshlp.

2. Driver awards and recognition. Kach
driver will receive the following: $250 in
cash, "four-star driver" certificate of award,
air or rail transportation to and from De-
troit. 1100 cash advance for incidental travel
expenses, hotel and meals furnished whUe la
Detroit.

3. Participating drivers will be selected
from any organized fleet consisting of 10 or
more taxlcabe. An organized cab fleet can be
either company-owned fleet, individually
owned fleet, organized associations made up
of Individual owners.

4. Taxicab companies who were repre-
sented in 1954, 1955. or 1956 are eligible for
participation again in 1957, although a four-
star driver who was selected in 1954, 1955, or
1956 will not be eligible again for a period of
3 years following the year of his award.

5. In order to encourage interest in all
sections of the country, 30 four-st£ir drivers
will be selected from groups of cities accord-
ing to population: 4 from cities of 1 million
population or more; 11 from cities of 500,000
population to 1 mUlion; 11 from cities of
100,000 population to 500,000; 4 from cities
under 100,000 population (the 1950 United
States national census will be used in estab-
lishing the popi l«tion of cities) .

In each of the above categories, the com-
mittee will select a representative number
of drivers who have had 5 to 10 years, 10 to
15 years, and 15 years or more of continuous
service with the company sponsoring them.
These men will be selected primarily for their
safety, courtesy, and citizenship records.

6. An official awards committee will m&ke
the flnal selection of 30 four-star drivers.
This committee will consist of an expert in
accident prevention; the head of the Nation's
top organization active in competitive auto-
motive events; representatives of the Ameri-
can Taxicab Association and the National
Association of Taxicab Owners, as follows:
President, NASCAR, director. Daytona Beach
International Safety and Performance Trials;
manager, accident prevention department.
Association of Casualty and 8\irety Com-
panies; the presidents of each association:
the national secretaries of each association.
N. W. Seldel, vice president, Chrysler Corp..
Fargo division, and G. E. Brugman, fleet
manager, Chrysler Motors Corp., Detroit.
Mich., will act as coordinating chairmen with
no vote in the selection of the drivers, and
will only coordinate and follow the project
to a conclusion.

7. Suggested methods for driver selection.
The manner in which the nominee is selected
Is left entirely in the hands of the manage-
ment of each individual company. The fol-
lowing are merely suggestions:

In some fleets, the management may want
the drivers to participate in the selection.
This can be done by having drivers nominate
one or more of their fellow drivers, and then
having a committee, Including driver repre-
sentation and management, make the flnal
selection.

Companies having more than one garage
may wish to nominate one driver from each
garage, and then have the selection made by
a committee consisting of garage superin-
tendents and management.

In some cities, management has submitted
2 or 3 nominees to disinterested parties, such
as the director of public safety, the police
commissioner, and a newspaper publisher,
who have made the flnal selection.

8. Each company wishing to participate
In the four -star driver program should sub-
mit the name and complete qualifications
of Its nominee on the printed application
form which accompanies this book of in-
structions. All applications must be post-
marked not later than midnight. May 1,
1957, or they cannot be given consideration.

9. The official awards commilttee will an-
nounce its selection of the 1957 four-star

i\

f^

8720

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

diiwra on May Ifl. 1987. Ceremonies of re-
cogDltlon and preaentatlon of awards wUl be
made June 9. 10. and 11 In Detroit.

10. The decision of t^ offlclal awards
committee will be final.

Tbe Cbryaler Corp.. together with the
Plymouth and Fargo divisions, wishes to ac-
knowledge the cooperation and many con-
trlbutloiu of the American Taxlcab Asao«
elation and the National Association of
Taxlcab Owners In supporting the four-star
driver program, which pays tribute to out-
standing taxlcab drivers who faithfully serve
the public In their communities.

QXTALinCATTOMS FOS CONSTBnWTIOW AND 8K-

LBcnoif or roLTi-sTAS DarvKss

Safety: A driver with an outstanding
safety record. A driver who thlnlLs of his
customer's comfort and safety at all times.

Courtesy: Follows company policies. A
neat, presentable driver who Is a credit to
his con-.pany and proud to serve his com-
munity ds only a taxlcab driver can. He
Is often the first point of contact a visitor
has In a strange city— first Impressions are
everlasting.

Service; Years driving a taxlcab. number
of miles driven (approximate), good attend-
ance record.

Citizenship: Good community record with
Interest in civic affairs. Association with
church work, youth groups, lodge, clubs,
sports, and hobbles. The above examp'.es
of civic interests are given only as a guide.

Taxlcab company name: Diamond Taxi,
of Lowell, Inc.

Street address: 128 Warren Street.

City: Lowell.

State: Massachusetts.

Name of sponsoring compai^j executive:
Thomas J Sullivan.

Title; President- treasurer.

Name of nominee; Edwin R. Encksou.

Street address: 194 Appleton Street.

City: Lowell.

State: Massachusetts.

Please enter the facts In support of your
driver-nominee In the spaces following each
heading below:

1. SArrrr

1. Has driver won any award for a long
safety record or has he made some outstand-
ing contribution to the cause of safety on
our streets and highways? Edwin has been a
consistent receiver of awards and pins during
his employment with us. His repuutlon is
probably best stated by the registrar of motor
vehicles, Rudolph F King.

2. Does this driver have respect for the
safe mechanical condition of nis taxlcao,
and does he drive with consideration for
maximum fuel economy and the long life of
his vehicle.' EJwin Is a perfectionist. He
advocates and practices the placing of the
transmission In neutral at ail trafflc .stops.

3. What has this driver done to Lncreuse
his knowledge and understanding of the
fundamentals of motorcar driving, such as
stopping distances, the effects of rain. snow.
Ice, temperatures, etc. on various road sur-
fiices:" Edwin Is always hungry for knowl-
edge about safe driving. Present at all
monthly safery meetings of our company
and he has sa» on our reviewing board more
of-en than any other employee because of
his ability, attitude, and experience.

2. COURTKST

1. In wh/it ways Aoes he build his com-
pany s prestige in his contacts with the pub-
he^ A quiet, soft-spoken gentleman, Edwin
loves his work and Is a dedicated taxi driver
as he says. 'It is with a sense of newnesi
dally that I report for work. I hke people I
like to listen to them and sometimes I h.'ive
to play the rule of advisor •

2 How does this driver qualify res^ardln?
neatness, b.irh as to h!s taxlcab and his
person? Having been a private chauffeur

for over a year for a very exacUng lady he
learned that neatness pays because nearly
70 percent of our tail customers are ladles.

3. How Is he regarded by his fellow
drivers? He Is a confidant and their per-
sonal advisor. They do not heslUte to go
to hUn for advice — for they know It Is sound.
Sound as Plymouth Rock.

4. How do taxi customers feel about thie
driver? Have special comments or requests
been made In his behalf? Through the
years we have received praises for Edwin.
The way he Is regarded in Lowell Is best
Illustrated by the letters of the mayor, the
city manager, and the superintendent of
police

5. Does this driver offer courtesies and
aasLstance to customers according to com-
pany policies.' His employment records
show no complaints cf any kind.

1 SOIVICX

1. Number of consecutive years driving for
present employer' 19 >ears.

2 Number (f consecutive years driving
wltliout a chargeable accident' 19 years.

3 Number of consecutive years without
any accldenf 15 yea.-s

4. Attendance record' Exceptional, 1 or
2 days a year, mosUy ', days.

4. CTTTZrNSHn'

1. Hns the nominee performed some out-
st.indlni; act of heroism, kindness, or hon-
esty In the course of his dally work? On
the death of his wifes parents, who had
raised him from a baby, Edwin and his wife
adopted Arthur Erlckson at the age of 11
and raL-ied him to the fine man he Is today.
Attested bv the picture of he. and his wife,
and three boys.

2 Does he take sn active Interest in
church work, youth activities, lodge work.
ciuba. sports, hobbies, or any other civic
affairs which add to the well-being of the
people of his community? At St John's
Epifcopai Church Edwin worked with the
Boy Scout troop and assisted In the pro-
duction of church plays.

3 Is he a citizen of whom his community
can be proud' Poei lively ye«— may we refer
jou to ail the letters pointing out this fact.

CCNEKAL

In the space below, please state any other
particula.'s bearlne on this drivers character
or accomplishments which you feel should
be brnii^ht to the attention of the awards
committee:

In every company In the taxlcab Industry
there Is a nucleus around which the entire
personnel operating and maltnalnlng the
company Is built.

The owner may buy the finest Uxlcabs.
equip them with the most expensive equip-
ment, have the best stand lcx:atlons. have
thou.'^.inds of fnend.s and customers but
without the taxlcab drivers, they can only
operate one cab. Edwin, through the years.
has been a member of our nucleus.

He has trained drivers, advised them and
as a .safety team c.iptaln h.us watched and
corrected them. Even as he has watched
over his adopted son. Arthur, so he has given
of his time and effort to novice taxlcab
drivers coming Into our organization.

We are very proud to nominate Bdwln R
Erlckson.

Title: President-treasurer.

Date: April 4. 1957.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
TREASURYS FISCAL CRISIS?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Texa.s [Mr. PatmanJ is recog-
nized for 20 minutes.

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, on
Thursday. June 8, 1957. the New York

Times published a lengthy lead editorial
entitled "A Problem la Not a Crisis." The
editorial seeks to absolve the outgoing
Secretary of the Treasury from blame for
the mishandling of our public debt and
the resultant critical financial situation
now confronting our CJovemment. The
Times editorial charges "political op-
ponents and other critics of the admin-
istration" wish to employ the term
•' crisis" to describe a number of pieces
of unfinished bu.sines« that rate the
designation 'problems.' " Who are the
political opponents and other critics that
the Times has in mind? Could It be
the editors of the Wall Street Journal
who wrote on Monday. June 3, 1957:

The plain, simple, and Incontrovertible
fact ts that the Government of the United
States ts In a n.-scRl mess To put It bluntly,
the Treasury of the richest NaUon on eartli
Is short of money.

Could it be the editors of Barron's?
On June 3. 1957. they listed the follow-
ing bill of parUculars in their indict-
ment of the outgoing Secretary of
Treasury:

1 Has been compelled to raise money with
distressing frequency and at steadily rUlng
costs

2 Serious financial straits (of the Treas-
ury) have p(«ed a mounting tiireai to over-
all economic stablUty.

3. While the Nation remains as solvent as
ever, debt-management policy has come
perilously close to bankruptcy.

Are these the "pieces of unfinished
business' the Times speaks about? I
wonder if the editor of the Times be-
lieves the term "crisis" should not be
ased in referring to the debt-manage-
ment situation until the Trea-iury con-
cedes it has gone bankrupt, and is un-
able to raise the necessary funds to in-
sure the continued operations of the
Government of the United States?

I am not being facetious or frtvoloua
In making these remarks. For the state
of our finances is in serious condition
after 5 years of debt-mismanagement.
Alice-in-Wonderland monetary policy
and giveaway fiscal policy.

Mr. Speaker, who has carried out these
policies for the past 5 years? Has It
been the Democrats or Republicans?
Did the Democrats approve those policies
or did they protest ai.d oppose them
from their inception, warning they would
lead directly to the crisis we face today?
I ask these questions because the Times
editorial insists that the Republican ad-
ministration and the Secretary of
Treasury are not to blame for the "prob-
lems" that exist today.

The Times editors assert they are the
type of problems that 'mlRht be ex-
pected to beset an administration that
(1> inherited a huge public debt, con-
sisting in the main of short term obliga-
tions, and (2) has been compelled to do
Its refinancing for 2 years now under
conditions of uninterrupted prosperity
and tightening money rate.s."

To what Icnpths will a great news-
paper go In order to shield a favored
administration from Just and well de-
served critlci.sm? In this Instance, the
Times appears to have been willing to
go as far as necessary, including gross
misrepresentation of the facts.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8721

Let us examine the excnse that fhe
administration Inherited a htige public
debt composed mainly of rtMrt-tcrm ob-
ligations. Five years ago short term biQs
and certificates constituted only 25 per-
cent of the total marketable debt.
Today the proportion Is dose to 29 per-
cent.

The plain truth Is that this adminis-
tration inherited a debt — which the
Democrats had managed successfully
for 7 postwar years — composed in the
main of bonds and nonmarketable is-
sues. Such issues constituted close to
70 percent of the pubbc debt on Decem-
ber 31, 1952. Today the proportion is
below 65 percent. The Times has re-
peated Republican propaganda about
inheriting a huge short-term debt for so
long that it has come to believe It as
gospel truth. The Republicans needed a
good excuse to break the long-term in-
terest rate and so they manufactured a
myth about the need to refund the
debt — to lengthen its maturity. This
was the reason they gave for putting
out the 3 '74 -percent 30-year bond in
April 1953. The proof that the debt
structure In 1962 corresponded to the
needs of the economy and of investors
ppnerally lies in the fact that the Re-
publicans have failed to lengthen Its ma-
tunty In 5 years. The average maturity
of the public debt today is shorter than
when the Republicans Inherited it 5
years ago.

Republican manipulation of the debt
structure and of Interest rates has
caused .some very serious shifts In the
ownership of the debt, which has con-
tributed to its Instability. For exam-
ple, one of the primary alms of the
Democrats was to encourage as wide an
ownership of the public debt as possible
by striving to Increase the amount of
savings invested in series E and F bonds.
The Democrats also tried to reduce the
amount of the marketable debt so as to
insulate debt-management operations
from market fluctuations.

After 5 years of Republican debt mis-
management, here is what we find.
United States savings bonds down from
$57.9 billion outstanding December 31.
1952, to $55.6 billion outstanding Mso-ch
31, 1957. And redemptions are continu-
ing to outrun sales at a substantial
rate. Total nonmarketable issues, in-
cluding savings bonds as well as the in-
vestment series bonds, down from $77.6
billion on December 31. 1952, to $67.3
billion on March 31. 1957. During this
5-ycar period, the total amount of the
public debt subject to the daily fluctu-
ations of the money market was boosted
from $148.6 billion on December 31. 1952,
to $159.9 billion on March 31, 1957.

INTTKEST RATX INC3IBASXS TO BANKS X4.3 TUCXS
CSEATXa THAN IMCaEASES ON TBXJST FUNDS

A Closely kept secret about Republi-
can debt management has been its ex-
ploitation of the various trust funds —
such as the old-age and survivors in-
surance trust fund, the national serv-
ice life Insurance trust fund, and the
other Government invested accounts. In
the past 5 years, the Treasury has to-
creased the ntmiber of special Issues it
Rives these accounts, in exchange for the
cash it uses for general expenses, from

$39.1 banon on Deeember 31, 1952, to
$45.6 billion on March 31. 1957. The
interesting thixig about this sreater use
of the trust fund numey to tovest in its
own securities Is that the Treasury Is
paying an average rate on these special
issues of only 2.702 percent today pom-
pared with the average of 2,678 on De-
cember 31, 1952, or an increase of only
0.024 percent In contrast, the Treasury
has boosted the average interest rate it
pays on marketable obligations from
2.099 percent on December 31, 1952. to
2,684 percent on March 31, 1957, or 0.585
percent In other words, it has increased
the average totercst rate paid to banks
and other lenders 24.3 times greater than
increase in the average rate paid on
funds borrowed from the old-age and
survivors insurance trust account, from
the veterans national service life in-
surance trust fund, from the Govern-
ment employees retirement funds, the
railroad retirement account, and the
unemployment trust fimd.

This Is the way in which the debt-
management operations of the Treasury
under a Republican administration have
discriminated against the millions of
workers, farmers, veterans, civil service
employees, and small, independent busi-
nessmen who are the main beneficiaries
of these trust funds.

The Treasury has not hesitated to use
this trust fund money to bail itself out
of debt-management difficulties when it
fund It necessary to do so. And in
doing so, it has paid the trust funds far
less of an increase In average interest
rates than it found necessary to pay the
bankers, the life insurance companies,
and other lenders,

CBEATION OF AETTFICISIXT TIGHT MONrT
CONSmONS

So much for excuse No. 1, Mr. Speaker.
Now we come to the second excuse given
by the Times for the Treasury's prob-
lems. We are told that the Treasury
was "compelled" to do Its refinancing
under tight money conditions. My
question is who "compelled" the Trea-
sury to borrow under such conditions?
The answer is that no one "compelled"
it to do so. The truth is that from the
start of 1953, Treasury debt manage-
ment ofiflcials have had as their primary
objective the creation of artificially tight
money conditions. This fact was recog-
niaed by a New York Times writer, Mr,
Joseph Loftus, who wrote in the Sunday
New York Times, April 26, 1953: "There
is no doubt that the Government Is pay-
ing more to hire its money than is nec-
essary."

In a report issued May 18, 1953, en-
titled "Refunding the Public Debt,"
Dean O. Rowland Collins and Dr. Mar-
cus Nadler of New York University's In-
stitute of International Finance, warned
against the impact of Treasury refinanc-
ing operations:

If mishandled, refunding could not only
have a detrimental effect on business activ-
ity but saddle the Nation for years to come
with higher rates of Interest and an in-
creasing debt burden which may prove to
be unwarranted. Lengthening of maturi-
ties of outstanding Federal obligations (Joes
not appear to be a pressing problem. • • •
TbcTB U no Bpeclal urgency to reduce the
volume of bank-held debt, since bUBlness

activity aad the ptie» stmetnre bare caught
up wUb tlM supply of deposits created dur-
ing the war (p. 15).

The excuse that the Treasury was
compelled to do its refinancing under
tight money conditions is a specious
one. The Treasury debt-management
crisis results from a conscious policy
pursued by the Treasury and at its be-
hest the Federal Reserve, directed to-
ward markedly decreasing the Uquidity
position M the commercial banks and
corporations who comprise an impor-
tant part of the market for Govenunent
securities.

The argument that the Treasury was
compelled to do its refinancing at higher
interest rates is refuted by the often re-
peated statements of the Secretary of
the Treasury that interest rates are still
low by historical standards. Moreover,
Secretary Humphrey has been one of
the few Treasury Secretaries in our en-
tire history who has stated publicly that
he did not feel it was his duty to keep
the interest rate on the public debt as
low as possible to prevent loading the
people of the country, their children and
grandchildren, with a hugh and unnec-
essary burden. Contrast the position of
Secretary Humphrey with that of for-
mer Secretary of the Treasury William
G. McAdoo. Charged with the enor-
mous task of financing World War I,
Mr. McAdoo later wrote:

My decision to adhere to low rates on bond
issties saved an immense sum to the people
of the United States. I could not reconcUe
myself to the idea of loading them with a
huge and unnecessary burden, although I
knew It would make my task easier in sell-
ing bonds (Crowded Years, Reminiscences
of William G. McAdoo, Boston: Hotighton
MifBln Co., 1931, p. 381).

Mr. Speaker, the problems of Secre-
tary Humphrey were his creation. They
were not foisted upon him by compul-
sion or coercion. Nor did he inherit any
problems from the preceding Demo-
cratic administration as the Times edi-
tors falsely maintain.

Mr. Speaker, we come now to the fa-
miliar excuse that the Treasury's prob-
lems have been due to the necessity of
fighting all-out infiation. For 5 years,
we have been told that the Republicans
were going to prevent inflation and pre-
serve the purchasing value of the dollar.
The inflation excuse, like the myth of the
huge short-term debt, was created by the
Republicans to justify higher interest
rates. When the Republicans took over
in 1953, there was no threat of inflation.
Prices on the average had been stable for
nearly 2 years, from February 1951 to
December 1952. It was only after the
Republicans took ofBce and began to re-
strict credit, boost interest rates and by
their general economic policies encour-
age the giant monopolies to boost their
prices and profits that inflation started.
Since 1952, there have not been any gen-
eral Inflationary pressures due to an
overabundance of money and credit or
an excess of purchasing power relative
to the supply of goods. What we have
had Is a selective administered price type
inflation. Giant monopolies have been
charging all the traffic can bear. They
have boosted their profits to record

m

CIU-

-549

8722

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

levels. They have gone on a moderniza-
tion and expansion spree, which haa
made them bigger and stronger, while
their competitors have been made weak-
er. They have gobbled up scores of
smaller firms in the most extensive con-
solidation and concentration movement
since the 1890s. This is what lies be-
hind the post- 1952 inflation. The capital
spending binge of the giant monopolies
has not been deterred in the shghtest by
the tight-money policy or high interest
rates.

MYTH THAT DIMOCKATS CAUSED rNFLATION'

It is time to expose the myth that the
Secretary of the Treasury sacrificed the
needs of debt-management in the in-
terest of curbing an inflation inherited
from the Democrats. Nothing could be
further from the truth. Republican
propaganda asserts that the American
dollar was debased by Democratic cheap
money policies and artificially low in-
terest rates. But the facts show the fol-
lowing. In the 12 '2 peacetime years
from 1932 to 1952. the years of so-called
easy money and artificial low interest
rates, the average yearly increase in the
cost of living index amounted to 2 points.
The increase this past year alone was
4.6 points. So in the last year under the
Republican high Interest, tight-credit,
anti-inflation policy, the cost of livincc
rose two and a half times faster than it
had on the average during 12'.. peace-
time years of so-called cheap money and
artificially reduced interest rates under
the Democrats.

That shows how phony is the charge
of Democratic debasement of the value
of the dollar through cheap money
policies. The truth is. and the Republi-
cans know it. that we could not waee
World War II and the Korean war at
the 1939 price level. To have done so
would have required a capital levy large
enough to wipe out the war-«enerated
savings. If the Republicans wanted to
confiscate over $150 billion worth of in-
dividuals' and business' saviniis in order
to maintain the prewar purchasing
power of the dollar, why did they not
say so? And what would have happened
to our economy in 1946 without the $150
billion increase in liquid asset holdings
from 1939 to 1945. We now come to the
final point in the Times' editorial. This
i.s the allegation that the increased bur-
den of interest, which the Secretary of
the Treasury has imposed on the Nation
for years to come, is less than the added
cost to Government would have been, if
inflationary pressures had been left un-
checked. This is, first of all, a specious
line of reasoning for it assumes that
higher interest rates have prevented
prices from increasing more than they
would have done if the rates had not
been raised. There is no prajf for that
proposition at all. On the contrary, all
the evidence is against it.

Now let us see what the extra interest
cost has been. So far, the annual in-
terest burden on the debt has risen $1 5
bill.on over what it was in 1952. But if
we were to refinance the debt at present
rates, and the debt will have to be re-
financed in les.s than 4 years, the extra
annual Interest cost would be $4 5 bil-

lion. In 1952, Government purchases
of goods amounted to $21 billion. This
excludes Federal civilian and military
payrolls. Assuming no change in the
kinds of goods purchased, how much
would prices have had to rise since 1952
to increase expenditures by $4.5 billion a
year? The answer is 22 percent. In
other words, the rise in the Interest
charge on our national debt since 1952.
which will be at least $4.5 billion when
the entire debt is finally rolled over, has
been equivalent to a 22-percent increase
in the average price of goods the Federal
Government purchased in 1952. Does
the New York Times really believe that
if interest rates had been permitted to
remain at 1952 levels prices would have
risen 22 percent' The argument has
been repeated over and over again,
namely that the extra interest charges
on the public debt offset billions, which
would otherwise have had to be paid on
account of price increases. It ignores
the fact that we shall have to pay the
higher interest rates for years to come —
in some cases 30 to 40 years — while no
one has yet maintained that prices of
commodities will go up and stay there
for 30 or 40 years.

Mr. Speaker. I a.'-k permission to insert
at this point in my remarks a summary
table, which shows the composition of
the public debt and the interest rates
on the securities making up the public
debt on December 31, 1952 and on
March 31. 1957. 5 years and 3 months
after Secretary Humphrey took over the
management of the debt.

Public debt outstanding

I In hill:oii<!

I>-r ,U, !■'■.>

1 M ir .(1. I'r--.:

.\aicHint

1 .Avpr-

II 1:1 •

Intrrrst

raU>

.\ mount

Avpr

ace

irt.rf-t

rule

M irk, table;

Hilli

Crrtifli-ates

Notw

$21 7
Ifi. 7
30 3

Percent
1. »IS
l.*«7
1. 7.V5

$25.3
ly. 4
34.4

7V. 1

Prrrrn!

3 .11

;< vjii

2 .iSI)

Tot;l]

7^ 8

'j'JJO

Bunds

2 4>«J

T..t.il m,irk.'t
•iM.-
Nonniirk^' l^.l^•
lllltt><l ."LiC-^
Siivin.M Nmds.

m. 5

J7 9

i.r 4
.4

zow

1J9 9

&.Vf.
none

11 i

2.'*«

Tri-k'iiirv 'iv

in>;s notes
Treiu-iirs Niiitls,

invr-ttnent

«t'ri<'<

I)»(H>-iiti)ry

bonUi

■ - - - -

Tot.il

7: 0
39.1

Z67S

4.V fi

.'^ppcicil l.ssiJi>s
( fMllf<l Statfs

tru-Ht funil.sj

2. 7" J

Resolution 98 calling on the Federal Re-
serve to support Government securities
at par and stop the rise in Interest rates,
Mr. David Lawrence, the well-known
political columnist, wrote as follows in
the Washington Evening Star:

At laat. a lenders' market Higher Interest
rates Anally reverse 20-year Injustice to thoee
who have money to lend for private gain.

The article begins:

Perhaps because the topic Is a technical
one. the most slgnlrtcant development in
a quarter of a century haa passed unnoticed
by the generiil public. It Is a fact that at
last the wages of money have finally been
awarded an increase • • •. The truth Is. the
step Just talcen emancipates • • • the lend-
ers or savers from the bondage of cheap
money.

What Mr. Lawrence omitted to say in
his column was that the object was not
to release lenders or savers from the
bondage of cheap money, but to put the
people of the United States and their
Government back in bondage to the
money trust from which Franklin Roose-
velt emancipated them. It was Franklin
Roosevelt who moved the financial cap-
ital of the United States from New York
to Washington where it rightly belongs.
It has been the Republicans who have
placed us in the position where we are
ruled by the New York bankers again.
Will we once again have to witness the
spectacle of a President of the United
States forced to come to terms with the
Money Trust in order to keep the Nation
solvent? This happened before under
Republican administrations. Will it
happen again?

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8723

-•••ir'f L -- lrvi.~..;> l<j;l> .-^tiitfmci:! .inj T^•tM,^llry
B:;ll,t....

In conclu.'^ion. I would like to repeat
what I have said many times before.
The interest-rate policy of this admin-
istration had only one objective and it
was not to curb inflation. That objective
was to Increase the profits of lenders, the
giant banks, insurance companies, and
investment banking house.s. This was
not my view alone. On May 11, 1953,
the day I submitted House Concurrent

FEDERAL FLOOD INDEMNITY

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Connecticut I Mr. S.\X)lak) is
recognized for 20 minutes.

Mr. SADLAK. Mr. Speaker, as Mem-
bers of the House know we .^iiall have be-
fore us shortly the conference report on
the third supplemental appropriation
bill. Some of the items in this bill are
In dispute between the House and Sen-
ate conferees. There is one item of great
importance to all of us and that is $14
million needed to start the Government's
flood-insurance program. The Con-
gre.ss established this program last year
with the enactment of the Federal Flood
Insurance Act which the President
signed Into law on Augist 7, 1956.

The Hou.'^e rejected t.nis necessary $14
million by a teller vote of 127 to 97. The
Senate restored the item.

Now I want to go into great detail
about a section of this law — the flood-
zoning provisions — beciuse there have
been implications mad? here that this
whole program Is a bit of Government
paternali.sm and that by starting it with
$14 million we are aboui to go on a one-,
two-, or three-billion -dollar handout
spree.

I have read the hearings and debates
on this subject and I cid not see any-
where a detailed accouit of the flood-
zoning provisions— wh; :h, If we will
study them, will show that this Is a busi-
nesslike program with many buUt-ln

protections against excessive losses to
the Government.

I should like at this point to quote
verbatim from the provisions in the
statute covering flood zoning:

Section 12 (b) of Public Law 1016
reads as follows:

No insurance or reinsurance shall be Issued
under the proTlalons of this act on any prop-
erty declared by a duly constituted State or
local zoning authority, or other authorized
public body, to b« In violation of State or
local flood aonlng laws.

Section 12 (c) of the statute reads as
follows:

After June 30, 1958. no Insurance or rein-
surance shall be Issued under the provisions
of this act In any geographical location un-
less an appropriate public body shall have
adopted and shall keep In effect such flood
zoning restrictions. If any. as may be deemed
necessary by the Administrator to reduce,
within practicable limits, damages from
flood in such location.

As if these protective provisions were
not enough, the Congress inserted sec-
tion 9 which reads:

The Administrator may from time to time
Lssue appropriate regulations regarding the
classification, limitation, and rejection of
ru>ks assumed by blm under authority of this
act.

Note that word "rejection" In this sec-
tion of the statute. The Administrator
Is authorized to reject applications for
this flood insurance and this will be done
where operating experience reveals that
the Government would be running too
great a risk in issuing policies.

Most of our States, including my own
State of Connecticut, have long recog-
nized the benefits of planning and zon-
ing as a means of providing for the or-
derly development of the coimtry. The
Federal Flood Insurance Act supports
existing zoning ordinances by denying
flood insurance to properties In violation
of existing ordinances. This provision
can be of great benefit to States and lo-
calities.

The application of zoning to future
developments in the flood plains of the
rivers of this country introduces a new
concept in our program to minimize the
disastrous effects of floods.

Whereas, we have tried in the past to
keep water away from man by construct-
ing fiood-control works, the Congress in
the flood insurance act has determined
to keep man away from water by flood
plain zoning, thus flood insurance will
work, hand in glove, with present and
future flood control and preventive
measures.

In short, flood insurance will only be
available in areas subject to periodic
flooding where the type and location of
Improvements have been restricted by
zoning and the potential flood losses
thereby reduced. In such circumstances,
flood insurance rates can be kept rela-
tively low.

New England Is deeply Interested in
the Federal flood indemnity program
because it will afford a new and much
needed tool with which to accomplish a
reduction In flood damage.

This region is organised for flood con-
trol and flood prerentloo. Public and
private group* have Joined with rarloui
agencies of the Federal Government to

provide for better utilization of water re-
sources and prevention of rfajnugiTtg
floods through the construction of dams
and reservoirs. They are prepared to
assume responsibility for flood soning in
highly exposed areas as an important
part of their comprehensive programs.

Under an Interstate Compact, the
States of New Hampshire. Massa-
chusetts, Vermont and Connecticut have
organized the Connecticut River Control
Commission whose duty Is to sponsor
flood-control measures in this great river
valley.

Similar Commissions may be set up
imder additional compacts for the
Thames River which rtms through
Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode
Island, and the Merrimac River in New
Hampshire and Massachusetts.

There is also a Connecticut River
Watershed Council, a semiprivate group
which Is pronwting flood prevention in
the Connecticut "Valley. The chairman
of this group is the distinguished editor
of the Hartford Times, Hartford, Corm.,
Mr. Ward Duffy.

An outgrowth of the New York and
New England Interagency Committee on
Water Resources is the New England Re-
sources Committee headed by Walter
White of New Hampshire. This group
comprises representatives of the 6 New
England States and 7 Federal agencies,
all concerned with conservation and
proper utilization of water resources in
the New England region.

All these agencies and groups hope to
be able to cooperate with the Federal
Flood Indemnity Administration in its
efforts to reduce flood damage through
proper flood plain zoning. The respon-
sibility for such zoning, however, rests
primarily with State and local govern-
ments. The FFIA cannot zone the coun-
try by Federal mandate: but it can
greatly strengthen the efforts of State
and local governments in zoning for bet-
ter land use, restriction of subdivision
development and prevention of stream
encroachment.

As I understand it, flood insurance will
be written everywhere throughout the
country until June 30. 1958. After that
date, the Commissioner of the Flood
Indemnity Administration may require
State and local governments to adopt
flood zoning restrictions as a condition
precedent to the underwriting of flood
insurance.

The New England States are not alone
among the various States in seeking to
cooperate with the Federal Flood Indem-
nity Administration, in this new effort to
keep man away from water.

Through the Council of State Govern-
ments close liaison has been established
by the Federal Flood Indemnity Admin-
istration with State ofBcials concerned
with State participation in the insur-
ance program. Many oi the States, it is
reported, are taking steps to accomplish
flood zoning in collaboration with the
Inderal Government. The whole coun-
try is greatly disturbed over the t«Tible
losses Just recently sustained in Ken-
tucky, West Virginia, Virginia, Oregon,
Washington. Hawaii. Texas, LouMan*,
Oklahoma. Idaho, Missotirl, and Arkan-
sas.

Damage In these States has been so
severe that the flooded areas have been
declared disaster areas for purposes of
Federal relief.

Looking at the record of flood damage
over the years, it will be seen that 80
percent of the land area of the country
is subject to periodic floods.

If we can reduce and minimize the
losses suffered by our people through
zoning, we have an added reason for in-
vesting public funds in the Federal flood
indemnity program.

You have heard it said in responsible
quarters that the flood-insurance pro-
gram will launch the Government on
another billion dollar spending binge.
This is strictly impossible.

It is true that we have authorized the
Flood Indemnity Administration to un-
derwrite $3 billion of insurance, but that
sum is not the measure of the Govern-
ment's liability.

Anyone familiar with property insur-
ance will know that the total face
amount of the policies in force is not
important. The losses under these poli-
cies are the prime consideraUon.

My belief is that the Government's
losses cannot be excessive simply be-
cause of the built-in protection afforded
by the zoning and other provisions in the
statute, and safeguards which have been
incorporated into the program.

Conscientious, sound administration
of this law will not only prevent large
losses by the Government, but will go
far toward reducing the enormous po-
tential damage to property subject to
recurrent floods.

Mr. Speaker, It is my earnest hope
that when this third supplemental re-
quest for $14 milhon comes before the
House that favorable action will be taken
and I recommend this to you.

URSULINE ORDER AT SPRINGFIELD,
ILL.. CELEBRATES lOOTH ANNI-
VERSARY

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, ttie gentle-
man from Illinois [Mr. MackI is recog-
nized for 5 minutes.

Mr. MACK of Illinois. Mr. Speaker,
during the stuxuner of 1857, five nuns of
the Ursuline Order arrived in Spring-
field, 111., and established the Con-
vent of St. Joseph, which has continued
for 100 years as a center of religious
training and culture in Central Illinois.
Mother Mary Joseph Woulfe, the four
nuns who came with her to Springfield,
and the many who followed over the
century have given unstintingly of their
energies, teaching children of all races
and creeds.

During the single school yesj of 1956-
57, Ursxiline nuns taught more than 3,700
persons in Springfield. These included
students of Springfield Junior College,
founded by the Urstilines in 1929 and
today one of Illinois' leading coeduca-
tional institutions of higher learning.

The Ursulines of Springfield also con-
duct the Ursuline Academy, a girls' high
school; the Blessed Sacrament. St Jo-
seph and £t. Aloysius elementary schools;
and an adult educational center at
BpriaeOeUL Junior College.

I

i fi

\m

8724

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RfiCQRD — HOUSE

3725

H«

Ih

i)

Thus. It Is with great pride that I
congratulate Reverend Mother Ernes-
tine. O. S. U., the present superior and
president of Springfield Junior College,
and take this opportunity to Inform the
House of the Urstillnes' century of
achievement In Springfield.

When Mother Mary Joseph Woulf e ar-
rived In Springfield on Friday. August
21, 1857, she was accompanied by Mother
DeSales and Sisters Agatha. Veronica,
and Martha. Mother Joseph Woulf e was
a native of County Cork In Ireland. She
made her profession as an Ursullne Sis-
ter In Charleston. S. C. She was super-
intendent of Assumption Ursullne Con-
vent In Cincinnati, Ohio, for 7 years and
then was transferred to St. Martin's Con-
vent. Brown County. Ohio. With the
permission of Archbishop J. B. Purcell,
of Cincinnati, and at the request of Rt,
Rev. H. D. Junkee. first bishop of Alton,
Hi., diocese, which later became the dio-
cese of Springfield, Mother Joseph
Woulfe was named superior of the group
of Ursullnes that established the convent
In Springfield. Her companions also
were from Brown County, Ohio. Later
Mother Charles Maloney, of Charleston.
S. C, joined the founding group.

Without a single piece of furniture, the
Ursullnes first settled in Springfield in
an old dwelling called the Farnsworth
houi>e. With some assistance from the
bishop and through the kindness of the
people, they opened their first school
within 17 days of their arrival. It was
attended by both Catholics and non-
Catholics.

In 1867. 10 years after their arrival in
Springfield, the Ursullnes opened a new
academy and monastery. The quahty
of their teaching was now recognized
over a wide area, and many boarders
and day students were enrolled in their
school.

Through the years many additions
were made to the original buildings, be-
ginning with a chapel in 1895, comple-
tion of the monastery building in 1901.
and an auditorium known as St. Ursula s
Hall, dedicated in 1909. Junior college
classes were started in the old Brinker-
hoff home in 1929. Mother Barbara Kla-
holt, of Springfield, was then superior
of the Springfield Ursullnes and the first
president of the Junior college. Ground
for the present Junior college building
was broken on February 7. 1930, and the
structure was ready for occupancy the
following September. With the permis-
sion of the Very Reverend Mother St.
Jean Martin, prioress general, the col-
lege classes were opened to men as well
as to women.

In 1941. a signal honor was bestowed
upon Mother Mary Joseph Woulfe by
Delta Kappa Gamma. National Organi-
zation of Women Educators. Each year
this group honors an outstanding pio-
neer educator from each State. Mother
Mary Joseph Woulfe was chosen to rep-
resent Illinois for 1941 because of her
foresight in the field of education, for
her excellent work in developing and en-
couraging the parochial school Idea, and
for the fact that she established the first
school of music In the vicinity.

Throughout the years the Ursullnes of
Springfield have ever tried to maintain

and to uphold the high standards of
teaching the ideals of true religious life,
and the progressive foresight which Is
the inheritance bequeathed them by
Rev. Mother Mary Joseph Woulfe and
her capable courageous group of co-
foundresses.

FARMING IS THE NATURAL AND
GOOD LIFE

Mr. NATCHER. Mr. Speaker. I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Kentucky?

There was no objection.
Mr. NATCHER. Mr. Speaker, our Re-
public was born in what has come to be
known as the Age of Enlightenment.
Dxiring this period of time intelligent
people discarded the traditional ways of
the feudal period which were accepted
generally as eternally right, natiiral. and
not subject to improvement, and in its
place substituted reason to show us bet-
ter ways. An aggressive search for bet-
ter ways started and continues to this
good day.

New methods of cultivation were de-
veloped in agriculture. Our love and
concern for the soil. Its use. conserva-
tion, and nature was born during this
period. Two of our early leaders. Wash-
ington and Jefferson, were among those
who put aside traditional prejudices and
tackled agricultural problems scientif-
ically. Jefferson said that "those who
labor In the earth are the chosen people
of God."

Farming was man's fundamental pur-
suit and it was the natural and good life.
Our early farmer came from a working
class of people in Europe and early fron-
tier life helped to develop a democratic
spirit and pride In the virtues of Indus-
try, thrift, and labor which Is present to-
day on our American farm.

Our forefathers knew that agricul-
ture must prosper if our new Nation
was to prosper. A move started in the
Second Continental Congress to set up
a Department of Agriculture where prob-
lems confronting our farmers could
be studied and properly researched. In
1776 two resolutions recommending aid
to agriculture were adopted. One of the
resolutions contained a clause, which
was later stricken, proposing the estab-
lishment of a standing committee of
Congress to correspond and assist the
agricultural societies which were to be
set up in each of the Colonies. George
Washington 2 decades later. In his last
annual message to Congress advocated
the establishment of a board of agricul-
ture to collect and diffuse Information.
A House committee favorably reported a
bill but It never came to a vote. In
1817 a bill was prepared and submitted
to the Committee of the Whole estab-
lishing a national board of agriculture.
Again no further action was taken.

Consuls and naval officers abroad
continued to follow the example set by
Benjamin Franklin in sending home
seeds and improved breeds of domestic
animals. John Quincy Adams recog-
nized this practice by Instructing all
United States consuls to forward rare

plants and aeedi to Wihshlngton. During
the Adams admlnisti ation a botanical
garden was set up and a committee on
agriculture was estabJshed in the Sen-
ate. The House created Its committee
5 years before this in 1 820.

In 1836 our Commissioner of Patents
on his own initiative distributed seeds
obtained from abroajl to our farmers.
In 1839 Congress appropriated $1,000 for
the threefold purpose of collecting ag-
ricultural statistics, conducting agricul-
tural investigations, and distributing
seeds. This money pi-ovlded for the es-
tablishment of an A^Ticulture Division
In the Patent Office.

In the year 1860. after nearly a cen-
tury of discussion th«> ground was laid
for the establishmen: of an executive
department of agriculture. A bill cre-
ating the United States Department of
Agriculture became i. law on May 15,
1862. Our land-grant college bill passed
during the same year— July 2. 1862.
Here we have the moft significant legis-
lation for agricultural education In the
United States. This law provided that
a SUte might receive 30.000 acres of the
public lands within \U borders for each
Representative and Senator it had In the
Congress. The proceeds derived from
the sale of the land \?as to be invested
and the Income used to create and main-
tain colleges.

Our first experiment station was
erected in 1875 at Wcsleyan University
in Mlddletown, Conn. After 1880 a
number of SUte agricultural colleges
established stations.

The next milestone along the way was
the establishment o- our Extension
Service. This Service Is a cooperative
undertaking by the FtKleral. SUte. and
local governments. The Smith-Lever
Act passed by Congrea-t In 1914 provided
for our Extension Serrice. Our exten-
sion work Is conduct4Kl today In over
3.000 counties In our country by our
county and home demonstration agents.
After its establishDient the Depart-
ment of Agriculture was looked upon
primarily as an agri:ultural research
agency. Today It ha.', other function*
which have grown enormously In recent
years. Our SUte exi>eriment sUtlons
have also grown steadily along with col-
lege teaching and exte:islon In the land-
grant colleges. Our Department of
Agriculture today dire»!ts its research to
the solution of problems of regional or
national significance. Many of the same
problems are handled by the SUte ex-
periment sUtlons — esiteclally those re-
lating to local conditions.

Our research has brought about
abundance. Our experiment sUtlons
and Elxtenslon Service have many
achievements to their credit. Production
and demand can be brought together by
the full cooperation ol our agricultural
research service, experl-nent sUtlons and
Elxtenslon Service. Development of new
uses for our agricultural commodities,
new markets, new crops and greater
emphasis on animal agriculture will
solve our surplus probl.?m and bring to-
gether production and demand.

The results of our n search and con-
trol achievements must be carried di-
rectly to the farmer in order to be prop-
erly utilized. Our fann family must

have the facta. Thla mlaaion li assigned
In the oialn to our county and home
demonstration agents. These men and
women are responsible for carrying
Boimd Information directly to our farm
people. This dedicated group of men
and women are properly recognized as
leaders \n agriculture In their communi-
ties. I might say at this point Mr.
Speaker, tliat our county and home dem-
onstration agents are not adequately
paid and in order to keep these people
In extension work it \» imperative tliat
the Federal. SUte and county officials
raise salaries Immediately.

It Ls impossible to measure adequately
the benefits derived from the service
rendered by our county and home dem-
onstration agents. My home SUte of
Kentucky is served by well trained,
qualified, dedicated county and home
demonstration agents. The Second Dis-
trict of Kentucky Is one of the large
agricultural distrtcU of the SUte. We
have strong agricultural organizations
In each of the 15 counties. OutsUnd-
Ing farmers with well cultivated faims
prevail throughout my district.

Intelligent, energetic young men and
women in the Second District of Ken-
tucky belong to the different organiza-
tions for young people — Future Farmers
of America. Future Homemakers of
America, and 4-H Clubs. For a great
number of years these yoimg men and
women have received awards for their
many accomplishments.

We have In my district this year a
group of young people of whom we may
all be proud. Toung people who are the
recipients of benefiU gained from our
Department of Agriculture, agricultural
research, marketing, experiment sU-
tlons. and Extension Service. The en-
couragement of families, county and
home demonstration agents, and friends,
combined with their own ability, energy,
and ambition have resulted In their
winning many of the top honors and
offices in the 4-H Clubs, Future Farmers
of America, and Future Homemakers of
America. Helen Stinnett of Hopkins
County and Harold Smith from my home
county of Warren are 2 of the 4 holders
of this year's top awards in 4-H Club
work in Kentucky. Myra Tobin of
Breckinridge County was elected presi-
dent of the Kentucky Future Home-
makers of America. Barbara Landrum
of Simpson County was elected first vice
president, Alice Hayes of Warren County
was elected parliamentarian, and Vir-
ginia B?low of Union County was elected
reporter. Two hundred dollar scholar-
ships for home economic studies were
awarded Romanca Oliphant, Allen
County, and Dorothy Joiner of Union
County. Miss Tobin was named a can-
didate for National FHA vice president
and the alternate was Pixie Priest of
Ohio County.

Billy Joe Mitchell of Smiths Grove in
my home county of Warren was named
1957 Kentucky SUr Farmer by the Ken-
tucky Future Farmers of America.
Larry F. Parrish. of Henderson County
was district winner for the Green River
district.

It Is good to know that with the de-
velopment of such fine, intelligent and

well Instructed yoimc people the future
farmers and homemakers of my dl^let
will not lack the right sort of leadership
and knowledge. These yoimg people
hare answered a challenge and I predict
that answering challenges will become a
habit with them.

Mr. Speaker, farm life has been deeply
affected by present day agrlcultiural
problems. Changing conditions demand
constant experimenUtion, more re-
search, new crops, new markets and more
extension service. We have come a long
way in agriculture, and oiir love and con-
cern for the soil. Its use. conservation and
nature will continue on into the future.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

By unanimous consent, leave of ab-
sence was granted to:

Mr. I^CoMPTS (at the request, of Mr.
CuHNiMGHAM of lowa) for an indefinite
period, on account of illness.

Mr. Bailit, for 2 weeks, on account of
official business, attending ILO Confer-
ence at Geneva, Switzerland.

Mr. MiLLEB of Maryland (at the re-
quest of BAr. Maktin) for 1 week, on ac-
count of illness.

Mr. Mat (at the request of Mi. Hos-
MES) for Monday and Tuesday, Jime 10
and 11, 1957, on account of illness in his
immediate family.

SPECIAL ORDERS GRANTED

By unanimous consent, permission to
address the House, following the legisla-
tive program ^nd any special orders
heretofore entered, was granted to:

Mr. Patkak. for 20 minutes today, to
revise and extend his remarks and to
include extraneous matter.

Mr. Saolak, for 20 minutes on today,
and to revise and extend his remarks.

Mrs. RoGEKS of Massachusetts, for 5
minutes on today.

Mr. Mack of BlinoiB, for 5 minutes on
today.

Mr. Cramkk (at the request of Mr.
Baldwin), for 45 minutes on tomorrow.

Mrs. Rogers of Massachusetts, for 5
minutes on tomorrow.

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

By imanimous consent, permission to
extend remarks in the Congressional
Record, or to revise and extend remarics,
was granted to:

Mr. Lanktord.

Mrs. KsE.

Mr. Chamberlain and to include com-
mencement address of the Vice President
at Michigan SUte University, and addi-
tional extraneous matter.

Mr. RoDiNo (at the request of Mr.
Albert) and to include extraneous
matter.

Mr. Flood (at the request of Mr. Cel-

LER).

Mr. Keating, his remarks made In
Committee of the Whole today and
which he will make in Committee cf the
Whole In consideration of the bill under
the 5-minute rule, and to include extra-
neous matter.

Mr, Barrett.

Mr. Rooino.

Mr, Ounm (at the request of Mr.
BaLvwnr) and to Inelade eztruieous
matter.

Mr. WA«g»TT. and to include extraaeoos
matter.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. CELIiER. Mr. Speaker. I move
that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly
(at 8 o'clock and 3 minutes p. m.) the
House adjoiuned until tomorrow, Tues-
day. June 11, 1957, at 12 o'clock noon.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS,
ETC.

Under clause 2 of rule XXIV. executive
communications were taken from the
SpealKr's Uble and referred as follows:

938. A letter from the Secretary of th*
Army, transmitting a draft of propoaed legis-
lation entitled "A biU to amend tltie 10.
United States Code, to provide for the readl-
neee of Industrial capacity for defense pro-
duction or mobUizatlon leserve purpoaas";
to the Committee on Armed Oeivluee.

939. A letter from the Secretary of the
Army, transmitting a draft of propoaed legis-
lation entitled "A bUl to extend the author-
ity for the enlistment of aliens In the Regu-
lar Army, and for other purpoaea"; to tha
Committee on Armed Services.

940. A letter from the Acting Secretary
of the Navy, relative to the propoaed trans-
fer by the Department of tha Navy of the
obsolete cruiser Olympia, to the Cruiser
(Xympia Aseociatlon. a nonprofit organisa-
tion incorporated under the laws of Pennsyl-
vania, pursuant to title 10. United Statea
Code, section 7308; to the Committee on
Armed Services.

941. A letter from the Chairman, FWteral
Home Loan Bank Board, transmitting the
annual report of the Federal Home Loan
Bank Board for the year ending December
31, 1956, pursuant to section 17 (b) of tha
Federal Home Loan Bank Act. as amended;
to the Ciiommlttee on Banking and Currency.

942. A letter from the Acting Secretary of
the Tr«tasury, relative to reporting the pay-
ment of £a,949.6J to the City Line, Ltd.,
75 Bothwell Street. Glasgow C.3.. Scotland.
In fuU settlement of a claim for damage to
the steamship City of Karachi, pursuant to
title 14, United SUtes Code, section 646 (b);
to the Committee on the Judiciary.

943. A letter from the Chief of Legislative
Liaison, Department of the Navy, transmit-
ting a draft of propoaed legislation entitled
"A bUl to establish the Office of the Deputy
Judge Advocate General of the Navy, and for
other purpoaes"; to the C<nnmittee on Armad
Servlcea.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUB-
LIC BIUUS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XTTI, reports of
committees were delivered to the Clerk
for printing and reference to the proper
calendar, as follows:

Mrs. PFOST: Committee on Post OfBoe
and C^vll Service. Part 2. minority views on
H. B. 6836. A bUl to rradjust postal ratea
and to establish a Congreasional policy for
the determination of postal ratea, and for
other purpoaea (B^t. Mo. 534). Referred to
the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union.

Mr. FRAZIEB: Committee on tha Judi-
ciary. H. R. 7536. A bill to amend the act
of Janxiary 12, 1951, as amended, to con-
tinue in effect the provisions of title n of

8726

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

tte r\xwt War PDir«n Act. IMl: vlth amwd-
■uot (Rajit. No. 644). ii«f enwl to Um Oon-

inltte« of the Whole House on the Siat* at
tbe Uiiioa.

Mr. ENOLE: Committee on Interior and
Insular Affairs. H. R. 3940. A bill to grant
certain lands to the T^iiltuiy of Alaska;
without amendment ( Rept. No. 545 ) . Re-
ferred to the Coramltta(.< oX ttM Whole House
oa Um 9tat« of the Uakin.

Mr. ENGLE: Committee on Interior and
Insular Affairs. H. R. 4035. A bill to pro-
Tide for settlement and entry of public lands
to Alaa^B containing coal. oil. or gas under
■sctloD 10 of the act of May 14. 1898. as
amended: without amendment (Bept. No.
646). Referred to the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union.

Mr. £NGLE: Committee on Interior and
Insular Affairs. H. R. 4830. A MU to au-
thorize revision of the tribal roll of the
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, North
Carolina, and for other purposes-, without
amendment (Rept. No. 547). Referred to
the Committee of the Whole House on the
S«ate of the Union.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 4 of rxile XXII. public
bills and resolutions were introduced and
•ererally referred as follows :

By Mr. BARTLETT:
H. R. 8018. A bin to amend secUon 27 of
the Merchant Marine Act. 1930. as amended
(48 U. 3. C. 883): to the Committee on Mer-
chant Marine and Fisheries.

By Mr. DAVIS Oi Georgia:
H R. 8019. A bill to extend the coveratte of
military service under the old-asje, sumvors.
and disability insurance system to Include
Inactive duty training; to the Committee on
Ways and Means

H. R 8020 A bill to amend section 11 of
the act of April 1. 1043 (56 Stat. 197. ch.
207); to the Committee on the District of
Columbia.

By Mr HARRIS
H. R 8031 A bill to amend the act of
August 5. 1955. authorizing the construc-
tion of two surveying ships for the Coast
and Geodetic Survey, Department (if Com-
merce, and for other purposes: to the Com-
mittee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
By Mr HILLINGS: .
H. R 802i A bin to amend the Internal
Revenue Code of 1954 to provide, In the case
of professional athletes, an Income tax de-
duction for depletion of physical resources;
to the Comn^lttee on Ways and Means.

H R 8023 A bill to make the antitrust
laws applicable to certain aspects of desli;-
nated professional team sports: to the Com-
mitter on the Judiciary.
By Mrs KKK:
H. R. a024 A bill to amend title II of the
flocial Security Act to provide that the wife
or widow of an Insured individual shall be
deemed to have been Uvin« with him. at the
time required for entitlement to benefits. If
at such time they were separated without
fault on her part; to the Committee on Ways
and Means

By Mr. MOSS:
H. R. 8025. A bill to amend the act ot
September 26, 1950. to extend the Tehama-
Colusa conduit to Yolo County, Calif; to
the Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs

By Mr NEAL
H R. 8036. A bill to continue availability
of funds for surveys and planning under
title VI of the Public Health Service Act;
to the Committee on Appropriations
By Mr. SAYLOR:
H R 80J7. A bill to prOTlde for the ad-
mission of the State of Alaska Into the
Union: to the Committee on Interior and
Insular Affairs.

By ICr. BTAOGCB8:
BL a. 80a«. A Mil to transfer to tba ClvU
Aaroaautlca A<lmlnIatratlon tha airport
revenue bonds Issued by the city of Elklns.
W. Va., and presently held by the Recon-
■tructlon Finance Corporation ; to the Com-
BUlttee oo Basking and Currency.
By Mr. CHRISTOPHER:
H. R. 8039. A bm to provide for the pay-
Bent of claims for supplies and servloes fur-
nished the Irregular or giicrrlila forces of
the farmer Commonwealth of the Philip-
pines during World War II, to the Commit-
tee on the Judlclarv

By Mr. MATTHEWS;
H. R. 8030. A bill to amend the Agricul-
tural Adjustment Act of 1938 with respect
to acreage history; to the Committee on
Agriculture.

By Mr OATHTWOS:
H R. 8031. A bill to permit farmers In
areas afTected by excessive rainfall and
flooded condlUoAs to Include acreage In the
acreage reserve pnjgram up to July 15,
1957, to the Committee on Agrlcultxire.
By Mr. MILLS:
H R 8032 A bill M provide that In 1957
farmers tu areas adversely affected by exces-
sive rainfall and flooded condltlor^a may
plant their unused cotton-acreage allotments
to rice; to the Committee on Agriculture

H R 8033 A bin t<i permit farmers In areas
affected by excessive rainfall and flooded
conditions to include acreage In the acre-
age-reserve program up to July 15, 1957, to
the Cummmee on .Agriculture.
By Mr. ZABLOCKI;
H R 8034 A bill to repeal the tax of 20
percent of all amounts paid for admission,
refreshment, service, or merchandise at any
roof garden, catiaret, or other similar place;
to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr BONNER:
H R 8C33. A bill to amend the North Pa-
clflc Fisheries Act of 1954. to the Committee
on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
By Mr GWlNN;
H J Res 355 Joint resolution proposing
an amendment to the Constitution of the
United States relative to abolishing personal
Income, estate, and gift taxes, and prohibit-
ing the United States Government from en-
gaging in bubiuess in competlUun iMth Its
Citizen.'!; to the 0;rr.m;ttee on the Judiciary.
By Mr ALBERT
H Con Res 181 Concurrent resolution fa-
Vfjring ciuwresBlnnal recognition of the Na-
tional Cowboy Hall of Fame and Museum
to Xx located at Oklahoma City. Okla.: to the
Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
By Mr BELCHER
H Ci\ Res lb2 Concurrent resolution fa-
voring congrrwlnnal r^rotpntrion of the N.1-
tlonal C(Jwboy Hall of Fame and Museum
to be located at Oklahoma City. Okla ; to
the Committee on Interior and Insular Af-
fairs.

By Mr EDMONDSON:
H Con Res 183 Concurrent resolution f()r
the establishment of the National Cowboy
Hall of Fame and Museum; to the Commit-
tee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
By Mr MORRIS
H. Con Res. 134 Concurrent resolution fa-
voring congressional recognlUon of the Na-
tional Cowboy Hall of Fame and Museum
to be located at Oklahoma City. OkU ; to
the Committee on Interior and Insular
Aff.ilrs

By Mr. STEED:
H Con Res 185 Concurrent resolution for
the est.^bllshment ul the NationHl Cowboy
Hall of Fame and Mu.seum: to the Committee
on Interior and Insxilar Affairs.
By Mr JARMAN:
H. Con. Res. 186. Concurrent resolution fa-
voring congressional recognition of the Na-
tional Cowboy Hall of Fame and Museum
to be located at Oklahoma City. Okla ; to the
Committee on Interior and insular Affairs.

By kfr. VUOOD:
H. Bea. 377. Baaolutlon axpresalng th«
sense of the House of Ripresentatlves with
respect to the trial of Arny BpSc William 8.
Olrard by a Japanese court; to the Commit-
tee on Foreign Affairs.

MEMORIALS

Un<!!«r «lauM 4 of nile XXII. memo-
rials were presented and referred as
follows :

By the SPEAKER: Memorial of the Le^rls-
tature of the State of Oall'ornla, memorlalla-
tng ttee ft'ealdent and Um Congress of tha
United States relative to the Federal budget;
lo the CocnmlUec on Apprt>prlationa.

Also, memorial of the Legislature of tha
State of California, memo'lalizlng the Presi-
dent and the Congress of the United States
relative to the extension o: the Folsom South
Canal within the counties of Sacramento
and San Joaquin, State of California; to tha
Committee on Interior ami Insular Affairs.

Also, memorial of ths Legislature of th«
State of Cahfurnla. nvmorltUlzlng the Presi-
dent and the Congress of the United State*
relative to the proclamation of Senior Citi-
zens Day: to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, memorial of the .«glslature of tha
State of Maine, naemorlaliang the President
and the Congress of the United SUtes to
enact legislation concerning unjustified
price Incraases of crude oil and refined petro-
leum products; to the Conunlttee on Inter-
state and Foreign Commer;:e.

Also, memorial of the legislature of the
State of Texas, memorialljlng the President
and the Congress of the Gnlted States rela-
tive to Joining In taking appropriate stepa
for submission of a constitutional amend-
ment which dearly and laecjulvocaUy de-
fines State rights as underiUxxl by our fore-
fathers, lo the Committee on the Judiciary.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8727

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 1 of ru e XXII. private
bills and resolutions wer ? introduced and
severally referred as fol ows:

By Mr ANDREWS:
H R 8038 A b.ll fcir thi relief of Prances
Monteleone, to the Comm ttee on the Judi-
ciary

H R 8037 A bill for the relief of Mrs.
Helga E Flndenlg Brack nei; to the Commit*
tee on the Judiciary.

By Mr BROWN of Ohio
H R 8018 A bill for th.» relief of Margia
C Stewart, to the Comml.tee on the Judi-
ciary.

By Mr CURTIS of Massachusetts:
H R 8039. A bill for the relief of Edward
L Munroe; to the Comml- tee on the Judi-
ciary.

By Mr CURTIS of Missouri:
H R 8040 A bin for the relief of Hugh
Man-bok Wong and Lucy L^ee Wong; to the
Committee on me Judicial y.

H R 8041 A bill for the relief of Edmund
Tick Ming Chan, to the Committee on tha
Judiciary

By Mrs. DWYER:
H. R 8042. A blU for the lellef of Domlngoa
Jose Barreto, to the Comm; ttee on the Judi-
ciary.

By Mr. JONES of Al ibama:
H R 8043 A bin for thi- relief of Alfred
C Conder, to the Committee on the Judi-
ciary.

By Mr KEATTNG:
H R 8044 A bill for thj relief of Rocco
and Emanuele InUrlice; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.

By Mrs KEE:
H R 8045. A bill for the relief of Santlna
Helia Relchardt Spaulding; to the Commlt-
taa on the Judiciary.

By Mr. MONTOTA:
H. R 8046. A bill for the relief of Joaquin
A. Bazan; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. RABAUT:
H. R. 8047. A bUl for tha relief of HasBen
Berrl; to tha Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. REECK of Tennessee:
H. R 8048. A bill for tha reUef of Mrs.
Blllle Reed Holt; to tha Commlttaa on tha
Judiciary.

By Mr. REES of Kansas:
H. R. 8049. A bill for the reUef of Eventhla
K. Perdarls; to the ConmUttee on the Judi-
ciary.

By Mr. WALTER:
H R 8050. A bill for the relief of Klyohlto
Tsuuul; to the Commlttae on the Judiciary.

PETITIONS, ETC.

Under clause 1 of rule XXII. petitions
and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk
and referred as follows:

269 By Mr. PATMAN: Reaolutlon of tha
Red Henderson Post, No. 483. the American
Legion, Inc., Cooper, Tex., strongly oppoelng
the trial of any United States servicemen
accused of any felony or misdemeanor by for-
eign couru; favoring the trial of such young

men only by United States military ot cItU
courts; imd urging Congress to make a com-
plete restudy of all treaties of thla country
which by their terms make our boya wbo
enter the service of their cotmtry subject to
trial and punishment by foreign courts; to
the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

270. By tha SPEAKER: Petition of the
faithful navigator, Long Island General As-
sembly, Knights of Columbus, Woodslde,
N. T., petitioning consideration of their reso-
lution with reference to reaffirming support
of legislation which would restore the pro-
tection of our Federal Constitution to the
fimdamental rights of United States citizens
serving abroad as members of our Armed
Forces; to the Conmilttee on Foreign Affairs.

271. Also, petition of the national com-
mander, American Defenders of Bataan and
Corregldor, Inc., Jersey City, N. J., p«tltlon-
Ing consideration of their resolution with
reference to requesting passage of the bill
H. R. 4742; to the Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce.

272. Also, petition of Eva I. Lucas, Houston,
Tex., requesting a congressional Investigation
of the Food and Drug Admlnlstratlozi to cor-
rect abuses and restrain this branch of
Government from trying to destroy the Hox-
sey treatment for cancer; to the Committee
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

37S. Also, petition of A. L. Puddy, Hotuton.
Tex., requesting a congressional Investiga-
tion of the Food and Drug Administration
to correct abuses and restrain this branch
of government from trying to destroy the
Hozsey treatment for cancer; to the Com-
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

274. Also, petition of the commander, the
American Legion, Department of Alaska,
Juneau, Alaska, petitioning consideration of
their resolution with reference to urging
that statehood be granted to Alaska; to the
Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

276. Also, petition of the executive direc-
tor, the American Institute of Architects,
Washington, D. C, petitioning consideration
of their resolution with reference to recom-
mending enactment of a statute creating In
the Executive Office of the President the po-
sition of Federal Coordinator of Publlo
Works Planning; to the Committee on Publlo
Works.

276. Also, petition of the president. Cham-
ber of Commerce of Honolulu, Honolulu.
T. H., petitioning consideration of their reso-
lution with reference to requesting approval
and ratification of the provisions of section
I of joint resolution 32, Session Laws of Ha-
waii 1957, by the adoption of a bill in sub-
stantially the form Included In said joint
resolution; to the Committee on Interior and
Insular Affairs.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

Addreii Ly Hob. Theodore Francis Green,
of Rhode Island, at Brown Uniyersity

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN

or aHODZ ISLAND

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNFTED STATES

Monday. June 10, 1957

Mr. GREEN. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the Congressional Record, an address
which I gave at the under -the -elms ex-
ercises at Brown University on Friday,
May 31, 1957.

This address, entitled "A Sense of Bal-
ance." I believe may be of interest to the
Members of the Senate.

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed In the Record,
a.s follows:

A Sknsk or Balancc
(Address of United States Senator Thtodorz

Francis Green at the Under the Elms ex-

prc!.«:es. Brown University, Providence.

R. I.. May 31, 1957)

It means a great deal to me, a great deal
more than I can easily express, to meet with
you Under the Elms today.

I first saw these trees, at least most of
them, when I was a little boy. I have seen
them year after year ever since — excepting
2 years when I was a student In Germany.
The most memorable occasion for me, under
these elms, was In 1887 — just 70 years ago —
when I graduated and bade them "goodby"
and read thenj a farewell poem, You see It
took a long while for them to recover from
that shock — but I am grateful for their ul-
timate forgiveness.

Most of these stately elms have stood here
for a long time, in ccid and In heat, in dry
seasons and wet. In wartime and peace,
quietly pursuing the business of being elm
trees, undisturbed, so far as we can observe.

by recurrent crops of frightened freshmen
and solemn seniors hurrying by, or by the
great and fundamental changes which have
taken place In this world since they were
seedlings.

We humans can learn from all of nature.
We can learn from these trees. The secret
of much usefulness and success, of good
health and a tranquil mind, lies In this ca-
pacity to go quietly ahead with the business
of existence, undisturbed and undismayed
by passing stress and turmoil. Yet, such Is
the balance In nature that we cannot be
wholly Insulated from our Burroundlngs. any
more than a tree can be. In dry country a
tree will send Its roots far down, search-
ing for water. It Is well known that a sap-
ling win push Its way through cracked rock
In order to survive. A tree In dense forest
win become tall, reaching upward toward
the light.

If It Is the part of tranquillity to be prop-
erly unconcerned with the world around us.
It is the part of survival to be properly con-
cerned. It Is this balance we must, culti-
vate, and It Is of this balance I wish lo speak
today, particularly as It relates to matters
of American foreign policy, which has grad-
ually become my chief concern as a United
States Senator in Washington.

There are certain areas of this country
which question whether foreign policy should
ever have been Invented In the first place.
I am happy to say that the record shows
that Brown University Is by no means such a
place. During my undergraduate years
here and later, here and abroad, I becsime in-
creasingly impressed by the contribution my
alma mater has made to this subject which
has become probably the most Important
subject our Government has to deal with.
Let me give you some of the highlights.

William Learned Marcy, Brown class of
1808, bad his first taste of foreign affairs
when he led an attack which captured a
Canadian outpost in the War of 1812. Ap-
parently this whetted his interest in matters
beyond our borders, for in 1853 he became
United States Secretary of State, and greatly
distinguished himself by the handling of
Important and delicate matters. Including

the Gadsden Treaty of 1853 with Mexico, and
the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 with Great
Britain.

Richard Olney, who received his degree
from Brown in 1856. served as United States
Secretary of State from 1895 until 1897. He
Induced the British government to submit to
arbitration Its dispute with Venezuela over
the boundary between Venezuela and British
Guiana, and wrote a remarkable official note,
sustaining the right of the United States to
Interfere, and giving a wide Interpretation
to the Monroe Doctrine.

John Hay. of the class of 1858, after serv-
ing as private secretary to President Lincoln,
was given poets as a diplomat in Paris, Vienna
and Madrid, later became Assistant Secretary
of State, then Ambassador to Great Brltlan.
and finally served as United States Secre-
tary of^ State from 1898 until his death in
1905. Among his service- were the signing
of the first Hague Conference Treaty for
World Conciliation, negotiating the original
treaty for the Panama Canal, and assisting
with the settlement of the Russo-Japanese
War. John Hay, by the way, was the author
of his class poem, which was considered
quite above the average. You see. a class
poet may go far. I hope today's may do so.

Charles Evans Hughes, class of 1881, was
Secretary of State from 1921 until 1925. He
negotiated more than 50 treaties, presided
over the Washington Conference on Limita-
tion of Armament, was chairman of the
United States Delegation to the Sixth Pan
American Conference In 1928, and was a
judge of the Permanent Court of Interna-
tional Justice from 1928 until 1930, when he
was named Chief Jiostlce of the United States
Supreme Court.

This is a good record for Brunonlans, but
It is by no means the end of the story.
Secretary of State Dulles Informs me that at
last count there were 28 Brunonlas on present
active service with the State Department.
Including John Joseph Mucclo, Class of 1921,
formerly Special Representative of the Presi-
dent to the Republic of Korea, winner of the
Distinguished Service Award, and now Am-
bassador to Iceland.

8728

OONGRESSJONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

la-.y

rriKTriD r c c Tr\x.T at t> t? /"rMj t\

trr^TTcn

8728

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8729

il }

Over ttu pMft 3 jmtu, Mr. DuilM tella me
alBO. that BrunoaJaos htva woa. appolat-
mentfl to Um ForHcn Servtoe at Um rat« o£
two a year. I feel canfldeat Uuit tiiU ia-
feenst and thia sarvtoa wUi coQUnua.

No account of Um cootrlbuUoDa at Brown
to foreign aflaln woakl be ooa>plet« wlbbout
a mention oC our (onner Prealdefit. Dr. Wrie-
ton. Tbere Is no need for me to eQumerata
bis achievementB before thla audience. Tou
know them well. Tou know that hla courage.
hia breadtb of outlook, hla progreaalve aplnt,
his ability to command confldenoe and re-
apect have been given unstintlngly to the Na-
tion and the worid. as well aa to this unlver-
alty, which cordially returns the deTOtioc b«
has bestowed upon It.

Dr. Wrtston's central schierement here at
Brown was. I believe, to strengtiien in all iu
aspects the tradition of liberal learning One
of the chief products of this learning Is the
balance of which I have spoken, the inner
guide that dlsxingulsheb an educated, civi-
lized man; that gives talm the capiicity to
thread his way among dangers and diScul-
tlea and to chart a course of honjr and safety
through unknown waters. I hope that siima
of you here today may follow the same path
trodden by our fellow Brunonlans, some of
whom I have mentioned.

L<et me review with you a few of the ways
In which our foreign policy today must
achieve a vital balance. We must, first of all.
know to what extent we mtist be Invotred.
and to what exetent we should be Involved.
In the destinies of other nations. If our own
survival depends upon the survival of certain
other lands, and if they In turn must have
our help in order to survive, then the most
elemental self-interest. If nothing else, de-
mands that we do what Is required, and not
less than is required, to insure their survival
and strength. There is little room for hair-
splitting here.

But. the fact that we must necessarily co-
operate with other peoples does not give us
license to run their lives for them, nor to
squander our substance In doing things for
them they should be doing for themselves.
There Is a balance between too much and too
little, and we must seek that balance.

In the second place we must make It clear
to ourselves, and to the world, not only to
what extent we are Involved, but also why we
are involved in these matters In lands far
away Our legitimate Interest in surviving
causes us to heip others to survive. We have
also a legitimate interest In prospering, which
causes us to desire that others be prosperous
also. These thlnjjs are related.

We have interests, and we also have obllRa-
tions. We have obligations to abide by the
terms of the promises we make, tlie treaties
we sign, the rules and customs of inffrna-
tional law. the Charter of the United Nations.
We liave obligations to live up to the heri-
tage of freedom, which breathes from the
traditions, from the monuments, from the
very lands around us here. We must remam
true to the religious faith upon which our
freedom Is founded. We must be true to our
very humanity, which we share with other
humans, whatever their race or station.

Our honor as well as our survival hang
uixin maintaining a pmper balance, betwpen
our legitimate Interests and our Inescapable
obligations. Upon that proper balance de-
pends not rmly our peace of mind, but also
peace among the nations.

So. clear thinking '« needed about why and
to what extent we must becotne Involved
In the affairs of the rest of the world. But.
knowing why we do a thing, and knowing
how much of It to do. still leavies ua with the
most troublesome problem of all — Ik)w to get
it done. It U easy enough to become In-
volved m an argumerrt over a coming football
game. But. then you have to win it, and
that requires something more than aecond-
guessing and armchair quarterbacklng.

Firtt and forcmoat of aU. we nuat learn
patlance In our tortt^u dnallnga We ar«
living In a time wlian changes In the atti-
tude ot tha Soviet Union, which may well
b» t^rmin^ vUi come slowly: when problems
auch aa beaat tha Middia East will require a
generation or mora for aolutlon; when de-
veiopoaent auch aa the jM^ng nations seek Is
alow to the point of anguish, rtlfllrtilt. and
often disappointing.

But. fur all our patience, we cannot yield
the initiative. We must be restlesaly prob-
ing for avenues to move ahead, and when we
find them we must exploit them, not with
timidity or penury, but with energy and vi-
sion, with courage and will, and if possible
with good humor, even when now and then
we make a mistake.

Just as we must be patient, so we must be
bold. But. as we must be bold, we must
be cautious The Soviet Union Is waving
the olive branch of disarmament again, and
tt appears this branch may p.-^sslbly have
a little more substance than the ?ame old
statue pr'-'p they have waved before. Yet
our foreign policy has been and must con-
tinue to be a leading fnan strength, not
weakness, because weakness does not pre-
vent wars. It invites them.

But, even though we must be cautious,
we still must trust — and hope — and con-
tinue to negotiate because we know there
is as much danger In too llfle disarming
as there iurely wmild be in too much.

S.\ we must sail our ship of policy be-
twaen the devi; and the deep sea between
the whirlpool and the rock We cannot
drop anchor where we are; we cannot turn
back. Either we sail on, or we sink.

And. Just as there is balance In our
methods, so there will be balance in our
moods. We know the fear of awful de.struc-
tlon. and know there is no shame In such
a fear. We know the thrill ot winning a
gamble that must be taken, of meeting a
chaJlensje as It comes We know the Joy
of creating, not merely a poem or a paint-
ing, but a nation, a civilization, a new
world. We know the reward, bt-yond all
other rewards, of giving our best to people
we love, t.) a Nation we love, to values we
love, of beini; true — In the highest sense —
true to ourselves

I wLsh you well, you seniors, as y^u go
out ffim here. In your chUdTiuod and stu-
dent days you have teen the birth of a
perlio'is and wouderfnl a:]e. Now go out
and share in Its maturing. And. I pray
that you may keep y ur balance

May your lives and the Hie ui the world
you are joining grow as this Natl(jn and
this university h.ive gruwn May they
fl.jurl.'^h and endure, and bee tne strnng and
beautiful, like these old elm trees around
us here this ailen.oon.

Time Shoald Be Giren Kscrafo To
Aiicwer Khnishchev Broadcast on CBS

EXTENSION OF REM.ARKS
or

HON. HARRY G. HASKELU JR.

or DELAW.^RE

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, June 10. 1957

Mr HASKELL. Mr. Speaker, on June
2. 1957. the boes of Uie Russian Com-
munist Party, Nlkita 8. Khrushchev, ap-
peared on tie telerlslofi program. *Tace
the Nation." on the Columbia Broad-
casting Syst em. His answers to the ques-
tions submiLted to him were nothing: but
the usual Soviet distortions of the truth.

In my district, in a suburb of WU-
mlDtfton. Del^ the lasl freely elected
mayor of the city of Budapest is now
living. Yesterday, be wrote to the Co-
hunbte Broadcasting System and re-
quested that he be giver time to answer
the statements made by Khrushchev, and
eepeclally the latter's assertion that the
Kadar regime is the true representative
of the people of Hungary.

The best way to disprove that state-
ment would be for the Soviet Union to
conduct free elections In Hungary and
allow the Hungarian people to decide
whom they desire to be governed by.

I know of no one who ^-ouW be more
qualified to give the American people the
true picture of the tragic situation that
now exists in Hungary than Mr. Joseph
Koevago. the last free mayor of their
capital city.

Mr. Koevago was very active in the
resistance movement against the Nazis,
and during Worid War II was a major
factor in organizing the underground.
As a result of his attempts to strengthen
ties with the Western countries, he was.
In 1946. thrown into prison by the Com-
mimtsts for 6 ' 2 years.

Mr. Koevago was the last freely
elected secretary general of the Small
Holders Party, the majority party in that
heroic nation. Since e.scaping from
Hungary, he has t>een to London, Paris,
Brussels, and other parts of the free
world to enlist assistance for his en-
slaved people. He is continuing these
activities here in the United States. Mr.
Koevago was one of the leaders of the
October revolution in Hungary last year.

Today, I sent a telegiam to Dr. Fraiik
Stanton, president of the Columbia
Broadcasting System, urging that Mr.
Koevajio's request for time to answer the
outright lies by the Soviet CommunLst
Party boss, Khrushchev, be granted.

Tl)ere is no American spokesman who
would be more capable of making such
an answer and In presenting the true
picture to the American people of Soviet
brutality in Huiigary.

I hope that the Members of Congress
will support Mr. Koevago"s efforts to
obtain time on this nationwide television
network, to give the American people
the truth about Hungary.

Soviet DeporUtMi af Baltic People*
in 1940

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. PETER W. RODINO, JR.

or irrw jaasrr

IN THE HOUPE OF RRPRB8ENTATIVBB

Monday. June 10. 1957

Mr. RODINO Mr. Speaker, the

brave but unfortimate people of the three
Baltic countries — Estonians. Latvians,
and Lithuanians — have bad long his-
tories. But fate was moat cruel to them
tn If40. In that year these three coun-
tries. once the secure home of rising
young dftnocrades, were forcefully an-
nexed to the Soviet Union and many
hundreds of thousands of their inhabi-

tants were uprooted from their homes.
These innocent and helpless victims of
the Soviet Union's aggression of 1940
are still suffering In some distant and
desolate corner of the Soviet prison
empire.

Smce then the free world has heard
practically nothing about them except
from those few who have had the extra-
ordinary luck to escape. And the fate
of millions of Estonians, Latvians, and
Lithuanians in their homeland is not
much better. If they were not deported,
they certainly suffered much privation
and hardship during the war. and are
still suffering imder the linrelenting
tyranny of Soviet communism. We have
even heard that the native population of
the coastal areas of these countries were
moved to the interior in order to make
room for Asiatic people brought in to
settle there. Outrageous and almost un-
believable this may sound, yet the delib-
erate policy of the Soviet Union seems to
be to colonize these frontiers exposed
to the West with people from other parts
of the Soviet Union. This of course adds
to the misery and suffering of the native
population, but since they are living in
what is little more than a concentration
camp. It is not surprising.

We in the West are fully cognizant of
these heart- rendering facts. We are
well aware of the sad fate that befell to
those deportees and of the unbelievable
lot of those who are living in the three
Baltic countries. I wholeheartedly sym-
pathize with their unfortunate lot, and
ardently hope that soon a way will be
found to ameliorate their lot and free
these deserving citizens of the free
world.

Polish Aid Afreenents

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. DANIEL J. ROOD

or PrNN8TI.VANIA

IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES

Monday. June 10, 1957

Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, as you
know I have been very active In urging
tl:e satisfactory conclusion of the nego-
tiations between this country and Po-
land concerning economic aid to Poland
by our Government.

As you will recall, during the negotia-
tions I introduced a resolution in the
House, House Resolution 248, which
sUtea, in part, that "the United States
should speedily furnish substantial eco-
nomic and technical assistance to the
people of Poland, subject to careful con-
trol through the use of inspection teams
or otherwise to insure that comimodi-
ties and equipment so furnished will
not be diverted to Russia or her satellites
but will remain in Poland for the pur-
pose of strengthening her internal econ-
omy and bolstering her people In their
quest for freedom."

I am certain. Mr. Speaker, that our
Government agencies will follow through
with shipments of American products
to Poland, and also arrange for ship-
ment of surplus agricultural products
to Poland as well as permit the receipt

by the people of Poland of gifts from
their relatives here in this country.

I was gratified to learn that agree-
ments have been arrived at on the allo-
cation of funds to finance the sale of var-
ious food products and textile raw ma-
terials for Polish currency.

It is interesting to note that the bank
loans will be repaid in dollars at 4^
percent Interest beginning in 5 years and
extending to 20 years.

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt In my
mind that the PoUsh people have never
been, are not now. and never will be pro-
Communist, despite Indescribable suffer-
ings and persecutions by the Communist.

There is also no intelligent doubt that
the Polish people want a free and inde-
pendent Poland and will always trust
the United States as Poland's true
friend.

Tke 85th Gmfrets

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. EUZABETH KEE

or WEST VIRGINIA

IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES

Monday. June 10, 1957

Mrs. KEE. Mr. Speaker, about this
time every year, a hue and cry goes up
that Congress is two-thirds of the way
through its session and has done nothing.
This year and this Congress are no ex-
ceptions, as I have learned by reading
mr favorite political writers, com-
mentators and news analsrsts. The criti-
cism is never entirely Justified and is
frequently misleading. And so I am
moved to say a good word for Congresses
generally — since apparently so few peo-
ple ever do.

Mr. Speaker, somehow, the impression
has gotten about that unless the Na-
tion's great legislative body is busily en-
gaged in grinding out laws — like a giant
buzz saw gnawing through wood and
scattering the chips where it may —
nothing is being accomplished. Of
course, this simply is not so and I can
think of nothing that could be worse for
the country if it were. Laws passed in
haste must inevitably be repented — and
repealed — at leisure.

Each Congress develops a character
and objective distinctly its own, but
always in response to the public mood.
When people are restless and reaching
out toward new goals, you will find a
Congress seething with action — scurry-
ing about and eagerly seeking the means
to achieve those goals. When the peo-
ple are satisfied and wish, primarily, to
be let alone, then you will have a Con-
gress that is conservative and con-
templative, reviewing, correcting and
amending, but seldom pioneering in new
fields.

Prom the vantage point of my seat in
the House of Representatives, I would
say that the character of the 85th Con-
gress, as it has developed so far, is some-
where between the two extremes. It Is
neither especially pn^resslve nor is it
ultraconservative. It ia deliberative.

Knotty problems and tremendous
challenges face the 85th Congress; and I,

for one, am content that it Is not to be
hurried into making any hasty, axid pos-
sibly erroneous, decisions. Civil rights,
foreign aid, amending the iminigration
laws. Federal aid for school construc-
tion, extending the minimiiTii wage cov-
erage, regulating election campaign
contributions and tightening the lobby-
ing law — these are some of the major
questions to which this Congress must
find the answers.

These answers, when they are foimd,
are bound to affect the lives of all of
us — and conceivably, a good many peo-
ple could be hurt. That is why I am
very glad that neither our leaders, the
chairmen of our committees, nor the
Members will allow themselves to be
rushed or pressured into quick action.

At the moment I would say that the
major objective of the 85th Congress is
econcMny — the squeezing of the fat out
of the budget. For years. Government
spending has been the target of political
baits and public criticism — and again,
I say, much of it justified, a good deal
of it unfair and selfishly inspired. This
year, both the House and Senate are de-
termined to do something about it and
are concentrating upon this single goal
almost to the exclusion of the rest of
the legislative program. At least. aU
other proposals are considered first in
the light of whether or not Uiey will add
to Government spending.

To date, the House has cut more than
$4 billion from the administration's
budget estimates by painstaking exam-
ination, item by Item, of its vast pro-
posed expenditures. If you do not be-
lieve that this is something of a feat,
try keeping track of every cent you
spend in 1 month. Then go back and
see how you can reduce that spending
by 5 percent or better, without changing
appreciably your mode of living. This is
what the House has done on a tremen-
dously greater scale and without detract-
ing to tmy marked extent from the pub-
lic good or the national well-being.

This accomplishment, alone, would
constitute an outstanding record for the
85th Congress — to reestablish Congres-
sional control over spending in the exec-
utive branch of the Govenunent. It
is by no means all that has been accom-
plished so far.

Important to the Fifth District, and in
fact to all of West Virginia, especially
In those areas damaged severely by the
January floods, is the legislation enacted
which increased by $80 million the lend-
ing authority of the Small Business
Administration.

The borrowing power of the Federal
National Mortgage Association has been
increased by $500 million to ease the
mortgage-money market, and both
House and Senate have passed housing
bills which are now in conference and
which, ultimately, will help homebuyers
and the construction industry, allow
lower downpayments on FHA-insured
loans, and make It easier for elderly peo-
ple and large families to obtain adequate
housing.

In the House a number of veterans*
benefit bills, long sought and urgently
needed, have been paraed. Among them
are bills to increase the rates of ccnnpen-
sation for service-connected disabilities

i;*

8730

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

and dependency allowances; to Increase
the maximum allowable for direct hous-
ing loans; to Increase the monthly jjen-
slon payments to widows of Spanish -
American War veterans; and to make
permanent the Missing Persons Act, au-
thorizing continued pay to next of kin of
personnel missing in the course of duty.

Nor does any of this take into account
the vast scope of the work now going on
in the committees of Congress — work
which will shortly begin to bear fruit as
each committee reports out the bills
which are the results of its labors and
both Chambers quickly pass these bills
in rapid succession.

Mr. Speaker, this Is the pattern which
has been established in the Congress
over the years. And although our good
friends, the news reporters in the Press
Galleries, are prone to descnbe this ac-
tivity as "the rash of bills pushed
through in Congress' last-minute rush
to adjourn." It is, of course, nothing
of the sort. It is final action coming
after much hard effort, long delibera-
tion, and careful weighing of the end re-
sults of each bill's passage.

In the estimation of this Representa-
tive, the best Congresses are tha'-e that
pass the fewest laws — but take the time
and thought to make them good ones.

The Basis of America's Foreifv Policy

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. CHAPMAN REVERCOMB

or WIST vraciNiA

IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED STATES

Monday. June 10. 1957

Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President. I
ask unanimous consent to have printed
in the Congressional Record an ad-
dress entitled "The Basis of America's
Foreign Policy." which I delivered before
the St. Paul's Guild of St. Joseph's
Catholic Church, on May 26, 1957, at
Huntington, W. Va.

There being no objection, the address
wa^ ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

Taa Bmbs of Amouca's Foreign Polict
(Address by Senator RcvncoMs)

I sp««k to you today on a problem that
may T7«11 be uppermost In the minds of every
American. Stated simply. It Is this: 'How
can the United States contrtbut-e most to
conditions that Rive greatest assurance of
poaoe In the world and security for our own
people'"

This "roblem la not new. to be sure, but
tlie conditions that confront us today are
quite different from what they wero only a
few vears agn. Therefore, we must t)e pre-
pared to think anew and act anew.

However much we may wish to wash our
h.'iads of the responsibility that Is thrust
upon this country, we cannot escape the
gr;ive task with which we are faced. How-
ever much we might prefer to take comfort
In our economic and military strength, the
in.?.scMpable fact remains that we cannot af-
ford to (?o it alone. Alliances with other na-
tions have become a.- essential to our own
aecurlty as the hydrogen bomb or the Inter-
continental missile. The security of our
own shores depends as much on preventlni?
the Communists irom takhirr over the Mid-

dle East as from taking over the Philippine
Islands.

The reaaon for this new set of conditions
on which world j)eace hinges is obvious when
we consider the facts. The advent of the
air age. and with It the hvdrogen bomb
and the guided missile, has brought all na-
tions Into such close proximity that every
part of the world ha« become a potential
battlefield. When one pauses to consider the
fact that It will soon be possible for an
enemy power to direct guided missiles with
unerring accuracy upon our cities from
points thousands of miles away. It becomes
graphically clear that the nation which
seeks to stand alone is Inviting Its own de-
struction.

In the face of these Indisputable realities,
unpleasant though they be. It becomes
abundantly clear that 19th century policies
are Inadequate to meet 20th century con-
ditions. And we must either rise to the oc-
casion and accept the responsibility that Is
Americas or risk the danger of losing all
that we hold dear.

I need not remind you that there Is still
abroad In the world an Ideology that Is
alien to the beliefs of every person who
gives allegiance to God. I need not remind
you that If the perpetrators of this evil
design carry out their avowed aim. which Is
world conquest, the way of life that you and
I cherish will be lost.

There are those who say to me. "But why
should we be concerned with what Ls hap-
pening In the far-off Middle East?" 1 say
to yuu. m reply, that what happens In that
distant part of the world may well determine
Whether or not we are able to keep com-
munism from engulfing our own shores.

We know that If a forest fire Is burning
In the direction of our homes, we do not
watt until the flames are lapping at the
d(x)rs before moving to check Its advance.
If a flood la descending upon us. we do not
stand Idle until It has engulfed our homes
before taking action to avert the danger.
By the same criteria, we must acknowledge
that It Is folly of the worst sort to sit Idly
by, taking comfort In our own strength,
while natmn after nation Is being absort>e<l
into the Communist camp. In my Judg-
ment, the greatest danger from these ag-
gressors lies in their well-conceived plan of
taking over country after country until
America Is left Isolated and standing alone.
This must not be permitted t<j happen.
Whatever the cost, we must txil.ster the
strength of those free nations which are
resusiing the Communi.^t tide The moral
and fln.tncial 8upp<^rt we give them now
may wel. save ua billions of dollars, to say
nothing of .American Uvea, at some future
day when the danger has swept much closer
home

I subscribe wholeheartedly to the basic
tenets of the foreign p<illcle8 on which the
leaders of this country have embarked. It
Is an altruistic policy, to be sure, founded
on the high moral conception that the dig-
nity of man requires that he be permitted
to enjoy certain Inalienable rights, not the
least of which Is the right to exercise a
voice m his government This la not to
say that this country should seek to Im-
pose It.* way of life on any nation, but
rather that our deep love of human free-
dom compels us to employ a part of our
substance and strength to help prevent the
people of other nations from being enslaved
agaliiSt their wills.

In the main, however, our foreign policy
Is based on the simple expedient of self-
preservation. So long as communism poses
the threat that It does today, self-interest
demands that we Join forces with every
nation which Is resl.itlng this evil force.
It Is an obvious fact, certainly one well
known to our military leaders, that should
the oU-rlch Middle East fall to the Com-
munists, our own security would be les-
sened by an Incalculable degree. Ey the

same token, should all Asia fall to the
Communlsu. we know that it would be only
a matter of time until the aggressor would
be moving from Island to Island across the
Pacific. Such Is the nature of the evil force
we are called upon to resist In the Interest
of our own self-preservation.

I am convinced that If war Is to be avert-
ed. If clvlllasatlon la to be spared the horri-
fying experience of an atomic conflict that
Is certain to engulf the whole world, com-
munism must be stopped before It has
made great new advances. Every gain they
make, wherever It may occur, will Inevitably
Increase the chances of war. On the other
hand. If we stand firm, If we lend our sup-
port to those nations now actively resist-
ing this aggressive force, war may be avert-
ed.

I believe that security la better defended
by standing U>gether with those who fight
against a common enemy than by staying
neutral on 8<3 dangerous an Issue until one
by one our friends are destroyed. This Is not
a time for neutrality. We cannot be neutral
In the face of proven danger. Where would
Christendom be today If ChrUt had been
neutral on the subject of the moral life of
man?

No one can say that the policy this Nation
la pursuing will guarantee conditions of
peace. The reaulU that already have come
from that policy, however, are encouraging.
I cite a recent example.

Only a few weeks ago It looked as though
the little kingdom of Jordan was ripe for a
Communist coup. Internal dlsaenaon had
created conditions Ideal for that purpose.
What was the result? President Elsenhower.
Implementing the principles embodied In
the Middle East doctrine, threw the full
moral support of this country behind Jordan.
The United States Sixth Fleet waa moved
into a strategic position In the Mediterra-
nean— not as a threat of war. mind you, but
rather as a warning to those who would
exploit Jordan's Internal difficulties that thli
country would tolerate no outside Interven-
tion. The result of that action has been to
keep Jordan's Government In the antl-Com-
munlst alliance.

The basic aim of our whole foreign policy,
then. Is to deter aggression This Is true in
eastern Europe, In the Middle East and In
Asia. This policy has already paid off In all
three areas. Only a few days ago. In an
address before a Joint session of Congress, the
president of the a-year-old Republic of
Vietnam, a strategic south Asian country.
emphasized that American foreign aid had
been largely Instrumental In preventing his
country from falling to the Communists.
I quote from his address

"In the face of Increased international
tension and Communist pressure In south-
east Asia, I could not repeat too often how
much the Vietnamese people are grateful for
American aid, and how much they are con-
scious of Its lmp<3rtance. profound signifi-
cance, and amount • • •. This action has
contributed to the defense of southeast Asia
and prevented the raw materials of this area
from falling into Communist hands "

It Is only reasonable. In considering the
task we have undertaken, to ask: "How long
and to what extent mu-st America extend aid
to other natlon.-s'''' I think we must ad-
vance military aid until such time as the
Free World is sufficiently strong that the
Communlsta will not dare risk starting a
war. As for economic aid abroad, I am con-
vinced that the time has come when such
aid should be in the form of loans rather
than gifts. It is to our Interest, of course,
that the nations of the free world be both
economically and militarily strong. How-
ever, nearly all foreign nations outside the
Communist orbit are now In a stronger eco-
nomic position than ever before, and such
help as they require should not be at th»
expense of endaujerlng our o*u economy.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8731

The burden of maintaining strong defenses
here at boms and of bolstering the military
strength of nations which subscribe to the
basic principles of human freedom is heavy,
to be certain. A large percentage — inoT9
than 60 cents out of each tax dollar — Is going
for that purpose. I say In all earnestness,
however, that so long as this menace remains
a threat to America's security, we must stand
prepared to make whatever sacrifice may h«
required.

I deplore the high cost of this policy — but
It Is less costly than war. I deplore the neces-
sity of the policy Itself — but we cannot Ignore
realities.

A few weeks ago. It was my privilege to talk
at some length with a foreign correspondent
who hi'.s co\ered wars and uprisings In nearly
e.ery part of the world for the last two dec-
ades. The man I reler to Is Larry Allen, a
former West Virginia newspaperman, who
had only recently returned from Vietnam.
Ue had experienced firsthand the tactics of
the Communists In Indochina and other
Asian countries. Ke said to me: "If the day
should ever come that the American citizen
is required to pay 80 cents out of every dollar
he earns to provide this country with ade-
quate defenses against communism, I would
B.iy that Us a smiUl sacrifice to make." He
went on to say that no one who has not wlt-
r.e-.'cd firilhand the horrors of Communist
eufiavement can begin to Imagine what life
Is like under that tctalltarlan Ideology so
alien to all that we In this country hold
dear.

We must continue on In the task that world
clrcum::tanccs has assigned to us. We must
not falter In the world responsibility that la
c ;rs. We must cr.st aside partisan politics
Bt the water's edge and stand united In our
dercn'e of American liberties. We must
eirnestly, serlourly seek the pathway that
leads to conditions of peace.

It Is my crnvlctlon that If we do not falter.
If we do Ti'-t let down our guard, If we do
not Fhow signs of weakness, the time will
come when the threat of enslavement will
have pas.•^ed away. Then the vast sums of
money we are now spending for defense pur-
pt^es can be used for internal Improvements
here In America or turned back to ovir people
in the form of tax relief.

Indeed, there are already heartening slgiu
thit the strength of the free world Is reach-
ing a point where the ag^essor nations are
gr jw;ng mnre wary. We know that the peo-
ples behind the Iron Curtain are growing
rr.ore and mere restive, and there Is reason to
bPlleve that the time will come when the
drtrrrrnt Influences of the free world will
more than balance the warmaklng potential
of would-be aggressors.

Until that day comes, however, we must
Bta.nd firm against further Communist ag-
gression In any part of the world. Any other
course can well lead to disaster for free peo-
ples everywhere, our own Included.

Michigan's Tax PoBciet

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. ROBERT P. GRIFHN

or MlCHICAIt

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATTVE3

Mo7iday. June 10, 1957

Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. Speaker, press no-
tices concerning Michigan's tax policies
and their effect within the State upon in-
dustrial expansion, or lack of it, have
reach :jd all over the country.

There follows an article summarizing
the situr.tlon which appeared in the June

6, 1957, issue of the Muskegon (Mich.)
Chronicle :

(By William C. Kulsea)

IjUtsuro. June 6. — The boylah grin Is gone.
The shoulders are stooped. The pout of th«
lower Up Is nore pronounced. Even the
green-and-whlte polka dot tie has lost Its
swagger.

For the first time in nearly 9 years. Gov.
G. Mcnnen Williams has been hurt politi-
cally.

From nearly all sections of Michigan, from
California, from Texas, from New York, and
from Massachusetts reports are coming In
that Williams is driving industry out of
Michigan.

His opponents are crying that the Gov-
ernor's tax policies are chasing industry out
of the State, and preventing new business
from coming in.

The Governor has been shouting back —
"It's libel on the reputation of the State" —
"Irreparable damage Is being done" — "This is
mass hysteria" — "This is politics both in
Michigan and in Washington."

But bis denials are coming into an echo-
chamber, and so far are being beard only by
bis partisans.

And even some of thjm are beginning to
wonder. Reports reaching the executive of-
fice are that Negroes in Detroit are asking
"Why Is Soapy chasing industry out of the
Bute?"

The story is a prairie fire among many
minority groups. Many are taking a back-
ward glance at their 46-year-old favorite to
see what all this means, why are so many
losing jobs, why doesn't Williams come out
and say it Isn't so and make It stick.

"It's a bum rap." say bis aids.

The peerless public-relations organization
operated by Paul W. Weber, his press secre-
tary, so far is stalled. It doesn't know how
to fight back.

Here's the problem, as outlined by one of
the Governor's aids:

"It's a hard tiling to fight. Take a man
who owns a plant in Michigan. He decides
to expand. He spends some money for minor
expansion of his Michigan facilities and then
announces he's going to build a new plant
In Kentucky. He says he's doing that be-
cause taxwlse it will be cheaper for him to
do that there than in Michigan.

"It's a personal matter. It's his plant, bis
money, and his problem with taxes. It's bis
own idea and there's no way you can dis-
prove it. There have been so many of these
cases lately tbat you can't begin to cope
with them all.

"It's propagsinda. We know It. but we
can't fight It with the same formula we used
in other cases."

It all began innocently enough several
months ago. The Governor said a University
of Micliigan study showed tliat taxation Is
not an important factor in having industry
locate in a State.

The Republicans in the legislature
screamed like they had Just caught a burglar
at the State treasury safe.

Leading the pack was the house speaker,
George M. Van Peuraem, of Zeeland. He was
aided by businessmen and industrialists who
took Issue with the Governor's Interpretation
of the report. One of them was Harlow H.
Curtice, president of General Motors.

Williams took off after Curtice on the
theory tiiat "his blast" was the most damag-
ing, but he was too late.

Curtice deepened the wound with these
phrases:

•■• • • Even the present level of business
taxation in Michigan has already led us to
locate plants in other States, where the
taxes per General Motors Job are less t^ian
one-half of the present taxes per Job in
Michigan. This will also be taken into con-
sideration in the placement of additional
plants.

"Obviously, if the Governor's plan of taxa-
tion is adopted the resultant excessive tax
level will be even greater influence in our
decisions with respect to locating new plants
and providing new Job opportunities."

This and a prior statement by Curtice trig-
gered a reaction that has painted Williama
as a tax-happy Governor.

For 7 of the 8 years be has been in oflOce,
Williams bas been asking the legislature to
adopt a corporate profits tax. It hasn't.

Editorial writers all over the country re-
sponded to Curtice's statement.

The Financial World warned; "His [Cur-
tice's] words serve as a voluble reminder
that no one State has a monopoly of natural
resoiu-ces or labor and It behooves State gov-
ernments to be efficient and reasona'ole lest
they lose competitive position."

The Buffalo Evening News: "Michigan
• • • Is risking the loss of industry to other
States."

The Chicago Tribune: "The State that
punishes Industry with heavy taxes will not
get new plants, other things being equal."

Tampa Dally Times; "It Is equally true
that Industry will shy away from thos*
States with InefQcient governmental organi-
sation and heavy tax loads."

New Bedford (Mass.) Standard Times:
"Every company must give major considera-
tion to the tax factor when choosing a site
for manufacturing facUltles.-

Omaha E^•enlng World-Herald: "Obvious-
ly, there Is a point at which returns from
Increasing tax rates and new forms of taxa-
tion begin to diminish. Michigan may be
nearing that point."

Washington Evening Star: "There should
be some reasonable balance between the tax
burden and the advanges received in return.
It Is an area in which economic considera-
tions, rather than political ones, should be
prevailing."

In tbe Governor's office, his aids have one
thing to smile labout. It's 18 months befor*
tbe next gubernatorial election next year,
and tbe controversary may blow over.

Mr. Speaker, whether the charges and
countercharges concerning Michigan's
tax policies are true or false, the public-
ity attending them has not enhanced
the State's reputation as a home for
industry. Since I represent a Congres-
sional district where there is now con-
siderable unemployment, I believe it is
essential that an appropriate committee
of the State legislature get to the bottom
of this matter as quickly as possible and
straighten it out. if possible. There fol-
lows a letter which I mailed today to the
presiding oflBcers of the two houses of
Michigan's Legislature:

JDNX 10, 1957.
Hon. Philip A. Habt.

President. State Senate.
Hon. Gkoegx M. Van PEuascM,

Speaker, State House of Representa-
tives. The Capitol. Lansing, Mich.

Gentlemen: In recent weeks, national, as
well as State-wide, attention bas focused
upon the tax policies of Michigan and their
effect upon industrial expansion, or tbe
lack of it, within our State.

I am very Interested in this subject be-
cause at the present time there is consider-
able unemployment in northwestern
Michigan, particularly at Muskegon and
Traverse City. Several plants in that area
have closed their doors during the past
year, while at the same time. I am aware
tlu'ougb conversations with some of my
Ohio colleagues In the Congress, that Ohio
is now flourishing industrially with many
new Jobs being created there.

The purpose of my letter is not to point
an accusing finger or to pass Judgment; but
I believe that the many laboring people who
are out of work, as well as the rest of the

f
I

II

8732

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

citizens of Michigan, are entitled to know
tome facta. If State tax poUclea or other
conditions are causing Industries to prefer
other States to Michigan, then unfortunately
It la the laboring people of our State who are
the real losers — not Industry. In view of
the recent nationwide publicity, which haa
been very damaging to our State's reputa-
tion. I believe the charge that State and local
tax policies are dUcouraglng Indiistrlal ex-
pansion In Michigan, should now either b«
■ubstantlated or discredited.

Accordingly, I wish strongly to urge that
an appropriate committee of one or both
houses of the State Legislature commence
Immediately to study and conduct a thor-
ough Investigation of the charge

if I can be of assistance In any way, please
let me know.

Sincerely yours,

ROBCKT p. CrRimM.

Member of Congress.

Ad<ireis by Hon. Barry Goldwater, of
Araona, Before WucoDtin Repablicaa
State CoBTeatioa

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. BARRY GOLDWATER

or AXIZONA

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

Monday. June 10, 1957

Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President. I
ask unanimous consent that ihe address I
made before the Wisconsin Republican
State convention on June 8. 1957, be
printed tn the Ricord.

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed In the Record,
as follows:

Address bt StN.ATot Barkt Goi.dwateu BrroRK
THE Wisconsin Rcpuwican State Conven-
tion. June 8. 1957

For many reasons I am pleased by this op-
portunity to come to Wisconsin tonight.

First, and quite naturally. It Is a prlvUege to
meet wilh your outstanding State Republican
organization, as It Is an honor at any time to
Join with those of our citizenry who are ac-
tively dedicated to the cause of good govern-
ment through the enunciation of basic Re-
publican principles.

Second, and of particular Importance to
the party ot Abraham Lincoln. It is <ixxl to
visit the State la which. Just over 100 years
ago. the Ideal of Republicanism was trans-
formed Into the reality of the Republican
Party.

We are fortunate today In recalling our
first century of service to this Nation, to be
able 'o acknowledge that those same ageless
precepts and purp<.)ses which guided the men
In the little schoolhouse at Rlpon still pro-
vide the motivation for our party'.s efforts.

The Republican Party Is now, as it was In
the beginning, committed to the proposition
that man. as a child of God, is a free being,
and that governments are created among
men to serve and protect the liberties of the
Individual.

The Republican Party Is today as It was
100 years ago. a party dedicated to the goal
of reserving to the States and to the people
the p<jwer to regulate their own lives, un-
hampered by any semblance of Federal
domination.

We believe that the thesis of Individual
Incentive and private Initiative Is good —
good for the country and good for all Its
citizens — and we are pledged, as always, to
the strengthening of that economic and
political system which enables men to real-

ize and enjoy the products of their own
labors through the sheer Joy of personal
accomplishment In a free and competitive
society.

As Republicans, it ta our historic obliga-
tion to preserve inviolate the principles em-
bodied In the Declaration of Independence
and the Constitution of the United States.
And we vigorously reject any concept which
suggests that these are no longer applicable
to our governmental pursuits.

Indeed, for 20 long and painful years our
Nation followed bureaucratic byways toward
a coUectlvlst goal under the devious direc-
tion of New Deal and Fair Deal administra-
tions.

For 20 years the traditional Democrat
philosophy of Jefferson and Jackson was
subverted and destrriyed, and all that re-
mains of the foundation of that once great
party is now desperately crying out for a
restoration of loyal leadership which does
not, because It cannot, respond.

Many times I have suggested to my Demo-
crat friends that there is a pl.<\ce for them
In Republican ranks, and that they would
be welcome. For our party has not and
never will write < ff the value of States rights
and limited, conservative, economical Gov-
ernment.

Neither will we ever abandon the prin-
ciples of Republicanism for the siren soug of
socialism.

Another reason that I am glad to be with
yovi this evening Is because Joe McCarthy,
your Senator, was my giK)d friend, and a
man of whom all Republicans can be Justly
proud.

Joe and I became friends long before
either of us entered the Senate and. with
his usual good Judgment, whenever the
weather In Appleton or Washington got t(x)
cold for him. he u.'^ed to come out to Arizona
and enjoy some of our priceless sunshine
which nobody has ever figured out how to
put In bofTles and ship back East.

During the time that I had the good for-
tune to serve with him In the Senate, I found
further evidence of his ulstlnctton as a Sen-
ator, as a Republican and as a friend He
was a faithful, tireless, and conscientious
American. He fought Just as hard for the
things ht* believed were right as he did
against the thln.;s he knew were wrc^ng.

Joe McCarthy gave himself— his life — to
the service of his God and his country. He
did a Job that no other man could, or would,
do. He was completely selfless and his sin-
gle motive wa.s the preservation of thofe
principles which make It possible for the
Republican P.\rty t.i pr x-lalm now Its ful-
fillment of the confidence of all Americans.

Rpcau'^e Joe McCarthy lived, we are a
safer, freer, more vigilant Nation today.
That fart, even though he no longer dwells
among us. will never perish. And I know
you will Join with me In thanking God that
while Joe lived he made a contribution to
his countrymen that will forever redound to
the credit of the people of Wisconsin and
to your Republican organization.

Finally. I am proud, as a Republican, to
come to this State which has twice accorded
to DwlEtht D Elsenhower such an overwhelm-
ing vote of respect. And I am gratified to
be able to report to you that, wl^h the pass-
ing of each day, this Republican adminis-
tration grows in stature and In the sight
of the American people.

To those of us who watched with alarm
the chaos, corruption, and communism
which was rampant under the New Deal
and Fair Deal administrations. It Is surely
rewarding to know that, under Republican
leadership, dignity, decency, and dedicated
Americanism have been restored to the halls
of our Government.

After 20 years of rule by a philosophy
whose watchword was crisis, the affairs of our
Nation are now directed by a leadership
whose watchword la peace.

Now, we might ask, who Is really respon-
sible for these achievements? A modern Re-
publican might answer. Arthur Larson or
Paul Hoffman. But Arthur Larson did not
even vote in 1054 and 1960. and Paul Hoff-
man, who was a member of the Truman ad-
ministration, has not been conspicuous for
achievement In political, or other fields.

To this question of who deserves the credit
for the accomplishments of these past 6 years,
a citizen for Elsenhower might reply that It
Is the President himself. Yet I know that
he considers himself as only one member of
a large team, and I t>elleve President Elsen-
however would be the first to deny the In-
dlspensablllty of any single personality in
the overall effort to bring good government
to our land.

You and I gathered here, of course, might
say that the genius for these recent gains
resides solely In the Republican Party: and,
indeed, comparatively speaking. It must be
admitted that our party has succeeded In
righting many of the evils perpetrated by the
New Deal disciples.

Yet, to be completely accurate, may I sug-
gest that It is the Innate good sense of all
the American people, and their Increasing
dedication to and understanding of our con-
stitutional, free-enterprise way of life, that
has provided the real impetus for this return
to sanity and morality In government.

The Republican Party has always sought
to reflect the combined, cumulative think-
ing and beliefs of men and women of good
conscience who are devoted to representa-
tive government and committed to the main-
tenance of the dignity of the Individual.

That Is why there Is. and always will be,
room In our ranks for men of such widely
differing personalities and vlewpolnla as
Dwlght Elsenh(jwer and Joe McCarthy.

That Is why. when we are In pursuit of
a principle, we must divorce It completely
from any considerations of perKonallty; for
to Judge an Ideal merely In terms of the
Individual who prop<iunds It Is to Insult both
the Ideal and the Individual.

It Is this capacity of Republicanism to em-
brace the honest disagreement of honest men
that gives our party Its best opportunity for
future achievements for the good of all. And
there Is no place among Republicans for
the use of compulsion or other Inducements
to enforce a specialized will or tiehef upon
the party as a whole.

Indeed, we have never subscribed to that
coUectlvlst conclusion that the sum Is
greater than the total of lU component
parts.

Right and Jvistlce and honor and truth
and devotion to the cause of mankind are
not the products of an organization. They
are and always will be a refie<-tlon of the
principles of the men and women who are
members of that organization.

In the Congress today the Republican Party
Is engaged In debating the merit and wisdom
of the prop<j.sed budget for fiscal 1958. There
Is a wide divergence of opinion and belief.
I am among those who think that this budget
can and should be cut In the Interest of pre-
serving the economic freedoms and fiscal In-
tegrity of this Nation. There are others who
think that any reduction In this budget
would Imperil our future security.

May I submit that this disagreement Is a
healthy situation. It Is an expression of the
sincere conviction of each Individual. And
out of this debate there will be produced a
final conclusion, strengthened and temjjered
by the cumulative wisdom of those contribut-
ing to that decision.

I suggest, too, that the Republican Party
will be stronger and more unified because of
this experience. The President's position of
leadership will be enhanced. For history
teaches us that when men of conscience have
disagreed and have resolved their disagree-
ments In a climate of mutual respect the

X957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8733

eauM of representative goremment haa been
well served.

There are acme member* of the oppoeltion
party who think they, in this struggle, are
witnessing the disintegration of the Repub-
lican Party. They are, I think, extremely
shortsighted and engaging, perhaps, more in
wishful thinking than in objective analysis.

They are, I suggest. Incapable of recogniz-
ing the dynamic strength of this political
faith which haa grown so steadily in wisdom
and stature and in Ite ability to serve the
people by virtue of Its constant rejection of
the feudallstlc concept of a political organ-
ization which requires subservience and
acquiescence of its members.

You and I, as Republicans In 1957, can be
grateful to this administration for having
repudiated the thinking of those who urge
the concept of one-man rule, for having re-
affirmed our ancient faith in the tripartite
system of government, and for having en-
listed in this cause of freedom those who
would serve rather than those who would
master.

Strong in the faith of Lincoln and In the
proven record of our party of principle, we
can answer now and for all time the cynical
demands of those who would divert us from
our chosen course by reaffirming these high-
est concepts of Republicanism.

Addreii by Hod. Gifford P. Case, of New
Jersey, Before New Jersey State Federa-
tion of Labor

EXTENSION OP REMARKS

OF

HON. JACOB K. JAVITS

or nkw tobk
IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED STATES

Monday. June 10. 1957

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent that there be printed
the CoNGRKssioNAL RECORD a most dis-
tinguished address delivered by the
junior Senator from New Jersey [Mr.
Case! before the annual convention of
the New Jersey State Federation of
Labor, at the Traymore Hotel, Atlantic
City, on Monday, June 3. In the address
the Senator from New Jersey dealt with
the implications to American labor of the
current hearings by a special Senate
committee; and also pointed out the
preat responsibility of labor leadership
today to provide for internal grievance
machinery and other safeguards which
will be self -generating within unions
them.selves, as an obligation to trade
union membership, and as another op-
portunity— so many of which have been
availed of in the past— further to ad-
vance real trade union statesmanship.

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the RECoaD,
as follows:

In the current wave of discussion about
organized labor, there may be some who
might be tempted to try to make the names
of Beck and Brewster synonymotis with all
the 15 million Americans who belong to
labor unions. I think It would be useful
to take a look at the situation and attempt
to bring the matter Into proper perspective.

Testimony developed thus far before the
McClellan committee Indicates that the
oflBcers of one of the major unions have
abused their power and misused their trust.
This Is a grave matter and It Is good to know

that law enforcement officials have been
taking action and that the leadership of the
labor movement has acted promptly to con-
demn and remedy such abuses.

Further steps are necessary and I suggest
these:

1. Establishment of a program by union
leadership to bring democratic procedures
and protections to all members.

a. Enactment of adequate legislation to
protect the health and welfare funds run
by unions and managements alike, so the
hard-earned money of union members and
their families are protected. But, let me
emphasize, I do not mean legislation aimed
at burning down the whole home of labor
In order to roast a few pigs.

At the heart of this corruption problem
lies the need for making unions the demo-
cratic institutions which the founders en-
visioned. Clearly, the best Insurance of
honest unionism lies In an alert and In-
formed membership.

There Is much that the leadership of the
labor movement can do to assure that the
rank and file of locals actually, as well as
theoretically, make the decisions. Business
has the problem of bringing adequate facts
before the stockholders so that they can
make the proper decisions. It is Just as im-
portant In unions that members have full
Information.

I urge the AFL-CIO Executive Council to
consider setting up a code of minimum
standards of self-government for its mem-
ber unions.

The AFL-CIO. even before the current
revelations, took a firm and frank stand on
ethical practices in the labor movement.
In December 1955, long before the Beck-
Brewster hearings, the AFL-CIO convention
noted that "the vast majority of labor union
officials accept their responsibility and trust.
They endeavor honestly to carry out the
democratic will of their members and to
discharge the duties of their olHce. Yet the
reputations of the vast majority are Im-
perUed by the dishonest, corrupt, unethical
practices of the few who betray their trust
and who look upon the trade union move-
ment not as a brotherhood to serve the gen-
eral welfare, but as a means to advance their
own selfish purposes or to forward the aim
of groups or organizations who would de-
stroy our democratic Institutions."

And, in June 1956. the executive council
established a committee on ethical prac-
tices to help keep member unltr "free from
any and all corrupt Influences" and last
month the council spelled out a recom-
mended code of financial and certain demo-
cratic practices for member unions.

My suggestion today is that the executive
council of the AFL-CIO take further steps
to strengthen the stewardship of funds and
Improve the decision-making process within
unions. Since our unions have developed in
varying ways, they now have varying degrees
of democracy In their procedures. It Is Im-
portant to put a floor tender these proce-
dures so that certain minimum protections
are provided to union members.

At present, I am told, about a half billion
dollars a year Is paid by members in dues.
The executive councU has suggested a num-
ber of fiscal checks. Including outside audits
and bonding of disbursing officials. In ad-
dition, there should be ample opportunity
for union members to have a voice in the
determination of all major policies includ-
ing those Involving expenditures and to re-
ceive full and accurate reports of union
activities including financial transactions.

The provision for election of officers
varies. Some are chosen by national con-
ventions, some by referendums of the mem-
bership, some for 1-year terms, some for
5-year terms. In some cases, voting Is by
show of hands, In others by secret ballot.
The executive councU has recommended

that elec|j|K>n of officers be held at least every
4 years, but other provisions for elections
should also be speUed out. Surely, mem-
bers should be assured of a right to regular
and not too far apart elections of officers
by secret baUot.

There should be an opportunity for In-
dividual members to appeal from arbitrary
action by union officers. The nature of the
appeal could be defined better by the leader-
ship of the labor movement. No union
members should be afraid to speak out for
Xear of losing his membership, or his Job.

No union should have any objection to
these requirements and I recognize fully
that many unions already have such safe-
guards.

Unfortunately, there are some who do not
want to admit this. The Beck-Brewster rev-
elations have been seized on by groups
which have long — and unsuccessfully^
urged restrictions on labor. Now they say
they are acting on behalf of the union rank
and file who have been abused by such
leaders. It Is Interesting to note that these
suggestions have been put forward by na-
tional groups who have been quick to op-
pose any Increased regulation of their own
Interests, but who feel that more regulation
Is better for unions. Their theory seems
to be that in order to make union members
stronger, it Is necessary to make all unions
weaker.

Prom such sources has come a recom-
mendation for new legislation to prohibit
present union security arrangements. They
demand a national rlght-to-work law. This
has a ring reminiscent of those who 20 years
ago argued against child labor legislation
on the grounds that it interfered with a
10-year-old's right of contract. This legisla-
tion would mean unions and managements
that have peacefully negotiated contracts
for union shop agreements would have to
cancel them. Such a law would be a in&}at
step toward disintegration of labor unions.
I agree with Secretary of Labor Mitchell
that down this road lurks labor-manage-
ment chaos.

Even the late Senator Robert A. Taft, co-
author of the Taft-Hartley Act, stated dur-
ing the Congressional debates that he was
opposed to such legislation. He said: "I
have hesitated to support the complete out-
lawing of the union shop, because the union
shop has been In force In many Industries
for many years and to upset it today would
destroy relationships of long standing and
probably would bring on more strikes than
it would cure."

Such sources have made other legislative
suggestions, which although less direct, are
not really aimed at protecting Individual
members but rather would have the effect of
weakening unions and their position. Let
me remind you that such proposals would
affect not merely Messrs. Beck and Brewster,
but all decent, honest union members as
well. In the long run, the process of col-
lective bargaining would be severely ham-
pered and one of the major forces In achiev-
ing the world's highest standard of living
would be hindered and hurt.

On the other hand, there has been some
useful legislation proposed In the Senate to
help safeguard union members against the
raiding of immoral union leaders In collu-
sion with cooperative employers. The legis-
lation of Senator Pattl Douglas and Senator
IxviNO Ives for reporting on the estimated
925 billion of union pension and welfare
funds deserves urgent and earnest consid-
eration. The amendments proposed by Sec-
retary of Labor Mitchell should also have
quick action. The union members who count
on the life Insurance, sickness pay, hospi-
talization, medical and pension benefits
should be protected from the shysters and
sharpshooters attracted by these large sums
of money.

K ^1

m-

f "1

N

8734

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

n

If

Another legislative proposal which deserves
prompt consideration U that proposed by
Secretary Mitchell to make public financial
fitatementa now required under the terxna
or the Taft-Hartley law and to provide pen-
alties for any false Items reported.

Unions were not organized to provide a
few privileged individuals with fast horses
and fancy haberdashery. They were, and
are, men and women who Join together to
bargain more effectively than they could in-
dividually. They sought, and seek, to give
the working man a position of respect and
dignity in the community: to help him give
hto children a more abundant life: to pro-
tect him against oppressive employers, the
sweatshop and other hazards.

Philip Murray described it this way: "Or-
ganization fundamentally means but one
thing and that is clothing and bread and
butter and pictures on the wall and carpets
on the floor and music in the home and
ealarged opportunities for children to receive
the benefits of better education."

Inevitably, some who rose to power in the
labor movement have been corrupt, selfish
men, less interested in the workingman's
welfare than in their own. Unions were not
alone in attracting men of this kind: their
parallel has been found in those who have
organised vast corporate empires, bled them
and let them criunble destroying the savings
of thousands of Americans.

In the ranks of selfish men who have
abused the trust of their fellow men, the
names of Dave Beck and Prantc Brewster will
have an unenviable place. Their disregard
for the rights of the membership of the
teamsters union and their contempt for the
entire labor movement have been demon-
strated before the Senate Select Committee
on Improper Practices in the Labor or Man-
agement Field. The committee has had evi-
dence of the use of members' dues for man-
sions, costly automobiles, racing stables, and
other luxuries which has put all unionism
under a cloud.

Mr. Brewster says there was a gift for the
rank and file, too — the health and welfare
funds negotiated In contracts. But he did
not mention that the collective- bargaining
efforts of the teamsters' western locals and
their hard-earned 95 a month dues had
something to do with this. The hundreds
of employers who contribute to this fund and
the milk drivers, long-distance drivers and
others who work hard to earn It must have
winced when they heard Brewster's state-
ment.

Once before some unions were infiltrated
by unscrupulous individuals, then bent on
perverting the legitimate activities of union
members to assist Communist propaganda.
Courageous and perceptive leaders in the
labor movement saw the challenge, forced
the Issue, and drove these unions out of the
responsible house of labor.

George Meany and the AFlr-ClO executive
council have acted quickly and unanimously
In regard to Beck.

There have been several hopeful signs that
the membership is reviving interest in the
affairs of the union and in the transactions
of the treasury of Its western conference.
I have read of Beck's proposal for a union
fund to help defend himself, and of a mil-
lion dollar public relations fund to tell his
side of the story. That these have been
rejected are good signs. A wiser use of mem-
bers' dues would be for a full-scale audit and
legal accounting of the western conference,
as well as the general treasury. In this way
the members could recover any moneys im-
properly taken from the treasuries, as well
as any profits derived by persons using such
moneys.

The mtjor role in dealing with malfea-
sance of the oflQcers must be taken by the
1 4 million members of the teamsters union.
The future of the union, as well as the role
of all organized labor, will depend In large

measure on them. They are the parties di-
rectly aggrieved — It Is their money. Kven
more, it is their union.

Finally. In the Interests of further putting
this situation In perspective, let me quote to
you from an editorial In a current Issiie of a
national publication:

"When the McClellan committee began
looking into the affairs of Dave Beck and the
teamsters early this year, it was widely ob-
served that the labor movement was at last
getting the sort of hard senatorial scrutiny
that business had been subjected to in the
1930's. Such a scrutiny was certainly long
overdue — as the seamy revelations in the
Beck case attest — but events of the last few
weeks have also made It abundantly clear
that bu^^lness practices will be, and should
be, a I \]oT part of the investigation into
Improprieties In the field of labor-manage-
ment relations. Indeed, it was clear before
this committee began Its public hearings that
unethical and Just plain crooked deals be-
tween businessmen and union leaders were
commonplace In many Industries. In retro-
spect, the most surprising thing at>out these
deals is the complacencv with which they
were widely regarded. What the McClellan
hearings have done is dlsftpate the notion
that labor relations In the United States are
In good shape today Just because there is
relatively little violence.

■Just how much responsibility do busl-
nes.smen bear for Becklsm in labor relations?
The problem Involves only a small proportion
of businessmen, of course — Just as it involves
relatively few labor leaders. But certainly
there are some United States businessmen
who are in no position to assert any moral
superiority over their union opposite num-
bers. There are some ca.:>es, to be sure. In
which businessmen may almost be forgiven
for making a dishonest deal. When a small
retail store is hit during its biisy season by
pickets who do not represent any employees,
and who are Interested principally in getting
paid off. the proprietor may often face a
practical choice between making a deal and
going broke. But all too often the employer
who portrays himself as a hapless victim of
union racketeers is. In fact, merely an oppor-
tunist, who would rather pay off a crooked
union leader than Incur any economic hard-
ship. In unions, the improprieties are apt
to stem from racketeering; In business man-
agement, they stem principally from moral
laziness. "

The editorial concludes. "The problem of
Becklsm In business is not merely a ques-
tion cf strengthening labor law; it is also a
challenge to business ethics."

This may sound like an editorial from a
labor publication. But, actually, it comes
from the June issue of Fortune, the distin-
guished business Journal. To the views ex-
pressed, I say "Amen."

Public opinion should not aim the blame
for mlscontluct at a few labor leaders and
Ignore the culpability of a few businessmen.
It takes both to make a dishonest deal and
it takes both to keep an agreement honest.

Independent Airlines Set New
Safety Record

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. RICHARD E. LANKFORD

or MAKTLAND

IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENT.\TIVEa

Monday. June 10, 1957

Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. Speaker. It Is

with extreme pleasure that I call atten-
tion of my colleagues to the fact that the

Nation's independent airlines have estab-
lished a new passenger safety record for
the air-transportation Industry .

I am informed by Mr. Jesse F. Stall-
tngs. president of Independent Airlines
Association, that the independent airline
industry has completed over 18 montlxs
of fatality-free operations to surpass a
previous record established by the sched-
uled airlines in domestic operations be-
tween March 26, 1939. and August 31,
1340.

The supplemental air earners — for-
merly known as nonschedulei lines —
have flown in excess of 2 '2 biihon pas-
senger-miles without a fatal mishap since
November 17. 1955.

Restricted as to the amount cf civilian
common carriage business they may do.
the independent airlines have developed
the market for peacetime transportation
of military personnel and are rendering
a great service to our nationf,l-defen£e
effort, as well as saving the Government
considerable money In this respect.
These lines also represent an essential
element of the Nation's reseive airlift
capacity available for use ii: case of
nauonal emergency.

So on the occasion of estabh.ihing this
new safety record I offer congratulations
to the Nation's small businee^-es in air
transportation.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8735

Address by Secretary of A.{ricnltare
Before Wyoming Stock Growers
Associatioa

EXTENSION OP REMARKS

or

HON. FRANK A. BARRETT

or WTOMwa
IN ms SENATE OP THE UNITR3 STATES

Monday, June 10. 1957

Mr. BARRETT. Mr. Presidi-nt. I at-
tended the 85th annual convi»ntion of
the Wyoming Stock Growers A sociation
at Lander, Wyo.. on Thursday, June 6
last. Secretary of Agriculture Szra Taft
Benson delivered a forceful addi ess to the
1.200 members and guests assembled on
the occasion. The addrets received fa-
vorable mention in the press throughout
the West.

I ask unanimous consent that a copy
of Secretary Benson's address te printed
in the Record.

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in th2 Record,
as follows:

AODRXSS BT SECBETART Or ACBJCULrUBK EZBA

Tajt Benson Bctorb the Wyoming Stock
Growdls Association. Landeb. V'to., June
«. 1957

I consider it a high privilege as well as a
challenging responsibility to meet with you
today.

I want to talk with you as cltlz*n to citi-
zen, as farmer to farmer, rancher to rancher,
sincerely and honestly about the agricul-
tural sltu.-^tion. My only purpose is — as it
always has been— to seek what ij best for
agriculture.

We must face facts with the utmost hon-
esty. The American people want the truth,
and I have supreme confidence Ir the good
Judgment of rural people, who aie the salt

of the earth — and a great bulwark tor
American freedom.

We need to take a good look at the live-
stock picture — and at the agricultural pic-
ture as a whole.

Where do we stand? What la our goal?
What road ahould we travel to get where we
want to go?

First, where do we itand as regards live-
stock?

Livestock production has climbed to a
level higher than any previously known.
Our people— on a per person basis — ^^had
more meat last year than In any year on
record. In the past half century, our na-
tional population has almost doubled.
Meanwhile the number of people engaged
in agriculture has dropped 40 percent. Yet
our meat consumption last year — 167 pounds
per person — reached the highest point In
more than 60 years.

This was top performance production-
wise. But it brought with it serious prob-
lems of unsatisfactory prices — problems that
were compounded by drought.

Now the familiar cycle in cattle numbers
has apparently turned. A 7-year expansion
In cattle on United States farms has come to
an end. After climbing from about 77 mil-
lion at the t>eginntng of 1949 to nearly 97
million head at the beginning of 1956, the
cattle inventory this past January was down
by 16 million. What Is probably more im-
portant, the cow herd alone was reduced by
1 2 million from the high level of 1955. Hog
production also has eased off for the pres< nt.

Market prices of cattle and hogs are now
gener -lly $2 to $3 per 100 pounds higher than
at this time last year.

The decrease in cattle numbers may con-
tinue for a time. But we do not expect a big
drop In numbers such as occurred in 1934
and 1947. We look for a gradual strengthen-
ing of prices for cattle — a moderate trend,
not runaway prices, such as those of 1951,
which brought an aftermath of trouble. A
more permanent Improvement is to be pre-
ferred, and that is what we hope is in pros-
pect.

All in all, the longer range outlook for
prices to cattle producers is brighter than It
has been for several years.

This Is good news, especially here in Wyo-
ming, here beef cattle bring in a larger part
of total farm income than in any other State
except Nevada. Beef accounts for half of all
your farm cash receipts.

Wyoming was one of the few Western
States that did not reduce cattle inventories
last year. You will benefit considerably If
prices of feeder cattle this summer and faU
retain a higher level than last year, as we
expect they will.

The Improvement In the cattle situation is
part of a general trend in agriculture as a
whole. Last year, as you know, the realized
net income of farm operators rose about 4
percent — the first peacetime rise since 1947.
We expect another increase of perhaps 4 per-
cent this year.

So much for where we stand. Now, what
Is o\ir goal, our objective, for BRricuIture?
We have stated it many times. We seek an
agriculture that is expanding, prosperous,
and free — for the benefit of the entire
American people.

What do those words mean?

Expanding speaks for itself. We are a
dynamic people. Agriculture is a dynamic
industry. It must expand to keep pace with
the economy.

Prosperous, as I see it, means a constantly
improving abundant life for farm and ranch
people in fair comparison with that of other
groups of our population.

By free, I do not mean freedom to exploit
others. I do mean freedom for an Individ-
ual to make his own decisions, to manage
his own affairs. I mean freedom as con-
ceived in the Declaration of Independence,
constitutional freedom which so safeguards
the right of choice of each individual as to

provide the greatest pocslble opportunity for
\u all.

I wish I could report to you that the re-
cent gains agriculture has made — and is now
making — mean that this goal of an expand-
ing, prosperous, and free agriculture Is Im-
mediately in sight.

But I cannot. The basic problems have
not been fully solved. The objective Is not
close at hand.

We must not allow current progress to lull
us into complacency. This progress has
been achieved In large measure through
temporary, emergency programs, and at
great expense. These programs are reliev-
ing the pressure of surpluses but they do
not remove the cause.

True, we have some of the major tools we
need to deal with the current emergency —
disposal programs, the soil bank, and the
beginning of flexibility in price support.
The Agricultural Acts of 1954 and 1956 were
first steps In the right direction, and they
were enacted with bipartisan support. But
we have never contended that they were the
complete solution to ovu- farm and ranch
problems.

We are still saddled with one requirement
that we don't need — that price supports on
the basic commodities be increased as soon
as surpluses are moved. Under the price
support formula In the old basic law, once
the Government stocks in the warehouses
are cleaned out. the door must be opened to
build them up again.

The past consequences of this formula
have been extremely damaging, not only for
producers of the basic crops, but for agri-
culture as a whole. Both at home and
abroad, markets have been lost. Foreign
farm production has been increased. Ex-
ports of some American crope have declined.
Foreign products have been attracted to our
shores

Shrinking markets have forced drastic
acreage controls upon our farmers. But this
has not solved our problems. It has merely
spread them. Diverted acres were shifted
to other crops — and the consequences onto
other producers — until almost every farmer
and rancher, regardless of the crop or the
livestock he raises, has been htu-t.

Many of the diverted acres went into oats,
barley, and grain sorghums — the end prod-
ucts of which were more meat. milk, and
eggs at a time when markets were already
glutted.

We all agree that agriculture Is entitled to
a fair share of this Nation's record prosperity.
The question Is how does agriculture — how
do you livestock producers — get a fair share.

In my belief you will get it out of ef-
ficient production — balanced production —
and better marketing.

You will not get It out of Government.

You will not get it out of acreage allot-
ments and marketing quotas.

You will not get it by Government price-
fixing, and you never have.

You will not get it through research and
education and cooperation and free Initia-
tive.

You will get it out of buUdlng new
markets and strengthening the private and
cooperative marketing machinery.

There is a new dimension In the farm pic-
ture that makes management of agriculture
by rigid formula totally unworkable. I refer
to the amazing technological revolution that
has been, and is, going on in agricultiu-e.

Since 1920 crop production per acre has
risen more than 25 percent. Tremendotis
changes have occurred In the livestock busi-
ness too. Production per breeding unit—
that Is per cow. per sow, per hen on an ag-
gregate basis — has gone up 72 percent. Even
compared with 1935-39 we are now getting
40 percent more beef per cow of the breeding
lierd.

In view of this revolution, we cannot
balance total supply and demand by acreage

allotments on the basic crope. Farmers will
not accept, legislators will not vote, and
from a practical standpoint administrators
cannot Impose the kind of controls which,
at the price objective specified by the old
basic law, would be necessary to bring pro-
duction into line with market outlets.

Nor can we build a healthy outlook for the
corn, wheat, or cotton producers by steadily
fencing them In. On a 55-mllllon-acre mini-
mum national allotment we now produce
more than enough wheat for all our needs,
domestic and export. On an allotment cal-
culated to produce 10 million bales of cot-
ton, we grew almost 15 million. On the
smallest corn acreage allotment we ever had,
and with a drought in the western Corn
Belt, and with the beginnings of a soil bank.
1956 com production approached an all-tlxna
record.

For these three crops, plus tobacco, pea-
nuts, and rice, we have programs In effect
to control production and support prices ac-
cording to a legal formula. These six crops
bring In only one-fourth of farm Income.
Yet for these six crops, surpluses are greater,
costs are higher. Infringements on Individual
liberty are more extensive. International re-
lations are placed in greater Jeopardy, and
farmer complaints are louder than for all of
the 200 or so other farm commodities com-
bined

I want to emphasize one fact above all:
The basic rigid price support formula in th»/
old law is directly contradictory to the ob-
jective of an expMindlng, prosperous, and free
agriculture.

To expand, agriculture needs new markets.
The application of the basic price support
formula has caused markets to be lost. It
will cause ftirther loes of markets If It is
applied in the futiire.

To be prosperous, agriculture must be able
to compete successfully against foreign and
substitute products. The restrictions of this
formula have given agriculture's competitors
an almost unbeatable price advantage. It
would continue to do so In the future.

To be free, farmers must be permitted to
make their own management decisions on
their own farms and ranches. The appUca-
tion of this formula requires controls that
transfer the management of agriculture Into
the hands of Government. It Is doing so
now and it will continue to do so as long as
the rigid formula remains In the law.

This is the fundamental problem we face
In agriculture. We must confront It. We
dare not Ignore It. I have testified before
the Congress and I have emphasized before
agricultural groups that we should fur-
ther reexamine the old basic farm law — and
that we should do so now.

I am not proposing that we scrap farm pro-
grams or that we scrap price-support pro-
grams. I am sa3rlng that we need to revise
some of our programs so that they may bet-
ter serve the needs of our farm people. We
are now ready to take the next step in this
direction. Let us use the time while the
soil bank and the disposal programs are In
effect to make the transition to a sounder
price-support policy.

As you know, the cost of farm programs Is
much in the public eye. A key ptu-t of these
programs is the acreage reserve of the soil
bank. The acreage reserve Is a temporary,
emergency, costly, and voluntary program.
We came to it reluctantly because of the
emergency situation brought on by the war
and by unsound price-support policy.

The acreage reserve did not have a fair
trial last year. It was not authorized until
after most crops had been planted. Now
the attempt is being made to destroy It,
even before we can measure the results of a
full year's operation. The soU bank Is be-
ing blamed for faUures caused by the out-
moded programs of the past which made the
■oil bank necessary in the first place. Ex-
cept for these failures, there would be no
need of a soil bank today.

I

1

fi7^A

rnNr,R Fssf on a t r ecor d — house

June 10

1Q^7

r^d-Mkirm i: c c tr\»j a x

» T.<-kV T.O ry

8736

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

Jioie 10

The simple fact Is that eveij acre In the
acreage reserve — whether that acre U high
yielding or low yielding — means an acre that
Is not adding to axirpluses o( the ba&lc crops,
ir U Is allowed to work, the acreage reserve
can lessen the undue stimulus to Uvestoclc
production which has caused your Industry
many of Its present problems.

Though It is contrary to my philosophy to
pay farmers for not producing, agriculture
cannot be expected to bear the complete bur-
den of adjustment In a situation which Is a
national responsibility.

Management of agriculture by fixed Gov-
ernment formula Is assuredly not the road
to a dynamic, expanding, and free agricul-
ture. But is there another road.'

Of course there Is.

There Is the road of more freedom for
farmers and ranchers to produce, coupled
with less reliance ou price support by rlg'.d
formula. We should bes;in to move away
from acreage controls while the soil bani
and the surplus disposal programs are in
effect. We must not wait until, having dis-
posed of surplus stoclsplle No. 1. we have
built up surplus No. 2. Let us not put off
the making of necessary changes until they
are forced upon us.

Let us price our products so they will sell.

Let us not price support our products at
levels which make overproduction aim' st In-
evitable— which dry up markets and require
•evere controls on farmers.

Let us expand markets — markets for food
and markets for Ind istrtal and nunfood
uses of agrlcultura! products.

Let us give spe-iai attention to the prob-
lems peculiar to small farmers. Our Rural
Development Program Is successfully
launched. It can help open the doors of
opportunity to more than a million farm
faniiUea with incomes of less than a thou-
sand dollars a year. We hope this program
will grow in scope and effectiveness.

Let us. above all, build up our markets
for livestock products — wholesome, tasty,
nutritious foods that people can and will
purchase In larger amounts if the price
Is attractive.

Increasing and decreasing the livestock
population Is the time- honored method of
adjusting the food supply to changing needs.
The amount of flexibility provided by this
system Is tremendous.

When we consume more of our food In the
form of livestock products, we need the out-
put of many more acres to produce feed

Livestock condense about 7 pounds of dry
matter In the form of gram and other feed
to about one pound of dry matter in the
form of meat, milk, and eggs. The other 6
pounds are converted Into beat and energy
or waste. Thus, far more agricultural re-
sources are needed to provide a diet which
contains a high percentage of livestock
products.

The American consumer has been Increas-
ing his consumption of livestock and poultry
products. But on a per capita basts he la
still behind the Australian, the New Zea-
lander, or the Argentinian In meat consixmp-
tlcn We can go farther In shifting con-
sumption to milk, eggs, and other highly
nutritious livestock products.

Of course markets for more animal prod-
ucts must be potentially available before we
begin producing for them. Expansion In
output of meat animals, poultry, and dairy
products should occur only gradually.
Sharp increases can be dlsastroxis. as we
found a little over • year ago with hogs.
But we have been moving toward a greater
animal agriculture during the past 20 years
ar.d we can move further.

Prom time to time livestock markets win
become ghitted and prices will be disrupted.
In such periods timely and vigorous Govern-
ment purchase and diversion programs
should be used to help bolster prices and

help producers adjust to market demands.
Such programs have been undertaken by this
adininis txatlo n .

Here are some of the things we have done.
When we came to Washington in 1953 we
found grading of beef compulsory and prices
controlled and falling. We removed Gov-
ernment restrictions and we undertook a
vast beef-purchase program to help stop the
decline In prices. Since that time, we have
reinsUtuted purchases whenever It appeared
necessary. Last fall, fur example, the market
was almost swamped with cows and young
stock from drought regions. We bought 73
million pounds of beef at that time to help
move the big supplies into consumption

We have wurked with industry to market
beei: — and not only beef but dairy products,
pork, and other plentiful foods.

Just a year a^o, in support uf the recom-
mcndatimi of the cattle and beef Industry.
we adopted USDA Standard as the ne*es»
grade of beef. Very recently the Depart-
ment put out a new 1-mlnute TV film that
makes the most of beefs best points — Its
flavor. Us use In many appeMzlr.g dishes,
and the penerous supplies that are cur-
rently available. We produced this film In
support of the livestock industry s campaign
to merchandise beef

We have expanded our export markets.
Oxir shipments of Uve'tock and livestock
products In this cvirrent fiscal year are
estimated at nearly $3J0 million — an In-
cre.ise of 50 percent over the total of 3
years earlier— and 10 tunes the amount
shipped m prew. r years. Under Public
Law 480. we have so d or authorized (or
purchase about 125 million pounds of beef
to Israel. Spam, and Txirkey — a tonnage
equivalent to about 250.COO head of cattle.

Special programs of an emergency nature
have been provided to help llvest<'>ck pro-
ducers For e.xample, emersjency credit and
low-co5t feed have been made available In
drought areas.

What we have fought for. and what we are
now fighting for. is sound and practical.
It makes good sense. That has Ixen the ulti-
mate test to which we have subjected every
pro(;ram. I will nnt support any program
that does not make sense.

I have opposed direct price support of
UvesKxk. I have done so because, in my
Judgment, it Just won't work. It is not
sound. It would hurt the livestock indus-
try Thit la why I resisted the pressures
of the cattle caravan which came to Wash-
ington a few years ago. I will never advo-
cate any policy or program which I t)eUeve
is not In the best interest of farmers and
ranchers and fair to all our people — regard-
lesd of pressure.

If livestock producers had t>een subjected
to the kind of price ct^ntrols and production
straitjackets other segments In agriculture
have had during the past 10 years, your In-
dustry would never have achieved anything
approachlni? Its present growth. You might
have lost ground under the restrictive hand
of federal regulations and quotas — much as
some other spgments of agriculture have lost
g.'ound under these restrictions.

Tremendous opportunities beckon to ani-
mal agriculture In the longer range future.
A str'>ng economy Is the basis for big live-
stock markets, and the economy of the United
States Is healthy and rapidly expanding.
Compared with the 1951-63 average, we may
have opportunity to Increase production of
cattle and calves by as much as 50 percent
In order to meet prospective demand less
than 20 years from now We all remember
the phenomenal rise In livestock production
during World War 11. This was accomplished
tinder the Incentive of an almost Insatiable
demand. To attain the livestock production
anticipated for 1975, we would need to in-
crease output at about two-thirds the an-
nual rate of increase of the war years. Vtir

^

peacetime, this Is a tremendous opportunity.
It Involves growth over a period af two dec-
ades, not a spurt of Just a fev- years. It
involves an annual Increase one and a half
times the rate of growth from tlie mid-for-
ties to the early fifties.

Tour is the most expandable |)art of our
farm market. Our people will buy more live-
stock products If they are priced right and
the quality Is right.

We know that when the American house-
wife bu>-s milk, meat, and eggs, she Is not
merely buying food for the faDiUy, she Is
buying taste and convenience as well. You
as livestock producers are facing \ real chal-
lenge. Y'our production efficiency will play
o less a role In the market of the future

an will be played by processing and mar-
keting efficiency. You have got t4:> keep up
to date. You can no more rest content with
outmoded farm and ranch management than
a manufacturer can be content to go along
with the matvagemcnt practices of prewar
days.

Increased research on nutrition, dlseass
control, tietter breeding, more pr:>Atable u.se
of byproducts and Improved ma: ketlng will
help lower production costs and smooth the
flow of livestock products Into consumption.

Here In the West, cattle feeding has ex-
panded rapidly and has taken on a distinc-
tive character. The number ol cattle on
feed In the West this past Jan .lary 1 was
3';, times the l»3&-34 average. .Nearly one-
third of all fed cattle market>-d in 1956
came from Western States. You- feeding Is
resourcefully designed to utilize .^ variety of
feeds that Uke the place of thi; Midwest's
plentiful corn Feeding Is a more specialized
enterprise here In the We^t. Your cattle are
fed faster for quicker sale, and t.ie turnover
rate in feedlou U higher. Tlirough ex-
panded feedii^ of cattle, western producers
sre taking advantage not only of their own
fast-growing western market tor beef but of
the Increased demand for fed l>eeves with
finish.

All of our farmers — all of our people — har*
a vital stake in reaching the objective — aa
expanding, prosperous, and free agriculture.
But I can think of no group in Amfrlca to
which this objective Is more essential than
It Is to you producers of livestock. Ws can
have a more dynamic and prosperous agri-
culture. We can have a free agriculture.
To achlsvs It we must plan ahead now.
There Is no room for complacency. Ths
agricultural revolution has made the price
support, acreage -control program obsolete.
Let us reexamine the old basic luw. We arc
now ready for the next step forward.

Here In America we have the world's high-
est level of material living — and It is the
product of an expanding, proqterous, and
free economy.

But the history of nations presents this
shocking picture. As nations become more
prosperous — as their standard of living in-
creases— they become more Interested in
preserving luxuries and comforts than the
Ideals and principles which made them great.
Any nation which would trade freedom for
security deserves neither and will lose txDth.

God forbid that this should happen to our
agriculture or to our Nation.

We are a prosperous people today because
of a free enterprise founded on spiritual, not
material, values. Free enterprise Is bassd
on freedom of choice — free agency — an
eternal God -given principle. The Founding
Fathers. Inspired though they were, did not
Invent the priceless blessing of individual
freedom and respect for the dignity of man.
No, that priceless gift to mankind sprang
from tha God of Heaven and not from gov-
•mmant. The Founding Fathers welded to>
gether tbs safeguards as best they could, but
freedom must b« eontlnually won to be
rstalned.

R7'l«

rONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECCMU) — HOUSE

8737

With the belp of a kind providence tet ua
get on — now — with tha )ob of building a
prosperous, expanding, and free agriculture
In a prosperous, expanding, and free Ameri-
ca—an Amerlcji which Is economically, so-
cially, and spiritually sound.

Rider CoUcf c ConnoKencat Addmi by
Hon, AUa BiUe, of NctsiU

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. H. ALEXANDER SMITH

or wxw jzssrr
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

Monday. June 10, 1957

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. Presi-
dent, on Sunday, June 8, Rider College
in Trenton, N. J., bad its 92d commence-
ment. On that occasion honorary de-
grees were conferred by the college on
our distingnished colleagnes, the Senior
Senator from New Hampshire [Mr,
Bridges], who because of his recent In-
disposition was unable to be present ; the
junior Senator from Nevada [Mr. BibleJ,
and myself.

In Senator Bribcks' enforced absence,
Senator Biblb made an outstanding and
sipniflcant commencement address. It
was a great pleasure for us In New Jer-
sey to have Senator Bible with us. and I
a&k unanlmoiu consent that his address
be published In the Concrkssicnal

RJCCOID.

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the Recorp,
as follows:

Spzkch GrvEic bt Senatob BiBtx at Rma.

COLLXCE, TtENTOW, N. J.. JCNE 9. 1967

It is an honor and a prlvUege for me to
appear at the oommenoement exerdaes ol
Blder Collefe.

This day bekngs to the graduates of the
class of 1957 and to the parents whose sacrl-
flces have made It posslUe for this goal to
be reached. I hope that erery one of you
vui pause to suOeieiiUy appreciate and to
say thanks for the help you have recetved.

Graduates of Rider CoUege have much of
which they can Im proud. 8tnce 1865, Rider
has grown from a smaU business college to
the fine Institution which you know today.
It Is my understaxtdii^ that Rider is emtuirk-
Ing on a • 10 mUlkn buUdtns project which
win give your school one of the finest
campuses in the East. This Is a ^JgntftrTurt,
sign of the progress being made by Rider.
You can face the future oonAdentiy with tbe
reallsatton that you have received excellent
preparation here at Rtater CoUeKe.

The word "commencement" which Is used
to describe these ceremonies means a "be-
ginning ' In this senss. today is a begln-
nmg for you who are about to be graduated.
I do rxit Intend to Impose on your time. I
promUe to be brief. I weU remember my
college days, and I think I know the part of
the program for which ytra are waiting.

Tod are a selected gtoap. Ton were se-
lected for admission to this ooUege. Tou
were screened UM-ough 4 years ot study. Tou
have been given an opportunity. Tou haw
attained an objective. At the same time, you
have assumed a responsibility which you
cannot lightly disregard. As Thomas Hux-
ley said, "The greatest end of life is not
knowledge hut actton."

The faculty of this college has equipped
you with the Imowledge. Sometimes at con-

Cin 550

slderable pain to you and. I gnsprrt. some
irritation to them. Tour equipment is ex-
cellent. Tou cannot plead ignorance to your
XeUow men. Tou must accept the duty and
responsibility which, although not contained
to the wording of your degree, is, neverthe-
less, clearly your obligation.

As you leave this campus and seek employ-
ment in different parts of the United States
or. Indeed, the world, the direct test of what
you have learned here will be demonstrated
by your dally actions. All of you are in-
telligent or you could never have completed
the course of academic studies which has
been presented in the seminars and lecture
rooms of this college.

I suggest to you, however, that your dis-
tinguished faculty has not been teaching
subject matter alone. They have been
teaching young men and women. They have
been instilling in you the principles of fidel-
ity, honesty, moral courage, industry, in-
tegrity, and loyalty. These facets of yottf*
education are eternal. The subject matter
changes — the learning process is constant if
one would keep apace to today's world. But
a freeman who thinks like a freeman, who
talks like a freeman, and acts like a free-
man will remain a freeman in prosperity, in
adversity — whatever the future may bring.
It Is fashionable today to decry the times
la which we live. I hold to the theory, as
expressed by the English historian Macaulay.
that: "Those wIk) ocnnpare the age In which
their lot has fallen with a golden age which
exists only in imagination, may talk of de-
generacy and decay; but no man who is cor-
rectly Informed as to the past, will be dis-
posed to take a morose or desponding view
of the present."

Personally, I know that the present Is a
great Improvement over the past; I am con-
fident about the present, and I am optimistic
about the future. This Is my belief, and I
fasTe dedicated what talents I have toward
it. I hold no In-lef with those wlio Iwat tbelr
breasts and say that our civilization is going
to Hades in a handbasket and that the
decline of the West is in progress.

To me the future of this Nation belongs
to the youth. As I have witnessed, through-
out tlM length and breadth of this land, the
education of young men and women, dedi-
cated to love of country and service to hu-
manity. I am personally confident that the
future is in good tiands.

I do not mean to suggest that the road
which you will travel in the years ahead
Is an easy one. Tou will face adversity in
many forms. There wUl be momenta when
your eotnage Is shaken and you will be torn
with Indecision. Tbese are facts which you
must recognize.

I do suggest, however, thst during those
moments of douht the spiritual quality of
you, as Americans, achieves Its greatest sig-
nificance.

There ts no one among tis who can deny
that the affairs of men are guided by the
hand of a Creator. It Is inoonoeivable — as
a matter of personal phUosophy — that this
spiritual hand which guides us will permit
the destruction of this Nation before Its
mission to hunuinlty and God is achieved.
I draw strength from this concept, even in
the darkest hours of decision.

Whatever the sacrifices, I have no doubt
as to the ultimate outcome In the struggle
between a philosophy dedicated to the im-
provement of man as opposed to one which
seeks only to destroy him. H. G. Wells once
said: "Human history becomes more and
more a race between education and catas-
trophe." To me, this is a race which cah
liare only one outcome. Zducatlon will con-
quer.

To avoid despondency and despair, one has
only to consider the progress that has been
made In the last century in human relations.
Iiess than 100 jears ago, there was human

alavery in these United States. Tbday, that
very thought is intolerable. Women were
regarded as chattels without political eqiul-
Ity. That, too. has disappeared.

The concept of attempting to seek solu-
tions to world problems on a world basis had
not yet been born. Today we have the United
Nations. It remains our responsibility to be
constructively crUical of the United Nations
la the hope that it can tw zxiade to work
better. There is no doubt that without the
deliberately obstructive tactics of the Soviet
Union much more process toward peace
could have been nukde. Tou probably know
that of the 81 United Nations vetoes in the
last 11 years, 78 were cast by Russia. Perhaps
by a realistic appraisal of the situation, we
can go forward despite the Communists. Im-
perfect though tiie United Nations is today,
it is a vehicle for the exchange of Ideas and
discussion of mutual problems. We are at
least trying.

In the field of medical science more spe-
cific achievements have been made. What
would Abraham Lincoln and his wife. Mary.
iiave given for $fi worth of antibiotics when
their son died? What would Calvin and
Grace Cooiidge have given for a few dosen
culfur tablets when the precious life of their
eon was being drained away by septicemia?
What would thousands of parents have given
for the miracle drugs of today which were
not available while their children were being
atrlcken with diseases of diphtheria, pneu-
monia, tetanus, and others which are almost
unknown to modern parents. Perhaps today
with the Salk vaccine we are on the thresh-
old of a new victory of man over disease.

Each generation feels as though it has not
done a proper job in the conduct of lis
affairs. Each generation feels as though It
Jias burdened its children with its own mla-
takes. This eternal conscience which never
lets us rest is in itself an Indication of the
striving for Improvement which characterize*
our society.

Of ooxirse, there are problems, and very
serious ones. Today's problems are perhaps
the most complex the world has ever known.
They do not yield to simple solutions.

There is the problem of tv^nnmiiniBm i
regard this atheistic philosophy not as a
government in any sense of the word but
as a great international conspiracy aimed at
world conquest and domination. It chal-
lenges the very survival of this Nation and
all the people of the free world. I wovild
not appease communism by any action which
sacrifices one Inch of free land, one human
Ufa or one American principle.

I believe that whenever any free indi-
vidual is forced into bondage, to that degree
America becomes enslaved. Bo long as I
am able, I shall oppose communism with
all the resotu'ces at my disposal.

If the world is to be free, young men and
women like you must carry on the fight long
after I and others Uke me have disappeared.

Aa a citizen, aware of the dangers whicb
threaten our way of life, you young men
may be called upon to serve In the Armed
Forces of your Nation. Just as the pioneer
Davy Crodcett instructed his sons In wood-
craft and in the handling of weapons for
their own protection against hostile savages.
ymsT country must train you for your own
safety and the security of your loved ones.

It would be pleasant if the world had
reached the point wbere no danger existed.
It we«kl be desirable If you men eould be
allowed to get on with your ehoaen careers
and not have to devote a portion Of your
time to mflttary training. The present
necessity, however, Is not one of our mak-
ing. Tou must, therefore, accept your ctvto
responalUllty of mUttary service wtHi the
realisation that Its ultimate purpoae Is your
self-perpetuation. Ttiis Is one of tlie real-
ities of the times In which you live.

J

■ 1

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

ft7.^

8738

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 10

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

873d

M

*i

,1

11

There la also the problem of atomic eriergy.
This powerful sovtrce of energy la viewed by
some as a threatening monster which will
destroy the world. We know that the "atom"
has no morala, no ethics. It Is a natural
force like any other which can be used for
good or evil.

It Is man directed and Its u.<»e will reflect
the character of thoee who guide It.

I personally feel that the possession of
nuclear weapons, and the ability to deliver
them, by the United States restrained the
Communists from overrunning all Western
Europe, and allowed sufficient time for free
people to raise their own defenses.

I envision great strides In the benign
applications of atomic energy In medicine,
biology, agriculture and Industry. I am
convinced that as the years go by the benefits
to mankind will be enormous and will dwarf
Into Insignificance the weapons aspect of
this physical phenomenon.

If my vision Is to be realized, there must be
dedicated realistic men who have enough
commonsense to protect us from destruction
while we forge ahead in the cause of hu-
manity.

There is the problem of Individual re-
■ponslblUty. There has grown up a cult
throughout the world, and to a considerable
degree In our land, of thoee who believe
that government should accept the complete
r-'sponslblUty for the lives of Its citizens.

Those people all have one thing In com-
mon. They want something for nothln*.
They want to spend more than they make;
reduce taxes and Increa-^e benertts.

Their beliefs are In direct opposition tn
the political philosophy which made this
Nation great. The new order which was
given to the world In 1778 was based up<m
the philosophy that man was a rational ani-
mal, that given opportunity he could ta^e
care of himself without Injuring his neigh-
bors; that he had certain Inalienable rights
which government could not diminish or
circumscribe.

The only true security Is in the dally sat's-
factlrn of a Job well done. One has only to
reac' the dally paper to realize that no man
knovs when he will die. Life Is not measured
In years alone or by material acquisitions,
rather In terms of service, accomplishments,
and spiritual rewards. Better to have lived
for 50 years enjoying fully every second of
the time; doing great deeds; winning the
love of friends and neighbors; than to eke
out a miserable existence for a century where
life was an empty pulp.

The problem basically has been stated In
the Scriptures, "Bread cast upon the waters
returns a thousandfold."

It was also said: "Give and you shall re-
ceive."

If you give of yourself In the service of
others, you will be rewarded accordingly.

I get very restless with those who con-
stantly apologize for the American system.
Of course there are Inequities and Injustices
which should be corrected. Americans
should support every constructive suggestion
for the refinement of our social system.
Nevertheless, I am conscious that our society
has provided more opportunity for spiritual
and material development of humanity than
has ever before been possible.

E>e8tructlve critics of our way of life annoy
me. They are so busy lookuiR at the few
spots of mud that they never lift their eyes
and observe the blue sky above.

Every privilege In this world carries with
It a responsibility. Every opportunity Im-
plies an obUgatlun. Every pusses^lou haa
ttffl-xed a duty.

Whether or not the sphere of righteous-
ness extends rapidly or slowly In your life-
time, will ultimately depend on the attitude
each of you adopts. Never were there greater
ch.illenges. Never was there more opportu-
nity.

It haa been said that there are three in-
gredients In a good life: Learning, earning,
and yearning.

Here at Rider, you have been given th«
opportunity and the equipment of learning.
When you leave this Institution you will be-
gin the process of earning — earning not only
material things but earning the respect, the
love, and the friendship of people with whom
you associate. To a tremendous degree, your
future, and the future of your generation.
win depend upon the things for which you
yearn. If you yearn for freedom. Individual
responilblUty. and opportunity, you and your
children shall have It. You can transmit the
legacy you Inherited. It Is within your power
to make future generations refer to the last
half of the 20th century as "the golden age."*

This country and the free world needs
leadership. We dont need people who are
willing only to become one of the crowd; we
need men and women who are individuals
and who stand for Individual principles.
God give us wisdom to profit fr. m the mis-
takes of yesterday; God give us courage to
lace the problems of today; God give ua
Vision to plan for the challenges of tomorrow.

Vice President Nixon's Michif an State
University CommenccBent Address

EXTENSION OP REM.ARKS
or

HON. CHARLES E. CHAMBERUIN

or MICHIGAN

IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 10. 1957

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker,

the people of Michieian and the Sixth
Congressional District were honored yes-
terday when the Vice President of the
United States, the Honorable Rich.^rd M.
Nixon, addressed the graduating class
at the 99th annual commencement of
Michigan Slate University at East
Lansing.

The Vice Pre«:ident's analysis of cur-
rent governmental question.s in terms of
permanent intellectual principles and
each individuals civic re<^ponsibilities
merit the attention of Members of Con-
gress. The question now before the
House, the civil-ri«hts bill, is most par-
ticularly a case in point. Also, the clear
and concise statements on foreign aid.
labor legislation, and the Khrushchev
challenge, should be carefully examined
by each Member of the House as well as
all citizens.

The Vice President's address follows:
Address or the Vick PREsrorNT or thl UNrrED

St\TE3 at THE 99th A.NNfAL COMMENCE-
MENT. Michigan State Universitt, EUst
Lansing, Mich , Jvni 9, 1957

I hope that each member of this graduat-
ing class wyi make a personal and lifetime
commitment to take an active piu-t in the
political life of your communities.

Some of you should run for office. Don't
avoid your responsibility In this respect with
the usual excuse that politics Is a dirty busi-
ness. If you believe It is, get Into It and
do stjmething about It.

Those of you who do not make politics a
career can participate on a volunteer basis
in the political activities of the party of your
choice. I can assure you that both of our
major parties can use and need new blood
and new leadership.

All of you can help create the Intelligent
and iitXornied puoiic opinion which is essen-

tial If a democracy la to turrlve. The two
most dangerous enemlea of eucceasful demo-
cratic government are Ignorance and preju-
dice. Tou are particularly qualified by your
background and experience to fight and de-
feat them in the communities tn which you
live.

Thoae of you who become doctors, lawyers,
teachers, engineers, businessmen, home-
makers, win be tempted to adopt the atti-
tude: Why borrow trouble? Don't take a
position on controversial Issues If you do,
always support what appears to t>e the popu-
lar side of the question.

I urge you today not to fall Into that error.
Have the courage to take a pt^ltlon on the
great Issues of our time. And In doing so,
don't let a Gallup poll make up your mind
for you. What may be the easy or popular
answer to a hard question may not always
be the right one. If you believe what ap-
pears to be an unpopular position Is the
right one. make It your business to make It
the popular one.

Now I realize what I have Just satd
amounts to nt. thing more than pious plati-
tudes unless we get down to caaei. Let me
be specific by discussing some of the con-
troversial Issues on the Washington scene
today.

You have been reading and hearing at>out
the labor racketeering Investigation being
conducted by the McCleixan committee.
We can all agree that this Investigation U
serving a useful purpose in exposing the
activities of union officials who broke faith
with their union membership. The hear-
ings are being conducted with dignity and
fairness In the very best tradition of Con-
gressional Investigations. They have served
to remind us that no leader of government,
business, or labor Is so big or so powerful that
he cannot be made to account for his actions
before the elecud represenuuvea of the
people.

Now. however, we come to the more dlfll-
cult question. What legislation should be
passed to avoid such abuses In the future?
Public opinion at this momenw would prob-
ably support legislation of the most drastic
character which would have the effect of
curbing legitimate union activities as well
as the abuses that have been exposed In
these hearings. The tendency for most
people U probably to go along with this
prevailing sentiment.

But what Is the right thing to do? Organ-
ized labor today is going through a period
of trial comparable to that endured by the
business community 20 years ago. Its lead-
ership Is being scrutinized and tested. Some
union leaders have been shown to have failed
badly In their positions of trust.

But we should not repeat the mistake of
20 years ago and blame an entire move-
ment for the blunders and crimes of a
minority. Rather we should help outraged
union members to restore honesty and In-
tegrity to their unions. The protection of
the Integrity of union welfare funds and the
Insurance of democratic procedures In the
conduct of union business are among the
objectives which Congress should properly
consider In determining what legislation
should be adopted. The aim of any legis-
lation In this field must not t>e to weaken
or destroy unions, but to give union mem-
bers the tools they need to make all union*
follow the good practices which many unions
follow today.

I would go further and suggest that this
Is a golden opportunity for American busi-
ness men to encourage and make friends of
the honest and sincere men who constitute
the great majority of union officers. Now la
the time to build lasting good will in labor
relations, rather than to ostracize all union
leadership, good or bad, and create the con-
ditions which would lead to bitter Industrial
strife in the years ahead.

Let ua turn to tbe International field for
our second controversial laaue. We have Just
Blgned an ajfreement to send t»5 mlllton
worth of surplus a«rtcultural commodltiee
to Poland. Should the Congrees appropri-
ate the necessary fuxMla to carry otit thla
agreement?

The first reaction of perhaps a majority
of people would Im Uia^ to eeod aid to a
Communist country Is not only wrong but
fooilsh. Why should the Ainerlcen people
be taxed to help a nation which might be
alined against ua In the event of a conflict?

But how will the Interesta of the United
States best be served in this instance? Let
m look at the situaUon In Poland at this
time There la no queatlon but that Poland
i& a Communist country. But the Polish peo-
ple have been dlaplaytng increasing evidence
of their determination to follow a course
Independent of the Soviet Union.

In re^ponFe to that popular sentiment, the
leaders of the Polish Government have been
trying to soften the features of communism
that do the most violence to human nature.

The churches of Poland have much greater
freedom than In the past and the cardinal
primate of Poland Is allowed not only to exer-
cise his function but to leeve the country at
wUl. The powers of the secret police have
been substantially reduced. While the Pol-
ish press is not free by any means by our
standards. It has a greater degree of freedom
now than It has had In many years. Some
farmers have been allowed tn own their
fttrm.s— a marked deviation from strict Com-
nui n 15 1- theory practice.

These, then, are our alternatives:

We can drive the Polish people and Gov-
ernment back to complete domination by
Moscow In the hopes that Poland will then
be an economic burden on the Soviet Union.
If we follow this course, we are. In effect,
saying that there Is no evolutionary road to
Independence for a people dominated by com-
munism and that violent revolution la their
on if resort If they want to t>e free.

Our other alternative la to help Poland pro-
gress toward greater Internal freedom and
increasing independence from the Soviet
Union with the hope that Communists In
other lands will see tiiat freedom, and free-
dom alone, brings out the best qualities In
men. We do thla not because we approve
of communism, but because we believe that
the explosive power of freedom Is great
enough to deaUoy onmtuirtem once it la
given a chance to flourish.

In making this decision we are under no
illusions that our policy is certain to suc-
ceed. The Polish people and Government
might still be forced back under the com-
plete domination of the Soviet Union. But
certainly here is a gamble worth taking. If
because of our action the movement toward
Independence and freedom la enabled to re-
main alive and to grow in Poland, the other
satellite countries will have an example
which they in tarn can follow.

We sbouM favor any step that will promote
freedom and even limited Independence in a
Commuatst state. By onr action we will be
announcing to the world that we are not writ-
ing off the Pollah people or any of the other
millions who are held In bondage behind the
Iron Curtain.

A related controversial lasvie tn the Inter-
national field will soon be debated on the
floor of the Senate. It is the question of what
we should do about our foreign aid programs.
Here again the snap Judgment of many people
might well be — why should the Cot\gress ap-
propriate our hard-earned tax dollars to aid
people In other lands? We often hear the
term "giveaway" applied to this whole pro-
gram.

It Is relatively easy to develop public sup-
port for the military phase of thla program.
When we realise that It costs on an average S
tlnies as much for the maintenance of an
American soldier abroad aa it does for a fight-

ing man of the aUlas we aixL it Is obvious that
a vote to cm foreign military aid la not a vote
for economy but la actually a vote for larger
budgets In the years ahead.

It tant • questtoB of wbether each ooun-
trles aa Korea, Formoea, Indochina, Pakictan,
and Turkey, wlileh Iw^e coimnon borders
with the Communist world, shcruld have ade-
quate <lefeine forces. We learned In Korea
that If they are attadced. we will become In-
volved.

T^e qtiestlon Is how the necessary forces
can most economically and effectively be
■aalntalned.

Two and eight-tenths billion doltars In for-
eign military aid results directly In at least
$15 billion worth of defense for ourselves and
the Free World. These conclusloas, then, are
inevitable. Cuts In our military aid pro-
gram will result In more taxes and expendi-
tures for the American people rather than
less. And spending less for aid abroad would
not only mean more dollars for defense at
home but it would Inerltably mean more
American boys in uniform

I am confldert that the Senate will follow
the lead of Its Foreign Eelatlons Committee
In refusing to make substantial cuts in the
amounts requested by the President for this
program and that the American people, as
they know the facts, will overwhelmingly
support that decision.

But let ua turn now to a far more difficult
phase of our foreign aid program. The Pres-
ident has asked for a bllllcm dollars for the
purpose of foreign economic assl stance pro-
grams The greater part of this money will
not go to nations allied with the United
States militarily. Most of it will go to coun-
tries In Africa, the Near East and Asia
wlilch are uncommitted or neutral tn the
world struggle.

How can we Justify spending the taxpay-
ers' money In this way?

Let \u examine the breakdown of the
peupto In the world today. The world Is
roughly divided Into thirds, both in area and
in population — one-third free, one-third
Communist, and one-third uncommitted.
The Communists know that if they can win
a substantial part of the 700 million people
who live in the unoommltted u>eafl of Asia
and Africa to their side they will not have to
fight a war in order to achieve world domi-
nation. If they succeed tn this objective, the
overwhelming majority of the world's people
will tie under Communist control and the
Free World will be denied access to economic
resources essential for our survival. *

I have visited most of these countries. I
have talked to their leaders and to their
peoples. After centuries of poverty they are
determined to have ecooorolc progress which
will lead to a better life. They would prefer
to have this progress and retain their in-
dependence and freedom. But make no mis-
take about it. If we give them no other
choice they will be forced to turn to the
Commtmlst world for help.

The Communists know thla. That Is why
they are making every effort to meet the
needs of these countries for education, tech-
nical assistance and political advice. And
that is why we are spending a billion dollars
a year for our econamic and intormatlon
programs.

I have seen our program In action. TTiere
has been some waste and Inefflclency in their
administration. But wtien we consld^ the
tremendous stakes involved we can only oon-
elude that the remedy for these dlfflcultiea
and errors Is to try to do a more effective
Job and not to give up and let the Soviet
Union start taking ovar tba world.

Mr. Khrushchev In hla television broad-
east to the American people last SutMtay
predicted that our grandchildren wotild live
under socialism. By socialism ha. of course,
meant the communism we see In the Soviet
Union today. But he signlfleantly added

that the Soviet Union would win the struggle
for the world through other than military
means.

The greatest danger ttie Free World faces
today is not defeat or surrender In war. It
Is defeat by means other than war. When we
consldar the fact that the Communist World
haa gained 800 million people since World
War n without the Soviet Union being In-
volved directly In war we can see the danger
that oonfronts us. If we allow the Conusu-
nlats to win the uncommitted areas of the
world, the balance of power and resources
and men will be such that the Free World
will be strangled Into submission by the
Oommimist World.

The billion dollars we are spending for
economic assistance to these uncommitted
areaa, therefore. Is an Investment in our owa
freedom and Independence. It Is the pre-
mlmn we pay to Insure our survival as a free
people.

May I turn finally to a controversial but
vital domestic issue which has a far greater
effect on our foreign policy than nuuiy of
us realize. I have referred to the great battle
which Is going on in the world for the al-
legiance of the peoples in the uncommitted
nations.

These people are alike in several respects.
Their economies are underdeveloped. Most
of them are newly independent. All of them
belong to races which are not white. I can
testify from personal observation and experi-
ence' that even more than Independence
and economic progress the people of Asia and
Africa want and deserve recognition of their
equal dignity as individuals and as nations
in the world community.

We can tell them, as we do, that we re-
spect that dignity and that we consider them
to be our moral, political, and social equals.
But the Impression people have of America
abroad is determined more by what we do
than what we say. And the question that
is inevitably asked Is: Do you really believe
in equality when you practice racial dis-
crimination in your own country?

Now the easy answer to this question la
either to ignore the problem or to say "Let
the Government do it." There are some
things the Government can do In this field.
The enactment of the civil-rights bill new
before Congress would be an effective step
toward tlvtng up to our democratic Ideals.

But, in the final analysis, legislation will
not solve the problem vrlth which we are
confronted. A law is only as good aa the
B^ll of people to obey it. And this must
come from the hearts of people themselves.

In every community where racial tensions
exist today — and let me emphasize that this
Is not a problem which is limited to the
South — there is need for moderate, eonstruc-
tive action by people of both races. We must
not allow the extremists and demagogs to
take over tills field by default.

It Is only through the willlngnees of pub-
lic-spirited citizens In all walks of life to
assume personal responsibility for removing
the causes of racial prejudice that we can
assure the progress that eventually will make
the American dream of equality of c^portu-
nlty a reality for all of our citizens.

In discussing some controversial issues
today, I would not like to leave the impres-
sion that we should be skeptical or discour-
aged as to the eventual outcome of this great
struggle which la going on between the tcacea
of freedom and slavery In the world today.

We are going to win. We are going to win
beeatise we are on the right side, the side of
freedom, Justice, belief in God against the
forces of slavery, Injustioe, and atheism.

I know ttkat the members of this class
will be a mighty force in your ooBununttle*
and in this Nation in developing the en-
lightened public opinion which vtrlll support
our national leaders as they continue to work
for the cause of Independence, freedom, and
peace.

f
I

8740

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

i

V

SENA11

Tuesday, June 11, 1957

The Senate met at 9:30 a. m.

The Chaplain, Rev. Frederick Brown
Harris. D. D., offered the following
prayer:

Almighty God. eternal love. Thou
source of all life and light, we would
yield our flickering torch to Thee. Amid
all the confusions and uncertainties in
the realm of national debate and deci-
sion, wp bow in this hallowed shrine of
our dear-bought liberties to listen for
the still small voice. We are grateful for
the Republic's inspiring witness that our
democratic processes run so deep that
they are not disturbed even by the global
dislocations of these violent days and
that our America still stands with lamp
held aloft, a beacon of freedom for all
the earth.

Pacing now unfinished tasks calling
for courage and sacrifice and wisdom,
U{X)n all public servants who. sharing
the heavy load of these epochal days,
shape our policv and guide our destiny,
pour, we pray Thee, in double measure
Thy enabling grace. In the vital deci-
sions which even now are lifting them-
selves above the horizon, keep our goals
clear, our hearts pure, our spirits coura-
geous, as we never turn our backs but
march breast forward. We ask It in
thy Name that is above every name.
Amen.

THE JOURNAL

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the Journal
of the proceedings of Monday. June 10.
1957. was approved, and its reading was
dispensed with.

COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING
SENATE SESSION

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
the Subcommittee on Welfare and Pen-
sion Fund Legislation of the Committee
on Labor and Public Welfare and the
Subcommittee of the Government Oper-
ations Committee holding hearings on
Senate bill 6 were authorized to meet
during the session of the Senate today.

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the Com-
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce was authorized to meet today dur-
ing the session of the Senate.

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas.
and by unanimous consent, the Com-
mittee on Finance was authorized to
meet during the session of the Senate
today.

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the Subcom-
mittee on Government Contracts of the
Committee on Government Operatior^s
and the Subcommittee on Public Lands
of the Committee on Interior and Insu-
lar Affairs were authorized to meet dur-
ing the session of the Senate today.

to the consideration of executive busi-
ness.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to consider executive
business.

EXECUTIVE REPORT OP A
COMMITTEE

The following favorable report of a
nomination was submitted:

By Mr. LAUSCHX. from the Committee on
Banking and Currency:

Andrew Downey Orrlck. of California, to be
a member of the Securities and Bxcbanga
Commission.

The VICE PRESIDENT. If there be
no further rep>orts of committees, the
nominations on the calendar will be
called.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

The Chief Clerk read the nomination
of Robert Van Pelt to be United States
district judge for the district of
Nebraska.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, the nomination is confirmed.

UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS

The Chief Clerk proceeded to read sun-
dry nominations of United States at-
torneys.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I ask unan-
imous consent that tiie nominations be
considered en bloc.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, the nominations of district at-
torneys will be considered en bloc: and.
without objection, the nominations are
confirmed.

UNITED STATES MARSHALS

The Chief Clerk proceeded to read
sundry nominations of United States
marshals.

Mr. JOHNdON of Texas. I ask unani-
mous consent that the nominations be
con.<=idered en bloc.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, the nominations of United States
marshals will be considered en bloc; and,
without objection, the nominations are
confirmed.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I ask unani-
mous consent that the President be Im-
mediately notified of all nominations
confirmed today.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, it is so ordered.

LEGISLATIVE SESSION

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I move that
the Senate resume the consideration of
legislative business.

The motion was agreed to: and the
Senate resumed the consideration of
legislative business.

EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I move that the Senate proceed

LIMITATION OP DEBATE DURING
MORNING HOUR

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, under the rule, there will be the
usual morning hour for the transaction

of routine business. I ask unanlmoua
consent that statements made in con-
nection with the business of the morn-
ing hour be limited to 3 minutes.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, it is so ordered.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS.
ETC.

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the
Senate the following communication
and letters, which were referred as Indi-
cated:

Amxndmxnt to thk BTTDcrr. LaoisuiTiva
BaANCR (S. Doc. No. 44)
A communication from the President of
the United States, transmitting an amend-
ment to the budget for the Cscal year 1058.
Involving an Increase In the amount of
•30.000 for the legislative branch (with an
accompanying paper); ;o the Committee on
Appropriations, and ordered to be printed.

RmJLDttnaa or ItmxjsnxAL Capacttt rem.
Detcnsi P«oductiom
A letter from the Sfcretary of the Army,
transmitting a draft of proposed legislation
to provide for the readiness of Industrial
capacity for defense production and moblll-
Batlon reserve purposes, and for other pur-
poses (with accompanying papers); to thm
Committee on Armed Services.

PaoMonoN rot Ckbtaiw Omcna m th«
Naval Snvicx

A letter from the Assistant Secretary of
the Navy, transmitting a draft of proposed
legislation to provide improved opportunity
for promotion for certain officers in the naval
service, and for other purposes (with accom-
panying papers) ; to the Committee on Armed
Services.

8rm,Ei€nrr or Claim fob Damaoi to
Stkamship "CrrT or Kabachi"
A letter from the Acting Secretary of the
Treasury, reporting, pursuant to law, pay-
ment to the City Line, Ltd., Glasgow. Scot-
land, In full settlement of a claim for dam-
age to the steamship Citj/ of Karachi, In-
curred on August 18, 1955; to the Committee
on the Judiciary.

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS

PeUUons. etc. were laid before the
Senate, or presented, and referred as in-
dicated :

By the VICE PRESIDENT:
A Joint resolution of the Legislature of
the State of California; to the Committee
on Appropriations:

"Senate Joint Resolution 30
"Joint resolution relative to the Federal

budget
"Whereas the proposed peacetime budget
of the Federal Government has now reached
the unprecedented sum of almost $72 blUlon;
and

•Whereas approximately one-thlfd of the
Income of the Nation Is now paid out to
the various levels of government In the form
of taxes: and

'Whereas this volume of taxes and ex-
penditures Is Imposing an Intolerable burden
on the working people of the Nation, espe-
cially the young people who have no In-
come except what they earn by their toll
and sweat: Now, therefore, be It

•Rfiohed by the Senate and Assembly
of the State of California {jointly). That the
Legislature of the Sute of California re-
spectfully memorializes the President and
the Congress of the United States to reduce
the proposed Federal budget to manageable

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8741

proportions so that the tremendoiis tax
burden on the citizens may be eased; and
be It further

■•Resolved. That the Secretary of the Sen-
ate be hereby directed to transmit copies
of this resolution to the President and Vice
President of the United States, to the 8p>eak-
er of the House of Representatives, and to
each Senator and Representative from Cal-
ifornia In the Congress of the United States."

A Joint resolution of the legislature of
the Bute of California; to the Committee on
Interior and Insular Affairs:

"Senate Joint Resolution 18
"Joint resolution relative to the extension
of the Folsom South Canal within the
counties of Sacramento and San Joaquin.
State of California

"Whereas the expanding economy of Sacra-
mento and San Joaquin Counties requires
that supplemental supplies of water be de-
livered Into said counties; and

"Whereas many public agencies of the two
counties. Including Gait Irrigation District,
North San Joaquin Water Conservation Dis-
trict. Stockton East San Joaquin Water Con-
servation District. Clay Water District, Elk
Grove Irrigation District, Woodbrldge Water
Users Conservation District, Sacramento
County Water Agency, and San Joaquin
County Flood Control and Water Conserva-
tion District, have shown grave concern as
to their need for such supplemental water
BuppUes by making applications for water
to appropriate State and Federal agencies,
and otherwise: and

"Whereas said public agencies have an ulti-
mate need for not less than 800.000 acre-feet
of supplemental water for use of the lands
and the Inhabitants thereof within their
boundaries; and

"Whereas the United Sutes Government
has constructed Folsom Dam and reservoir
and Nimbus Dam and reservoir which can
provide needed supplemental supplies In the
two counties and the Honorable John J. Mc-
Fall and the Honorable John E. Moss have
Introduced bills, H. R. 4580 and H. R. 4584
in the 85lh Congress, 1st session, to authorize
construction of the Folsom South Canal to
serve the lands of said public agencies; and
"Whereas construction of Nashville Reser-
voir on the Cosumnes River would augment
needed water supplies In the Irrigable areas
of Sacramento and San Joaquin counties as
well as control damaging floodwi.ters which
now waste into San Francisco Bay; and

"Whereas the construction and operation
of Nashville Reservoir and the operation of
said Folsom Dam and reservoir as a multi-
ple-purpose project to provide said supple-
mental water supplies to said two counties
will be consistent and compatible with its
operation for protection against ravaging
floods of lands and Improvements along the
American and Sacramento Rivers and the
8acramento-8an Joaquin DelU: Now, there-
fore, be it

"Resolved by the Senate and the Assembly
of the State of California {jointly) . That the
State of California memorializes the Con-
gress of the United States to enact legislation
to authorize the construction and operation
of said Folsom-South Canal; and be It further
•Resolved. That the State of California
urges the United States Department of the
Interior to complete as soon as practicable
the studies now In progress regarding the
proposed Nashville Reservoir; and be It
further

"Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate
be directed to transmit a copy of this resolu-
tion to the President and Vice President of
the United States, to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives, and to each Sena-
tor and Representative from California In the
Congress of the United States."

A resolution of the Senate of the State of
Oklahoma; to the Committee on Public
Works:

"Enrolled Senate Resolution 52
"A reaolutlon memorializing the Congress of
the United States and the Appropriations
Committees thereof to direct special at-
tention to the land-procurement prac-
tices of the Corps of Army Engineers In
the Oologah Dam area on the Verdigris
River in northeast Oklahoma
"Whereas the Oologah Dam on the Verdi-
gris River in northeastern Oklahoma Is In
the very early Initial phases of construction,
with work proceeding on only the first stage
embankment contract on one side of the
river, under the direction of the Corps of
Army Engineers; and

"Whereas only a few hundred acres of land
actually have l>een acquired for the project
and with condemnation proceedings now in
progress on an additional few himdreds of
acres of land; and

"Whereas this $37 million project will
finally take more than 70,000 acres of land
In a well-developed and productive agricul-
tural and ranching area, resulting In the
dislocation of several hundred farm homes
and related schools, churches, cemeteries.
Federal and State highways, county roads,
electric power lines, telephone lines, oil
transportation pipelines and gas lines; and
"Whereas the proposed lake will Inundate
and destroy the birthplace and home of the
great Oklahoman, Will Rogers, which has
become a national shrine and each year Ls
visited by thousands of Americans who have
come to love the simple and homely virtues
of this great man; and

"Whereas on the lands to be taken for the
Oologah Dam project is located a sizable por-
tion of the world's greatest shallow oUfield,
which has been producing oil continuously
since its discovery before the turn of the
century, and which today is recognized as
having been the birthplace of the oil busi-
ness in Oklahoma, the laboratory where
secondary recovery was first tried and proven
In Oklahoma and the field which has pro-
duced more oil by the water-flood repressur-
ing method of secondary recovery of oil than
In any other field in Oklahoma; and

"Whereas the United States Bureau of
Mines, in a report dated August 1, 1951,
stated that a recoverable reserve of more
than 50,000,000 barrels of oil could be pro-
duced by today's known methods from the
more than 25,000 acres of proven productive
but undeveloped lands that are to be taken
for the Oologah Dam {woject; and

"Whereas a portion of the lands to be
covered by Oologah Lake have now been de-
veloped for the production of oil and this
developed area is now producing several
thousand barrels of oil each day; and

"Whereas the developed oil lands to be
Inundated by Oologah Lake bow give em-
ployment to hundreds of oilfield workers,
pay tens of thousands of dollars each year
in taxes to the State of Oklahoma and to the
United States, and produce millions of dol-
lars worth of economic wealth annually; and
"Whereas the oilfield is served by a crude
oil purchasing company whose storage tanks,
pump stations, gathering lines and pipeline
transportation system are located on lands to
be inundated by the Oologah Lake; and

"Whereas the same crude-oil purchasing
system, tank, farms, pvunp stations and
transportation lines that will be Inundated
by Oologah Lake also serve other oil -pro-
ductive acres located on lands adjacent to
the proposed lake; and

"Whereas the engineering difficulties that
will result for the pipeline operation fol-
lowing the building of Oologah Dam and
the loss of business to the pipeline as a re-
sult of abandonment of that part of the oil-
field that wUl be Inundated by Oologah Lake
could make It improfltable and economically

Impossible to operate the pipeline oil gath-
ering system to serve the remainder of the
oilfield and with the resulting loes of a
pipeline market for that part of the oilfield
adjacent to the lake, the entire oilfield
could be forced to shut down, with a fur-
ther economic loss to the entire section of
the State; and

"Whereas congressional appropriations for
the Oologah project, which is a very minor
part of the Arkansas Basin development pro-
gram, were first made last year after almost
20 years of being seriously questioned as to
the economic feasibility and the doubtful
advisability of destroying a great known re-
coverable reserve of oil and a tremendously
rich agricultural area; and

"Whereas the farmers and ranchers and oil
producers of the Verdigris River area repeat-
edly through the years have voiced their ob-
jections to this project in personal and dele-
gation appearances before the Congressional
Appropriation Committees of both the House
and Senate; and

"Whereas proponents of the project re-
siding In other parts of (Mclahoma and other
States have envisioned great economic gains
to grouDS of people, cities and towns, trans-
portation users and great industrial organi-
zations as a result of the constnictlon of
Oologah Dam, it was also recognized that a
great displacement of people and business
operations In the Oologah Dam area must
occur If the project was to be built and,
therefore, solemn assurances were repeatedly
given to the people and business concerns to
be displaced by said Oologah Dam both by
the Congressional committees and the per-
sonnel of the Corps of Army Engineers that.
In the event of the construction of the proj-
ect, every effort would be made to see that the
people In the affected area would not be
forced to bear unjust and undue economic
hardship and loss while others are reaping
the great economic gains that proponents
have promised would result from the building
of Oologah Dam; and

"Whereas appraisals and purchases of land
and residential properties In said Oologah
Dam area are in the process of being started
at this time by the land procurement office
of the Corps of Army Engineers; and

"Whereas appraisement of property In the
Oologah Dam area is being made on the basis
of assimied values in the present location
with no consideration being given to replace-
ment cost in kind In another location; and

"Whereas appraisements of many proper-
ties In the Oologah Dam area are being made
without due recognition of the known min-
eral values In the form of valuable coal de-
posits, gas reservoirs, and oil; and

"Whereas representatives of the Corps of
Army Engineers procurement office In Tulsa,
Okla., are quoted In newspapers of recent
date as telling oil producers and mineral
owners that "only In the dam site and con-
struction area does the Goverrmient have
definite plans for buying mineral holdings
outright," but would seek only to acquire
flowage easements on minerals and "under
the fiowage easement agreements oil opera-
tors would be required to subordinate their
operations to the basic functions of the dam.
and reservoir"; and

"Whereas the appraisement and proctu"e-
ment policies being followed by the Corps of
Army Engineers in the Oologah Dam area
have met with the active and determined
opposition of the landowners as is evidenced
by the fact that the Corps of Army Engineers
only recently has found it necessary to re-
Bort to condemnation action to acquire much
of the Initially needed lands in the dam site
and construction area; and

"Whereas In the condemnation actions
pending as of this date against the land-
owners In the Immediate vicinity of the
Oolo^h Dam itself, said actions covering
more than 1,500 acres which Is underlaid with

! II

>.

J

^

I

.1

8742

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

Taluable coal depoalta. attorneys represent-
ing Uie Corpa of Army Engineers have peti-
tioned the court to take the surface land
rights and reserve to the present owners aU
mineral rights and values, and to subordi-
nate the reserved mineral rights and values
to the "prior rlghU of the United tiUtes to
flood and submerge the land as may be nec-
essary for the construction, operation, and
maintenance of said project"; and

"Whereas under several hundred acres of
•aid lands now being condemned by the Corps
of Army Engineers for the Ojlogah Dam
project, the schoolchildren of the SUte of
Oklahoma own one- half of the mineral
rights and values; and

"Whereas the schoolchildren of the State
of Oklahoma, through the trusteeship of the
State School Land Commlsalon. own thou-
sands and thou&anda of acres of mineral
rights under lands located In the remainder
of the Oologah Dam area, the Keystone Diun
area, the EuTaula Dam area and In other
areas where such projects are planned, and

"Whereas the mineral rights and values
owned by the schoolchildren of the State of
Oklahoma In t.'ie Oologah Dam area now un-
der condemnation will be forever Inundated
and the value of said mineral rights wiU
therefore be eternally lost to the schoolchil-
dren of the State of Oklahoma, and

"Whereas the sch(X)lchlidren of the State
of Oklahoma will suffer great and irreparable
loss of wealth If the Corps of Army Engi-
neers coiAtlQue. through the length aiid
breadth of the Oologah Dam area, the Key-
stone Dam area, the Eufaula Dam area and
In the other areas where like projects are
planned, this policy of taking, without pay-
ment, the mineral rights and values belu nam-
ing to the schoolchildren of the State of
Oklahoma, and by force of cundemnatloa
then subordinating those mineral rights and
yaluea to the prior rights of t.^.e L'nued
States to Qood and submerge said m.neral
rights and values. Now. therefore, be it

'Revived by the Senate of t>ie 26th,
Oklahoma Leyu^lature of the State of
Oklahoma, That we respectively ur;4»'. re-
quest, and petition the Congress ot the
United St.itcs to make such Inquiry into the
land procurement procedures of the Corps of
Army Engineers. Issue such directives. a:ul
take such action as may be necessary to in-
sure the fulfillment of the Intent of Con-
gress In the protection of the rights of the
people In the Oologah Dam area and In safe-
guarding the mineral values and n,^hts of
the schoolchildren of the State of Oklaho-
ma In accordance with the laws and Con-
stitution of the United States; ar.d be it
further

"Resolved. That the chief clerk ct the
Senate of the State of Oklahoma be directed
to send a copy of this resolution to the
President of the United States, the Vice
President of the United States, each Mem-
ber of the Congress of the United StaU's. the
Director of the Bu.'eau of the Budget of the
United States, and to the Chief of the
United States Corps of Army Engineers.

"Adopted by the Senate the 22d day of
May 1^57.

"Do.v Baij)win,

*Pr??td«»nf pro tempore of the Senate."

A letter In the nature of a memorial fr-m
Mrs Mildred F Garlow. Deer Clan Mother of
the Seneca Nation. Allegheny and Cattarau-
gus Reserves. Lewlston. N Y . remonstrating
against the construction of the Kinzua Dam
on the Allegheny River, at Klnzua. Pa , to
the Committee on Appropriations.

A re8olutU>n adopted by the San d ibrlel
Valley Republican Women's Club. Temp!e
ritv, Calif, relating to the trial of Sp3c.
William S. Glrard by a Japanese court; to the
C<immlttee on Armed Services.

A resolution adopted by the Amer1'«n!?m
committee of the American Le«rlon. First Dis-
trict. New Orleans. La., favoring the cancel-

lation of the Statti* of Forces Treaty; to the
Committee on Foreign Eielatlons.

The petition of Oe<jrge Gauas of Denver,
Colo . praying for the enactment of legisla-
tion to provide Increased pensions for re-
tired postal employees: to the Committee on
Poet Office and Civil Service

THE LATE SENATOR MCCARTHY-
RESOLUTION

Mr. CURTIS. Mr President, on
Wednesday, Ma>- 9, 1957, the Committee
on Rules and Administration adopted a
memorial resolution related tc the pass-
ing of our late collrasaie. Senator Mc-
Carthy, of Wisconsin. On b-'half of the
chairman of the committee I Mr. Hkn-
NiNGs!, and as the ranking Republican
member of the committee, I should like
to read the resolution into the Record at
thus point;

Whereas Joseph R McCarthy has been
called to rest by hla Creator; and

Whereas the people of the State of Wis-
consin as well as those of all the other
States of the Union will long remember his
dedicated service to the principles he cher-
ished: and

Whereas we his colieasr'jes on the Senate
Committee on Rules and Admlnl.<!tratlon
will ml>;s h'.s enthusiastic and rrlendly par-
tlc;pa'.!-'n In our work: Now, thereore. be It

R^^otved by the me'm^r'i of the Senate
Comm:ttee on Rule^ and Ad'ntnhtratinn ai-
se-mblrd. That we hereby express our deep
perw^nal los.^. and that we expend to his
wicl>w. hii r.»ni.;y, and other loved ones our
heartfelt sympathy

Ci'MMrrm on RTT.rs *no
.\r)M!N:sT»A-ni.'N

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

The following: reports of committees
were submitted •

By Mr M.\Ci.vU30>f . from the Committee
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, with
amendments

S 1373 A bill to amer.d section 401 (e"^
of the CtvU Aerunaut'.ca Act of 1938 In order
to authorize permanent certlBratlon for
certain air cr\r:l«T9 operating between the
United States and Alaska (Kept No. 431).

By Mr CHAVEZ, fmm the Committee on
Public Works, without amendment

S 1054 A bill to extend tlie times for
c 'nimencng and completing the constrvic-
tl m of a ti 11 bridge across the Rainy River
at or ne.ir Baudef.e, Minn (Rept. No 432).

REPORT OP JOINT COMMITTEE ON
REDUCTION OF NONESSENTIAL
FEDERAL EXPENDITURES— FED-
ERAL APPROPR LOTIONS. EXPEND-
mJRES. AND UNEXPENDED BAIr-
ANCES

Mr B'i'RD. Mr President, the Joint
Committee on Reduction of Nonessential
Federal E.xpenditures today has com-
piled a report on unexi^ended balances
remaining in appropriation accounts for
executive agencies of the Federal Gov-
ernment as of April I

The report shows the total In these
balances at that date was $89 1 billion.
F\inds av:iiiable at the start of the year
last July had been $140.2 billion. Ejcpen-
ditures throu4;h March 31 had totaled
$51.1 biUion.

The President. In his January budget,
estimated these agencies would carry
nearly $70 billion, in unexpended bal-

ances in old appropriations into the new
fiscal year beginning the first of next
month. These balances are nearly as
irreat as the new funds requested by the

President for the coming year.

The President requested new appro-
priations and other expenditure author-
izations totaling' $73.3 billion. If these
were enacted durmg the present ses-
sion, as requested, there would be more
than $140 bUllon available to Federal
agencies In the comin* year. Fund*
available for highways, and through
other Federal trust funds, wo-ild be in
addition.

As of this date. I doubt if It is physi-
cally pw^sible even for Federaj agencies
to spend $140 billion to $150 billion in 1
year. But with this much spending
authority available, it is entirely possible
that expenditures will exceed the $71 t
billion expenditure estimate. T^ils would
be possible no matter how much appro-
priations currently Ijcfore Congress are
cut.

I cite these figures as concrete evi-
dence of the extent to which Congress
has lost control over annual Federal ex-
penditures through existing aijpropna-
tion procedures It is annual expendi-
tures— not annual appropiir Mons —
against annual revenues which deter-
mines whether there Is to be a deficit or
a surplus.

It IS highly questionable a.s to how
much we can control debt and inflatioa
until we get control over expenc.itures.

The report is strictly factual, based on
f^:rures from the records of the Fiscal
Service. Bureau of Accounts, Depart-
ment of the Treasury, and on flsures to
be found in the President's budget docu-
ment for fiscal year 1958.

I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the RicotD a statement by me
as chairman of the committee which
summarizes the report.

There l)eing no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed In the
Record, as follows:

STATZMCNT BT SDIATOa B rU
BALANCES AS OF MABCR SI. I BBT

Executive agencies of the Federal Govern-
ment entered the fourth quarter < f the fiscal
year, ending June 30. with balaiic«s In ap-
propriations and authorizations totaUng
•8S 1 bi;iton Total available fcr expendi-
ture In the year had been 1140 3 billion, and
expenditures through March 31 titaled •61.1
bUUun.

MiUiary /unctions

Balances remaining av&llable fir expendi-
ture for military functions at th" beginning
of the final quarter uf the year t>jial«d $45 7
billion. Total available for n Ultary ex-
penditure in the year had been S74.1 biUion,
aud ex[>endi:urcs tiirough Marct 31 totaled
1.18 4 blUllcn.

Other national tecMrUii

Balances remaining available tor expendi-
ture In other national security programs
such as ati^imlc energy, strategic and critical
materials, and expansion of drfe.ose prtxluc-
tion as of the beginning of the fourth quar-
ter of the year totaled $3 3 blKlon. Total
available for other national security expendi-
ture In the year had been %5 1 billion, and
expenditures through March 31 totaled 11.8
billion.

Foreign aid

Balances remaining available for expendi-
ture in forel?n-ald programs at the begin-
ning oX the Anal quarter of the year totaled

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8743

$7 7 billion. TotAl available for forelgn-ald
expenditure in the year had been tlO 4 bil-
lion, and expenditures through March 31
totaled sa.fl billion.

/nfernaflona/ affairs
Balances remaining available for expendi-
ture In International affairs programs at the
l)eglnnlng of the fourth quarter of the year
totaled S3 1 billion. Total available for In-
ternational affairs expenditure had been S3 2
billion, and expenditures through March 31
totaled 1126 million. Exf>ort-Import Bank
balances of t2 9 billion were included In the
March 31 total.

Domestic -civilian

Balances remaining available for expendi-
ture In domestic-civilian programs at the be-
ginning of the final quarter of the year
totaled $29 3 billion. Total available for do-
mestic-civilian expenditure had been $47.5
billion, and expenditures through March 31
totaled «18 2 billion.

These figures are shown In a report today
by the Joint Committee on Reduction of
Nonessential Federal Expenditures on Fed-
eral appropriations and authorizations,
expenditures, and unexpended balances
through March 31, 1957.

The figures are from the records of the Fis-
cal Service, Bureau of Accounts, Department

of the Treasury. They show prior-year bal-
ances, apiH-oprlatlons for the current year,
expenditures through March 31, and the un-
expended balances as of that date for all the
accounts of the executive branch of the Fed-
eral Government including the Government
Printing Office.

ISTIMATTD BALANCES AS OF JTTLT 1, 1957

As compared with the actual balances in
executive agency accounts, as of March 31.
totaling 189.1 billion, the President's Jan-
uary budget document estimated the total
would be down to $69.8 billion on July 1, ex-
clusive of new appropriations currently being
enacted for next year.

Military functions
As compared with the actual balances for
military functions, as of March 31. totaling
$45.7 billion, the President's January budget
document estimated the total would be down
to $37.4 billion on July 1, exclusive of new
appropriations currently being enacted for
next year.

Other national security
As compared with the actual balances
for other national security such as atomic
energy, strategic and critical materials and
expansion of defense production, as of
March 31, totaling $3.3 billion, the Presi-

dent's January budget document estimated
the total would be down to $2.7 bllUon on
July 1, exclusive of new appropriations cur-
rently being enacted for next year.

Foreign aid
As compared with the actual balances for
foreign aid programs, as of March 31. total-
ing $7.7 blUlon, the President's January
budget document estimated the total would
be dowm to $6.2 billion on July 1, exclusive
of new appropriations currently being en-
acted for next year.

International affairs
As compared with the actual balances for
international affairs, as of March 31, total-
ing $3.1 billion, the President's January
budget document estimated the total would
be down to $2.5 billion on July 1, exclusive
of new appropriations currently being en-
acted for next year.

Domestic civilian

As compared with the actual balances for
domestlc-clvUlan programs as of March 31,
totaling $29.3 billion, the President's Janu-
any budget document estimated the total
would be down to $21 bllUon on July 1, ex-
clusive of new appropriations cturently be-
ing enacted for next year.

A tabular summary follows:

Summnry by rntrgones of approprin/wns and other authorizations, erpenditures, and unexpended balances, executive branch of the Federal
<n.rfrnmrnt,> shmnng appmprintxons and other authorizations by current and prior years; and 1957 expenditures, and unexpended
balances, as of Mar. 31, I'Jo,. with budget estimates of balances at start of fiscal year 1958 and fiscal year 1959 <^venaen

|In thoasaods oi dollars)

Appropriation!) and suthoriiatioil!! •

Expenditures

through
Mar. 31, 19.'7

Tnexpended
balances as of
Mar. 31, 1957

Budppt estimate of balances
available at start of HscaX year

nulino-^ In

prior ycv

.|ipro|>riatinns

and niithoi

iraliuD-i

Currrnt appro

priation?; and

autho. iratiorii,

flsoHl vtar

1«57'

Transfers '

Total after
tronslers

1958
(July 1, 1967)

1959
^uly 1, 1958)

KatlonM fvmrlty

-Ml!:! iry lijii<-t (in«.

.'-!r:ili-ti( ;ixj(l (T:tU-«: m.iteniih

Ki[>an.>iion ol df-finse production

38, 490. 2M

7rr. am

WTli. (iHl
1.414.270

3fi, 175,iy

-602,487

74,062,934

7fi7, 30f.

970,081

3, 3r, 970

28,350,868

228.096

113,033

l,4ol,032

15, 712, 065

539, 210

857,049

1,881,937

37,427,727

342.306

970.081

1,350.384

37,869.806
127.305

Atuuiic eiiiNfry

I,tf61,n7»

-ti2, 379

920.081

1,53a 217

Total, natonal sonirlty

41.MI,»22

.w 1.V5 9.V;

— MU B/Vl

79,113,293

30.123,029

48, 990, 261

40, 090. 498

40, 447. 400

foTPien aid miitu.'U vcurlty):

.^llllta^v a^slst.lnoe

4,fil4. ,'A3
2. (««. 766

2, or, , .100
1, 7fi-. 383

6,632,033
3, 7J9, 571

1,488,4.58
1,140,712

5.143,575
2, 592, 869

4,017,991
2,223.686

3,867,991
2,417,193

Oth<-/

-57, 5f*

Total, 'o'oi -n aid

2. HTkI. am

3, 7S4, »f

-57. .568
-28.004

10,371,604
3,192,71*1

2,63,1,170
124. 871

7, 736, 434
3,067,911

6,241,677
2,488,718

loteniatliiQiil Kflair' '

6,285,184

2,2X^,985

T (tal, other tiian domestic civilian

I>oaimiic civilian

.M,14y, 71*
24, 20(1, fv37

42. 27SS. 4f)5
27, 020, 74«i

-750.5*
-3,718,ir71

92, 677, r,78
47,503,310

32, 883, 070
]8,24«,325

59. 794, 606
29,256,989

48, 820, 893
20,993,782

48, 966, .'.78

21, 442. 391

Total

75, 350, 436

00, 299, ISl

-4. 468, 599

14fl,180,'J88

51, 129, 395

89, 051, 595

60, 814, 675

70,406,969

^ Includes Oovemment FYinting Office

- Eiclude," tru.'it ami dfjwi'lt fund arcnunt!".

' lnclu<J«-9 <upp|pnn'ntals through .Mar. 31. lO.'J.

• K<-pr*apnis iKijusnn nu m-cessary for ttrhnlral. hudpotary and accounting
ptiriKiw>«i, inrludlng tranvft-rs lo surplus, cana'Uttliou and adjusimi-ms of borrowing
and ooolrat-t authorizallocb^, etc

• Includes U. S Information Agency, Stale Department, Export-Import Bank o(
« ashmgrton and Tariff Commission.

Note.— figures are rounded and may not add to totals.

BILLS INTRODUCED

Bills were introduced, read the first
time, and, by unanimous consent, the
second time, and referred as follows:

By Mr. TALMADQE:
S 2258. A bill to require that litigants In
cases reviewed by the Supreme Ckjurt be
accorded an opportunity for hearing before
that Court, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. AIKEN:
S 2259. A bill to Improve the efficiency of
the Government by regulating the outside
employment by officers and employees of
the departments and agencies of the Gov-
ernment, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Government Operations.

By Mr. NEUBERGKR (for Himself and
Mr. MoasK) :
8.2260. A bill for the relief of Annalles
Kramer; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. CHAVEZ (for himself, Mr. Mc-
Namaka, Mr. Nextbekges, Mr. Scott,
^ Mr. Carroll, Mr. Martin of Pennsyl-
vania, Mr. Casx of South Dakota, Mr.
KiTCHEL, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Hkuska,
and Mr. Revzecomb) :
S. 2261. A bUl to amend and extend the
Public Buildings Purchase Contract Act of
1954, as amended, the Poet Office Depsirtment
Property Act of 1954, as amended, and to
require certain distribution and approval of
new public building projects, and for other
purixtseB: to the Committee on Public Works.
(See the remarks of Mr. Chavez when be
Introduced the above bill, which appear un-
der a separate beading.)
By Mr. JBNNER:
S.2262. A bill for the reUef of Hasan
Muhammad Tiro; and

8. 2363. A bill for the reUef of Karel J. V.
Klkijuluw; to the Committee on the Judi-
ciary.

By Mr. KERR (for hlmaelf, Mr. Mon-

BONzrr, and Mr. Yabboeottgh) :

8. 2264. A bill to provide for an emergency
acreage-reserve program in areas determined
to be major disaster areas; to the Committee
on Agriculture and Forestry.
By Mr. BUTLER:

8. 2265. A biU to auth<M-ize the sale of a
certain number of merctiant-type vessels to
citizens of, or the Government of Uruguay
for the coastwise trade of South America
or fOT certain other services not competitive
with United States flagships; to the Com-
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commeroe.

(See the remarks of Mr. Btrruat when he
Introduced the above bill, which appear
under a separate heading.)

By Mrs. BUOlTB. of Maine:

8. 2266. A bill to provide a method for
regulating and fixing wage rates for em-
ployees of Portsmouth, N. H., Naval Ship-
yard; to the Committee on Armed Services.

■

•I

I-

8744

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CX)NGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8745

By Ur EASTLAND:

8. 23«7. A bill far the relief of the minor
child at ih0 late Julls Rodgen Baker; to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. TOXTRMOtfO:

8. 3268. A bin to prohibit the charging
of a fee to view telecasts in the home: to
the Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce.

(See the remarks of Mr. Thttkmon-d when
he Introduced the abore bill, ■which appears
under a separate heading )
By Mr KERR

S. 2269 A blU relating to additions to the
tax for f^lure to file a retitrn In certain
cases Involving amounU received In settle-
ment of claims against the United States;
to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. CHAVEZ.

S. 2270. A bill for the relleX of Yce Mah
Mee; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

CERTAIN DISTRIBUTION AND AP-
PROVAL OP NEW PUBLIC BUILD-
ING PROJECTS

Mr. CHAVEZ. Mr. President, on be-
half of myself, and Senators McNamara.
Neuberger, Scott. Carroll. Martin of
Pennsylvania, Case of South Dakota,
K0CHEL. Cotton. Hruska, and Rever-
coMB, I introduce for appropriate refer-
ence, a bill to amend and extend the
Public Buildings Purchase Contract Act
of 1954, as amended, the Post Office De-
partment Property Act of 1954. as
amended, and to require certain distribu-
tion and approval of new public building
projects, and for other purposes.

The general purpose of the bill Is to
extend the Lease Purchase Act to June
30, 1960. The present act expires on July
22. 1957. The bill includes certain tech-
nical provisions which may be helpful in
encouraging potential investors to make
loans on lease purchase projects at rea-
sonable interest rates.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill wiU
be received and appropriately referred.

The bill 'S. 2261 » to amend and extend
the Public Buildins-rs Purchase Contract
Act of 1954, as amended, the Post Office
Department Property Act of 1954. as
amended, and to require certain distribu-
tion and approval of new public building
projects, and for other purposes, intro-
duced by Mr. CH.^VEZ < for himself and
other Senators* , was received, read twice
by its title, and referred to the Commit-
tee on Public Works.

SALE OF CERTAIN MERCHANT-TYPE
VESSELS TO URUGUAY

Mr. BUTLER, Mr. President, I intro-
duce, for appropriate reference, a bill to
authorize the saJe of a certain number
of merchant -type vessels to citizens of
or the Government of Unii?uay for the
coastwise trade of South America or for
certain other services not competitive
with United States flagships. I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the Record a statement explaining the
purpose of the bill

The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill wUl
be received and appropriately referred;
and, without objection, the statement
will be printed in the Rtcord.

The bill (S. 2265) to authorize the sale
of a certain number of merchant- type
vessels to citizens of. or the Government
oX Uruguay for the coastwise trade of

South America or for certain other serv-
ices not competitive with United States-
flaj? ships, Introduced by Mr. BtrrLER.
was received, read twice by its title, and
referred to the Committee on Interstate
and Foreiiin Commerce.

The statement prcocnted by Mr. Btrr-
LER is as follows:

Thx Prawasa or thx Bn.L

Tlie purpose of thl-i bill is to authorize the
sale of certain number of n>erchant-type
vessels to the Government of Uruguay, or
the citizens of Ur\uruay, for employment In
t.'-ades nr servk-es t.h.it will be nonoompetl-
l,Vf» wi:h United States-tldg ves.sels.

T^ie economy nf Uruguay is, lii many re-
spects. In the Incipient stages nf its devel-
opment There Is a growing coastwise trade
between Urugnay and other countries In
South .\merlca. There Is also a tremendously
Increasing ore movement between Uruguay
and Japan and between UruT^iny and Europe.
It h.Ls been exceedingly UiflBcult for Unj-
cu;\yan Industry to obtain vessels In the
private marltet to accomm.xiate Lliese move-
ments United States-flag vessels have never
participated tn such movements The sale
of t!i» vessel.s authoriTed hereunder would,
therefore, he ralcul:ited to promote the eco-
nomic development nf f-ur friendly neighbor.
Urugii.iy. without resulting In any adverse
competitive effect to the Interests of the
American merchant marine.

Any sales made under the bill being bere-
wi'.:i Introduced would be subject to the
fi'liowlni? condl'ions. which are quoted ver-
batim In the bill-

ill Repair work necessary to place any
vesseU purchased hereunder in class accord-
ing t^i the st.vndsrds nf the American Bureau
of Shipping si'.sU be done In a domestic
Uni'ed States shipyard;

■ i2t Any vessels purchased hereurvder
shall be employed f >r tlieir remaining eco-
nomic tires In the roa.'stal service of Soirth
America or in sxich other services th.it are
n t competitive with vessels regtstered under
tiir- laws and fl.\g nf the United States;

■'i3) Any vesaels purchased hereunder
shall not tr>»de with Communist-controlled
n.itlons at any lime during their remaining
econumic lives;

"4) Any vessels p'orchnaed hereunder
shall be avallaMe to the United States In
times ut nulliary or economic emergency and
may be requisitioned by the United States
for this purpose, and such vessels shall b«
Bub'ect to the provisions of section 903 of
the Merchant Marine Act, 1936. as amended.
t<-) the same extent as If they were owned
by citizens of the United States, and

"(5 1 Any vessels purchased here-inder will
not be trarLsferred »-r sold by the original
purchaser or purch.users without the p'lor
appr'A-al of the Maritime Administrator."

These conditions would Insure that the
purposes for which the vessels are to b« sold
w )u;d be eflected. Such sales wuuld pro-
vide a substantial amount of work for do-
mestic shipyards, who despite the recent
shlppln« boom, are greatly in need of repair
work. It la also provided that the ves.se Is
would be used for their entire economic
lives In trades not competitive with vessels
of United States flag registry and would also
not be employed In trade with Oommunlst-
oontrolled or Communist-Inspired nattona.
The purchasers of theae veasels ara willing
that they sball be subject to the mme pro-
vtalona of the Merchant Marine Act of 1030
providing for requlaltlon tn times at national
emergency as vould vessels revtstared under
the laws of tiia United States and owned by
United States cltlaens. In order to Insure
that the vessels sold hereunder will not be
BUb)ect to sperulstlve proflta upon tranafer.
It Is also provided that the vessels shall not
be transferred or sold by tba arlgtnai pur-
chasers without the prior approval of the
Maritime Administrator.

In all respects, this bill ahnad have tha
effect of promoting the •oono'ulc develop-
ment of Uruguay and to enh;ince the In-
terests of the foreign policy of the United
States It ahAuid greaiiy promote the
friendly relations with our gi od ntl4;hl)<r.
the Oovernment of ITruguay, wl' h no expense
to the United States taxpayers, ind no detri-
ment to the Interests of the A.ncrlcan Mer-
chant Marine.

PROHIBrnON AGAINST FEE FOR
VIEWING TELECASTS AT HOME

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President. I
Introduced for appropriate reference, a
bill to prohibit the charging of a fee to
view telecasts in the home.

For some time I have been considerln?
this matter, and I have cnmc to the con-
clusion thst the result of peTmittins pay
television to be used generally would be
the same as having the Con,;ress impose
a new tax on the r)eople of this country.
In effect, the people who now view tele-
vision without additional ccst. after the
purcha.-^e of their sets, would have to
start paying additional fee? or charges,
or be denied the privilege of seeing their
preferred programs.

Perhaps thnt would not take place Im-
mediatPly with the institution of pay
television, but I am sure it would soon
follow once pay television were approved.

I have read m the ne^rspapers recently
in connection with the pc^^Mble transfer
of New York baseball team.; to the west
coast, that contracts have ilready been
arranged to telecast those pames on pay
television instead of free, as at present.

Several pay-television irterests have
been lobbying for the approval of their
plans for several years. Their ovoUve
Is the motive of proflL

My Interest is the public Interest, and
I believe that action should be taken now
to protect the public.

If we permit the Federal Communica-
tions Commission to grant approval for
experimental pay television programi. as
the Commi.<^sion has decided it presently
has authority to do. then we must face
the fact that it would be most difficult
later to tell the experimenters, who had
spent millions of dollars, tliat pay tele-
vision had t)een classified as against the
public interest.

Persons who had Invested their money
without being warned by Jie Congress
would then have cause to <x)mplaln be-
cause they had not txen stopped.
Therefore, we should act piomptly.

If there were any a&suraace that pay
television would be providetl purely as a
supplement to prevent service and that
no person would be deprivec of the priv-
ilege of viewing programs now beln^
shewn free, then we would not have to
be cocx;erned about this matter. But
there is no assurance and liiere can be
none that programs now seen free would
not soon be bought up by the producers
of pay television programs.

There is no proof that piy television
would provide the public with better
programs.

The one sure thing ab«^it pay tele-
Tlsion Is that it would cost the public
more than the present system costs.

I feel that the Federal Communica-
tions CommiasioD should have the power
to exercise great discretion In matters of

acientifk: concern. Tbe Oongress can-
not and should not try to decide qaes-
tions of sclentifk: detail after Congress
has once established the broad policies
which the Commission Is to follow.

However, pay television has raised
another question. This is a matter of
policy completely divorced front scien-
tific development. In my opinion the
Congress here has the clear duty of pro-
tecting the public Interest. I believe we
should proceed to do so by enacting the
bill I am introducing.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill wil!
be received and appropriately referred.

The bill (S. 2268) to prohibit the
charging of a fee to view telecasts in the
home, introduced by Mr. Thttrmond. was
received, read twice by its title, and re-
ferred to the Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce.

PROTECTION OP CIVIL RIGHTS OP
CERTAIN PERSONS— AMENDMENT
Mr. EASTLAND. Mr. President. I
submit, for appropriate reference, a pro-
posed amendment to Senate bill 83, de-
signed to protect the rights of members
of the Armed Forces of the United States
and their families serving in foreign
countries.

My Implacable opposition to any form
of Federal civil-rights legislation is well
known, but if there Is any one area in
which Federal civil-rights legislation is
Justified it Ls to protect American citi-
zens who are by circumstances forced
to reside in areas outside of the conti-
nental limits of the United States. Here
the protection of one or more of the sev-
eral States cannot be extended, and it Is
only through some form of Federal legis-
lation that the constitutional guaranties
contained in the Bill of Rights can be
effectively asserted to protect our citi-
zens against subjection to systems of
jurisprudence for the trial of criminal
cases that are aUen to the common law
and to the established Judicial proce-
dures of this country.

The provisions of the amendment are
self-explanatory, I urge its most serious
consideration.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The amend-
ment will be received, printed, and re-
ferred to the Committee on the Judi-
ciary.

ADDRESSES, EDITORIALS. ARTI-
CLES. ETC.. PRINTED IN THE
RECORD

On request, and by unanimous con-
sent, addresses, editorials, articles, etc.,
were ordered to be printed in the Rxcord,

as follows:

By Mr. KNOWLAND:
Broadcast by him of the program Face
the Nation, over the CBS television network,
June 9, 1957.

By Mr. JENNER:
Broadcast by him on May 19, 1957. In
tribute to the late Senator McCarthy.

Statement prepared by hlxn on the statua-
of -forces treaties.

By Mr. SMITH of New Jersey:
Address delivered by Senator Cams of New
•^rsey, at mmirtfiypfmynt ezerclaaa o( Rol-
lins CoUege, Winter Park, Fla., June 7, 1857.

By Mr. JAVTTS:

Letter addressed by him to tfae Commit-
tee on Foreign Trade Education. Inc., deal-
ing with the United States foreign trade
policy and approval of the OrgauiaaUon for
2tede Cooperation.

By Mr. CASE of South Dakota:

Article entitled "Sonic Boom," written by
Senator Golbwateb and published in the
magazine Planes.

By Mr. THYE:

ArUcle entlUed "Poles Crowd United
States Display at Trade Fair," wrltteo by
Colin Frost, and published In the Washing-
ton Post and Times Herald of June 10. 1857;
and statement issued by Senator Thte uiKler
date of August 2. 1954, dealing with ezhlblU
by the United States at world fatrg.

NOTICE OF HEARINGS ON H. R. 3028,
TO PROVIDE FOR THE RELIEP OF
CERTAIN FEMALE MEMBERS OF
THE AIR FORCE (AND RELATED
BILL S. 1305)

Mr. CMAHONEY. Mr. President, on
behalf of a subcommittee of the Senate
Committee on the Judiciary consisting
of Senators Eevin, of North Carolina;
Butler, of Maryland; and myself,
chairman, I desire to «ive notice that
public hearings have been scheduled for
Tuesday. June 18, 1957, at 2 p. m., in
room 424, Senate OflSce Building, on
H. R. 3028, to provide for the relief of
certain female members of the Air Force,
and related bill, S. 1305. At the indi-
cated time and place all persons inter-
ested in the proposed legislation majr
make such representations as may be
pertinent.

NOTICE CONCERNINO CERTAIN

NOMINATIONS BEPORE COMMIT-
TEE ON THE JUDICIARY

Mr. EASTLAND. Mr. President, the
following nominations have been referred
to and are now pending before the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary :

C. Enard Erickson, of Minnesota, to
be United States marshal for the district
of Minnesota for a term of 4 years. < Re-
appointment.)

Darrell O. Holmes, of Washington, to
be United States marshal for the eastern
district of Washington for a term of 4
years. (Reappointment.)

Edward L. Scheufler. of Missouri, to be
TTnited States attorney for the western
district of Missouri for a term of 4 years.
(Reappointment.)

Omar L. Schnatmeler, of Missouri, to
be United States marshal for the eastern
district of Missouri for a term of 4 years.
<Reappointment )

Richard Beal KkM. of Arkansas, to be
United States marshal (or the eastern
district of Arkansas for a term of 4 years.
<Reappointment.)

Leonard G. Hagner, of Delaware, to be
United States attorney fw the district
of Delaware for a term of 4 Fears. (Re-
appointment.)

Howard Call, of "Ulah, to be United
States marshal for the district of Utah
tor a term of 4 years. (Reappointment.)

Harry Jennings, of Michigan, to be
United States marshal for the western
district of Michigan for a term of 4 years.
(Reappointment. )

On behalf of tbe Committee on the
Judiciary notice is Jbereby given to all

persons Interested In theae nominations
to flle with the committee, in writing, on
or before Wednesday, June 19, 19S7, any
Tepi esentatioxis or objections ttiey may
vrish to present concerning the above
nominations, with a further statement
whether it is their intention to appear
at any hearings wlilch may be scheduled.

l^OTICE OP HEARING ON NOMINA-
TION OP JEAN 8ALA BREITEN-
STEIN TO BE UNTIED STATES
CIRCUIT JUDGE. lOTH CIRCUIT

Mr. EASTLAND. Mr. President, on
behalf of the Committee on the Judi-
ciary. I desire to give notice that a public
hearing has been scheduled for Wednes-
day. June 19, 1957, at 10 a. m, in room
424, Senate Ofi&ce Building, upon the
nomination of Jean Bala Breitenstein, of
Colorado, to be United States circuit
judge, 10th circuit, vice Walter A. Hux-
man, retired.

At the indicated time and place all
persons Interested in the above nomina-
tion may make such representations as
may be pertinent. The subcommittee
consists of the Senator from South (Caro-
lina [Mr. JoHNSTOK], the Senator from
Indiana [Mr. Jenher], and myself, as
chairman.

NOTICE OP HEARINGS ON SENATE
BILL 5

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I
wish to call to the attention of the Sen-
ate that a special subcommittee of the
Government Operations Committee will
hold open hearings on 8. 5 c- Tuesday,
June 18, at 10:30 a. m. in room 357 of
the Senate Office Building. S. 5 is a bill
to amend the Federal Property and Ad-
ministrative Services Act of 1949, as
ameiuied. to prevent the allocation of
procurement contracts to certain desig-
nated geographical areas, and for other
purposes. Anyone desiring to present
either oral or written testimony should
contact Mr. Glenn K. Shriver, of the
Government Operations Committee staff.

THE OPEN CURTAIN— AIM)RESS BY
SENATOR JOHNSON

Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, yester-
day's edition of the New Yotk Times
contained an article by that celebrated
journalist, Mr. Arthur Krock, dealing
with the statesmanlike address delivered
last Saturday evening in New York City
by our distinguished majority leader, the
^lenator from Texas [Mr. JohbtsohI.

Since the article contains noteworthy
commentary on the significance of this
address, I think tliat it should be called
to the attention of the American people
at large. I therefore ask unanimous
consent to have the full text of the Ar-
thur Krock article published in the body
of today's CowaaxsaioKAL Rscorb.

lliere being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the Ricoaa,
as follows:

iw mz Natiok

(By Arthur 'Krock)

coNsraxTcnvs ibxas noK tbb appostnoH

WasHnraraw. Jnaa 10. — When s laader at
the oppoeltlan to tba party ta power offen
a public proposal which is constructive and

J^

8746

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSK)NAL RECORD— SENATE

«74T

ti

at the same time Is an effective partisan move,
that la the highest type of politic*! leader-
ahlp. Such waa the speech In New York Sat-
urday night on disarmament and Soviet-
American relations by Lyndon B. Johnson.
of Texas, the spokesman of the Senate Demo-
crats.

It offered a sound, shrewd pro«tram to coun-
teract Soviet propaganda, pckrtlcularly the
propaganda In the television Interview the
Columbia Broadcasting System had with
Nlklta Khrushchev. The Johnson speech
projected definite Ideas, contrasting with the
lack of them In administration suggestions
how to deal with the Issues raised by Khru-
shchev. These ideas. If adopted, could effec-
tively put on the Soviets the burden of pro<if
whether they are sincere In their professions
for ending the nuclear weapons race. And
they established the Democratic Party In full
partnership with the President In his effort
to make a start toward dlsarniament.

This last element waa of great political
significance. The party of which the Presi-
dent Is the leader historically claims credit
for Ideas and their processing that culminate
In achievement and makes these claims a
basis for asking the people to continue it In
power. President Eisenhower has a program
for the beginning of disarmament that will
be revealed In detail by his deputy, Harold
E. Stassen, at the proper time In the current
negotiations with the other nuclear powers.
But on the collateral point discussed by
Senator Johnson — how to Inform the Rus-
sian masses of the facts which have prolonged
the nuclear weapons race, facts their rulers
have svippressed or distorted — the adminis-
tration has never come forward with pro-
posals as precise as Johnson's.

■Pree people who have access to the truth."
he said, are well aware that when the United
States "had a monopoly on the atomic
bomb • • • and offered to share the secrets
• • • with the entire world • • • In return
for reasonable guafantles that the atom
would never again be used In warfare." and
this offer was approved by the U N Assem-
bly. It was the Soviets and their satellites that
blocked It. But the nu.":.'?!an people do not
know this. And the Senator, taking the
Khr\ishchev broadca.st as his e.xample, con-
centrated on means to give the Information.

A icorM with open eari

This means, he said, would be not ]u!>t
"open skies" but "(-pen eyes. ears, and minds
for all the peoples (jf the world. I call it the
'open curtain.' Let truth flow through it
freely. Lf t Ideas cleanse evil just as fresh air
clean.ses the poisoned • • • mass ol a long-
closed cavern "

The aspiration Is not new, and no political
party or person has a copyright. But the
method proposed by Joh.vson Is the most
definite that a political leader of his stature
has outlined in the discussions that fol-
lowed the Khrushchev br<.iadcast.

He would have the United States Govern-
ment a5k the Kremlin for uncensond. free-
flowing rddlo and TV facilities for the u^■e
of 'sp' kesnien of cur own choosing to come
Into Ru.-;^ian homes and state the American
case " On that condition these statements
would be made regularly, not "meiely one
reply lo Khrushchev by the President or
s«ime other official." Americans would ap-
pe.ir wef-'kly on the Soviet media of com-
munication "Ar.d we should orfer similar
laciUties here— to Bu'tranln or Khra.shchev
or Molotov or any Soviet leader every week
In the year" The American case on dis-
armament would thus be made known to
tile Russian people.

We should not let a slncle day pass."
said Johnson, -withuut raising this issue
Iw.th the Kremlin on the free flow of In-
t'Tm.iti. .ti|. We should call it up In the
L:r.-e<l N.i'.ior.,^; we should make it a basic
proposal in all disarmament Ulks; we should
in.sist upim it every time a Russian repre-
semativo' is within earshot." Labor leaders.

managers of Industry and farmers, as well as
public officials, on both sides would be
heard. "And when the people ( everywhere |
know they will Insist that the arms race. th«
nuclear explosions, the Intercontinental mis-
siles • • • all be banished. They will In-
sist up)on systems that safeguard us against
world suicide" (Or. as a current couplet
runs, "Atomic war has a simple sequel. All
men are cremated equal.")

The Texas Senator voiced a high hope that
would be long in maturing, possibly too long
to avert the debacle of civilization whlctx
would be the consequence of international
ni'clear war. But the Johnson nr.ethfid
would supply an atmosphere In which this
hope would have a gixxl chance of survival.

The speech of the Senate majority leader
provided his party with a firm and construc-
tive position on the greatest Issue of the day.
And of this the Democrats stand In need,
frustrate as they are by the President's
advocacy of domestic and International pro-
grams they could not as a party oppose be-
cause so much of the basic structure Is their
own product

The Incident Illuminates the type of
leadership, never partisan for mere partls&n-
shlps sake, by which John.scn has been able
to effect more legislative unity among the
Democrats than they have shown for a num-
ber of years.

THE SITUATION IN THE FAR EAST

Mr. KNOVVLAND. Mr. President. I
ask unanimou.s consent to have printed
in the body of the Record following my
remarks a very informative and interest-
ing article entitled "A Silent Crisij In
the Far East: The Guns Are Not Boom-
ing, but — ." The article was written
by Fred Sparks for the Scripps-Howard
newspapers, and as the title indicates,
deals with the situation in the Far East.

Normally I would ask that an article
of this kind be printed in the Record,
but Mr. Sparks is an outstanding foreiv;n
correspondent and writer, with an ex-
cellent knowleriee of conditions In the
Far East. I think this article is of far-
reachini,' significance, and raises certain
warning sisrnab. I believe that all
Members of the Ccnsrress should have it
brou-iht to their attention, so I ask that
It be primed in the Record at this point
as a part of my remarks.

There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the Record.
as follows:

A SiL£NT Caisis IN THE F\E EAST: The Guns
Akx Not Booming, bit —

(By Pred Sparks)

Free A?la U in scruua danger; the silent
crl'^is Is now

N't frr^m a Red Chinese blow But from
contagious defeatism that mlpht accept the
Peipii.g rc::inie a.s the undl.'puted. direct
or Indirect master of hundreds uf millions of
brown and yellow people who ask little —
but freedom.

The new cr!?ls has been created not by
buKets, but by t.Tik and heslt\t; 'n T.x'X
of trade with Red China, t.ilk of neutralizing
Formosa Heslratlon to strengthen S<JU'h
K'lrea— while acknowledging North Korea's
tu"dup

What Is at stake for America Is the loss of
a vast butTer of proved friendship and. yes.
the military service of your son. brother or
friend — his very life.

CONVINCED

.As one who has sp*"nt more tlmo In the
Orient since the end of World War II than In
the United States, and Is still In touch with
developments there, I am convinced our
iriends In free Asia are demoralized today.

Demoralization Is the prologue to dUlntegra>
tlon.

While we were occupied wl'h spectacular
doings In the Middle East — th-; endless fric-
tions between Arab and Israi 11. the Soviet
grab for power In the oil deserts — the pres-
tige of Red China, which ipoonfeeda tte
young a "Hate America" diet, has been ele-
vated to new arrogant heights.

What are the fresh fever polr ta? Why does
the patient weaken?

TXAOS

England, followed by others eased restric-
tions set up during the Kcrean conflict.
Merchants from Birmingham and Lille now
hasten to the court of the great Red Khaa
In a manner of bootUckery, order booka In
hand.

This Itaelf would hardly discourage free
Asians. For they have seen England and
France compromise In the Orlrnt before.

But the foreigner they dep*nd on la the
United SUtes. And— as In the Middle East —
we have of necessity moved Independently.

Then Just the other day President Elsen-
h<jwer (under terrible pressures i opened
wide the possibility of American trade with
Communist China.

Consider the free Vietnam soMler. hU
youth spent fighting communism. Aban-
doned by France, today he pa.ks an Ameri-
can carbine Dally he sees an American oflQ-
cer. his regimental adviser. He Is told: To
the north la your mortal foe; there can t>e
no compromise.

What now If he hears of D< trolt peddler*
offering wares to this sam« Communist
enemy? Who can distinguish between mili-
tary and nonmllltary car^o? C annot a civil-
ian truck tran»p<jrt troops? C; nnot a shovel
spade a f( xhole as well as a garden?

Do you blame this btjy If he Is puzzled
tonight? (I pity the many American mili-
tary friends I have who today are training
Formosans. Koreans. Thalia iders. Viet-
namese. I can Imagine the q'lestlona they
are being a^ked )

In Saigon, In Bangkok the Red under-
ground can make good use of this new
trend Tliey can quietly advLse community
leaders: "Well, see how it's going? America
is shifting. M-\ke the t>e8t deal you cao^
while you can."

KOBEA

As every general, admiral, and U. N. ob-
server has stated. Communist North Korea
lau'hs at the aurreement forblldlng retool-
ing and reinforcing armies present when the
truce document ended the killlr.g.

Stll!. we refuse to send In modern toola.
Our Infantrymen watching the bleak armi-
stice line are threatened with brutal beating
when it should please Pelplng sgaln to push
south.

You can assume, then. South Korea's de-
clining morale. Seoul U 2 Jeep hours from
CwmmunL^t bunkers. Twice half that coun-
try was subjected to the tyrant; thousands
of lunocenu died in bloodletting.

FORMOSA

The unfortunate P.aah mob madness that
Backed our Tal-pel Emba.«!sy has again stirred
thoee who u.«»-d to label Red China's leadera
"agrarian reformers" without territorial
hunger.

Important politicians and columnist*—
whote A.^ian Journeys are limited to occa-
sional plates of won ton soup In Washing-
ton's chop suey parlfirs — now cry for a neu-
tralized, demilitarized Formosa.

A militarized, partl.-^an Formosa Is a club
of peace. That late giant, Philippine Presi-
dent Ramon Magsaysay. predicted that with-
out the shield of Formosa, communism
Would Cham his own country In 3 years.

By threatening the mainland coast, For-
mosa borrows time for Hong Kong, a spoil
Red China means eventually to have In
the crown colony's tea rooms, Pelplng't

agenu boast: "Moag Kong can be taken bj

telephone."

Dram B9 CHTHA

Minioni gagged by the absoltite ftate «ttn
dream of Uberatton. Prteete boM clandes-
tine prayer meeCtngi like anelant Chiisttaiia
In Eoman eaves. Well remam bared bm xnla-
Bkxiary actuola, Amerlcain liieruts. weatan
democracy.

Today's "two Chinas" campaign meaoa
tiielr slavery will never eod. And such t&lk
Is precious for the Communist bralnwasbers.

OVXaSKAS CHI1«XSS

There are 13 mlllloD In southeast Asia.
Energetic, wise, they nearly dominate tb*
finances of a half dozen countries.

So far, we have managed to keep them at
■worst, neutral. We have argued against re-
■mlttancee to relatives Inside Red China,
Insisting that every dollar dispatched
musclee the cocninuntst war machine.

If Formosa collapses, or If American mer-
chant ships anchor in Shanghai, their re-
slsunce would be snipped like a ribbon
before a new bridge; they'd be a prefabri-
cated fifth column.

As appeasement mounts, I can recall Just
B few Asian lives we have Influenced:

The brown Camt>odlan girl who learned
the true nature of communism sitting bare-
foot In an American library, a sturdy struc-
ture ringed by paddy-mud huts.

The young Chinese, captured fighting for
communism In Korea who, under our In-
fluence, refused to go home (sentencing his
parents to what penalties?) He chose
Formosa, tattooed bis chest with bitter anti-
Mao slogans.

The North Korean professor, a straggle aC
white beard on his chin, who fled his work.
his books, after hearing brave words de/ylng
communlsnx, offering hope, on the American
Government's radio.

These people are depressed today. The
mood Is spreading. Can you blame me for
being convinced that the silent crisis Is now?

THE FOREIGN AID PROGRAM

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Pres-
ident, last Friday the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee reported the mu-
tual security bill for 1958. This bill in-
cludes several significant changes for the
improvefflent of the mutual security pro-
gram, the most noteworthy of which
are the creation of a long-term revolving
loan fund to promote the economic de-
velopment of underdeveloped nations,
and a 2-year authoriration for military
assistance.

The bill initiates a major step in the
improvement and continuity of the mu-
tual security program, and it is gratify-
ing and pleasing to note that a good part
of tlie Nation's press is strongly support-
ing this action. I ask unanimous con-
sent that editorials from the Washing-
ton Post of June 8. the Washington
Evening Star of June 8, the Christian
Science Monitor of June 8. and the New
York Times of June 9, favorite the bill,
be printed in the Ricou) following my
remarks.

There being no objection, the edi-
torials were ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

1 From the Washington Post and Times
Herald of June 6, 1967]

BiTAKTZSAN IirVKSTMENT

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee's
approval of a 92 lillllon revolving fund from
which future foreign -aid loans would be
made Is undoubtedly a major victory for the
Elsenhower administration. The Important
fact about the committee's action, however.

Is UuLt it is a victory for the bipartisan
lorelgn policy which the country has fol-
lowed since World War 11, That jxdlcy liaa
goa» through several different phases since
It was laimched by Secretary or State ICar-
*hall 10 years ago. The action of the For-
eign Relations Committee indicates that It
stm has A strong apx>eal In the halls ol
Congress.

What the President and the committee
have done Is to adjust the policy of iddlng
our frleiuls and allies to the need of the
times and to make the whole program more
palatable to the economy minded. The de-
velopmental aspects of the program have
operated under a real handicap in the past
because of the uncertainty as to whether
aid would continue longer than the year for
which It was authorized. Major undiirtak-
llngs to help backward countries improve
their standards of living could not be
launched under such limitations. The pro-
grsuD. now approved by the Senate Commit-
tee Is of Indeflnlte duration and the funds
requested by the President would bo au-
thorized for 3 years ahead.

If Congress follows the lead of foreign
relations, aid to our allies will no long-er be
a piecemeal affair. It will have the dignity
and effectiveness of a long-range policy that
must have very substantial support in both
parties to survive. The Democratic major-
ity on the Foreign Relations Committeee
has been eminently wise to recognize this
«nd to sutx^rdinate politics to the welfare of
the Nation.

The committee's action does not neces-
sarily mean that the demand for economy
is subsiding on Capitol Hill. Rather, we
surmise, it reflects a realization tiiat attan-
donment of foreign aid would necessitate a
sharp upward step in our own military
spending to avoid serioua losses In national
security. The intimate connection between
foreign military aid and defense was em-
ptiasised when the conunlttee opened the
way to acceptance of the President's idea
of tying this part of the aid appropriations
to our domestic defense budget. That is
pi«clsely where the cost of arms for de-
fense of the Pree World belongs.

The committeee's attempt to swing ad-
ministratioD of tiit taiU avay from the In-
ternational Cooperation Administration to
the State Department is a vote of no con-
fidence in the ICA director. John B. Hol-
Uster It Is not a sound practice to upset
* logical organization pattern because a
Congressional committee does not like an
Administrator, but this action is a pointed
lilnt to the President that the program
ought to be In more sympathetic hands.

The major question now is whether Con-
gress as a whole will follow the commit-
tee's courageous lead. In our opinion It
will, if it weighs this program, as carefully
as the committee has done, against the dis-
mal alternative of Pree World disintegration.
It is not a question of pleasing or displeas-
ing ttte President but of continuing this
country's most successsful bipartisan in-
vestment in peace.

{From the Washington Evening Star of
June 8. 1957]

To Impbovz Foreicn Aid

The Senate Foreign Relations Oommittee
has done a significant and commendable
thing In approving President Eisenhower's
request for a long-term revolving fund of
92 billion lor future economic aid abroad.
The objective of the fund is to help finance
Important developmental projects on a loan
basis, and to mable our country to oommii
Itself in advance to such aid. Anumg other
things, fMsumlng tluit Congress as a whole
will follow the committee's lead, this will
mean that our mutual -security program, for
the first time since its Inception, will allow
for flezlbUlty of planning and for firm com-

mitments to specific undertakings over a
period of years.

In other words, both for our own Govem-
jnsnt and for IrieiMUy and aUlad govern-
meats overseas, an ekement of uncertainty
would thereby 1m removed, wiiereaa liereto-
lore our international f -f'ti^nrf efforts have
been subjected annuaUy to unpredictable
elaanges. depending on CoQgresslonsi moods
that vary from season to fi»ssnn. Such a
stabilizing reform would undoubtedly rnav^
our foreign aid more effective. This is so
because it would permit tba kind of plan-
Aing ahead and the kind of lang-rang*
commitments tiia,t are essential to the or-
derly prograoiing and sucoessfui oompletloa
of large-scale projects. These are the proj-
ects whose ooostructlon requires a relatively
long period of tiine — projects of a sort that
cannot very well be undertaken if there is
no advance assuranoe that our American
contribution to them will not be withdrawn,
from one year to the next, by budget-cut-
ting forces in the Senate and Hotae.

The fact that l^e Senate ]>y>reign Rela-
tions Oommittee has reoognised this reality,
and acted in keeping with it, has been de-
•cril>ed as a major victory for Preaident
Eisenhower. But it is more than that. Ac-
tually, wholly apart from politics and per-
sonalities, it Is a victory for commonsense

a victory that can serve our own country^a
l>est interests by Increasing the effectlvenes
of our foreign aid in such vital areas as Asia
and the Middle East. Accordingly, what we
must hope for now is tiiat both Houses of
Congress will support the committee's wise
action with a resounding affirmative vote.
Hot to do so would amount to shcrtBlgfated-
neas of the worst kind.

[Prom the Christian Sdence Monitor of

June 8, 1957]

Bettes Basis roa Am

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee
has talcen a major step toward improving the
mutual security (foreign aid) program. It
luks accepted the Kisenhower-DuUes plan for
a long-term revolving loan fund to promota
the economic development of friendly na-
tions. And it is recommending the re-
quested authorizations of $500 miUion for
the coming year and ♦750 million for each of
the two following years.

The committee lias also opened the way for
adoption of the administration's proposal to
put military aid into the defense budget.
While not promising any definite saving of
defense expenditures, this is a useful znovm
for accurate labeling of costs. It should re-
move much misunderstanding and take con-
siderable wind out of the giveaway bellows.

However, the committee's action In pro-
posing an advisory loan committee to give
the State Department ultimate control of the
revolving fund is not so evidently a step to-
ward clarification. It could fuzz up the ad-
ministration of the program. While it Is well
for the State Department to be consulted
about loans which are bound to have dip-
lomatlc effects, actual operation of the eco-
nomic development program could l)eneflt
from having its own independent and expert
management.

The move was apparently designed to by-
pass Joim B. Hollister. International Co-
operation Administration director, who is re-
ported less than enthtislastlc about the pro-
gram he handles. But personality should
not control the shaping of effective aid meas-
ures. Administrators may change; poor sys-
tems tend to remain. We trust tliat the
Senate as a whole or the House will find
simpler, better controls for the revolving
fund.

But the establishing of this $2 -billion fund
Is the heart of the new mutual security pro-
gram which has been In the making for 2
years. Lessons leameU from flaws In the old
program, pltis studies by several officials and

ill

M-u

if-i

n

8748

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE

8749

■f!

Tinofflclal gr^oup* of btulnessmen and ex-
perts— all tbla weight ol Information sup*
porta tbe new propoeala.

No magic formula will remoTe all the dif-
ficulties Inherent In thla kind of operation.
New loopholes for abuses may appear. Op-
position to and misunderstanding of spend-
ing on any type of foreign aid may persist.

But the shift from gifts to loans Is sound.
The clearer distinction between military and
economic aid and the emphasis on long-
term development are definitely moves In
the right direction. One valuable byprod-
uct of long-term planning should be en-
couragement both of private investment and
of aid from other free countries to the un-
derdeveloped nations.

Much remains to be done in obtaining final
approval and wise administration of a new
program, but the prospects now are bright
and warrant deep satisfaction.

[From the New York Times of June 9. 1957]
Sxcuxrrr Vkbsus the CALXNOAa

President Elsenhower seems this weekend
to have won two victories for his foreign
aid or mutual -security policy. First, the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, whose
power in that field is not inconsiderable, has
satisfied itself with a f227 million cut in
his t3.6 billion foreign-aid request for the
coming fiscal year. Second, and more Im-
portant, the committee has endorsed the
principle of continuity In foreign aid.

To make this continuity possible the com-
mittee voted in effect to give the President
the $2 billion long-term revolving fund for
which he has asked. The committee also
accepted a 2-year authorization for military
aid In place of the customary 1-year authorl-
Kation. This recommendation. If accepted
by the Senate and House, would mean that
there would have to be only one wrangle
over military foreign aid next year: that Is
to say. a debate as to how much of the
amount authorized would actually be appro-
priated.

The value of continuity In foreign -aid pro-
grams has been pretty well demonstrated by
10 years of experience. The country had this
particular bear by the tall and there never
was any real question among practical legis-
lators of letting go. The sums asked and
granted might gu up and down. There might
be a shift among the countries benefited.
Military aid might outrun economic aid.
Loans might overtake grants. Ingenious
specialists might Invent the concept of de-
fense-support programs to bolster up military
programs.

But the flow of assistance to our allies and
friends inevitably went on. Indeed. It ac-
quired a certain unity because the whole
project of strengthening democratic coun-
tries economically and In a military way was
continually stimulated by the policies of
Soviet Russia.

In his mutual security message of more
than a year aijo President Eisenhower main-
tained that "we should be able to assure the
nations of the free world that we will ct^n-
tlnue to participate In particular nonmllltary
projects and enterprises which will take a
number of years to complete " Last month,
picking up some of the recommendations
made In March by the International Develop-
ment Advisory Board under the chairmanship
of Eric A. Johnston, he emphasized in the
economic field reliance "more upon loans
than upon gifts." and urged the establish-
ment of a development loan fund with
enoukjh capital to allow steady and continu-
ing operations. For that purpose he asked
••500 mllllnn the next fiscal year and $750
million lor each of the 2 succeeding years.

The President also asked a little under $132
million for tt'chnlcal assistance. This, too,
should be part of a long-term plan, but it
doesn't l<K<k as though It would become so
at this session oi Congress.

It U clear that we are settling down at the
end of the first decade of foreign aid or
mutual assistance into what is likely to be-
come a long-range policy. One phase of this
policy will doubtless be the permanent Inclu-
sion of military assistance, as the President
advocates, under the domestic defense
budget. Defense doesn't stop at our own
frontiers any more, and this we will have to
continue to recognize. The second develop-
ment is certain to be the acceptance of eco-
nomic cooperation also, though largely in
the form of repayable loans, as a continuing
part of our budget.

There is nothing startling In all of this.
The foreign aid budget, part of which will be
repaid, runs around 4 or 5 percent of the
Federal budget. It shouldn't be wasted and.
despite some possible Inefficiency, not much
of It really Is wasted. It buys us In security
and In good will much more than it costs us.
And It will buy us more If we spend It wisely
and on a long-term program than It will if
we play marbles with It every time a new
fiscal year rolls around.

Now we must hope that the Senate will
follow Its committee s lead when floor debate
t>eglns this week, and that the House, also.
will recognize the exacting facts oT our inter-
national life.

TIIE OPEN CURTAIN

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr Presi-
dent, after the mornirm hour yesterday.
I had the privilege of reading in full the
addre.ss which was delivered by our
majority leader, the Senator from Texas
I Mr. Johnson 1 before the annual con-
ference of the United Jewi.sh Appeal.
This address was entitled "The Open
Curtain," and in the address our dis-
tinguished majority leader made a sug-
gestion which I feel should be considered
very carefully and sincerely by every
Member of this body on both sides of the
aisle.

After referrtn? to the subject of dis-
armament, the Senator from Texas said:

Lrr TH« PEOP1.S JtTDGK

How do we launch this program (of dls-
am.ament) ? We do s<i In the only way pos-
Bibie— in the only way that accords with
American traditions.

We must create a new world policy. Not
Just of "open skies"— but of open eyes. ears.
and minds, for all peoples of the world

I call for the "npen curtain " Let truth
flow through It freely Let ideas cleanse evil
Just as fresh air cleanses the p<M«oned. stag-
nant mass of a long-closed cavern.

Mankinds only hope lies with men them-
selves Let us Insist that the case be sub-
mitted to the people of the world.

Very properly many of the Senator's
colleafcrues on his side of the aisle rose to
commend the address. At the time I had
not read the address, but upon reading It
I am clad to rise and commend the Sen-
ator, as I feel a matter of this importance
should be taken entirely out of the realm
of partisan politics and we should all Join
seriously in considering the dramatic and
Important suggestion which has been
made. I am personally glad to identify
myself with the remarks of the distin-
guished majority leader.

We can trust the people of our United
States and we can trust the people of So-
viet Russia, if they know the facts.

Mr. President, a great American once
said, "You can fool all the people some
of the time and you can fool some of the
people all the time, but you cannot fool
all the people all the time." Thii was

none other, of course, than our grreat
leader. Abraham Lincoln, who made this
Immortal statement nearly 100 years ago.

I want to thank the majority leader for
what he said and to express my hope that
together we can explore the policy of
taking the whole matter to the people of
the world by having an "open curtain"
for this purpose.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Of course,
my good friend from New Jersey pleases
me greatly when he associates himself
with some of the thoughts I expressed
on Saturday evening. The senior Sen-
ator from New Jersey, who Is a leader
In the field of our relations with other
nations, and who has fought so long
and so hard that the people of the world
might have a degree of peace, will be a
tower of strength In any peace move-
ment that might be launched.

I know he understands, and under-
stands well, that I had no thought what-
ever of making any partisan suggestion
in the field of foreign policy. The fact
that my friend from New Jersey, ardent
Republican that he Is. can subscribe to
some of the things I said. Indicates that
It was not a partisan statement. Cer-
tainly, I had no intention of having It
become one. My friend has always been
overly generous with me, and I should
like to have him know that he has my
deep gratitude.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank
the Senator.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield.

Mr. JAVITS I know that a number
of Members of the Senate have Identi-
fied themselves with the demand voiced
by the majority leader in my hometown
on Saturday evening, for what In es-
sence Is equal time in freedom of access
to the Ru.ssian people.

I. too. should like to expre.v; my agree-
ment with that point of view.

I am very pleased. Indeed, that the
distinguished Senator from Texas made
his speech in my hometown of New
York. I know it was magnificently re-
ceived. Unfortunately. I could not stay
until the conclusion of the affair, but I
was there to greet the Senator from
Texas.

The Senator's speech represents the
kind of Initiative which the American
people are very proud to note, because
of their deep confidence in their cause.
Regardless of party, we are grateful to
the Senator from Texas for showing best
the American propensity to take on all
comers In regard to principles in which
we so thoroughly believe a.s our govern-
mental constitutional system and the
freedoms under which we want men and
women to live.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I wish to express my appreciation
for the kind words of the Senator from
New York. In addition, Mrs. Johnson
and I express our grateful appreciation
for his thoughtful courtesy in welcom-
ing us to his city. We are very pleased
that he could associate himself with the
thoughts I expressed on Saturday
evening.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President. I.
too. was Impressed by the commentary
of Mr. Arthur Krock. In the New York
Times of June 11, 1957, entitled "Con-
structive Ideas Prom the Opposition."
I wish to compliment the distinguished
Senator from Idaho [Mr. Chtjrch] for
Inserting the column In full In the Rec-
ord. It furnishes some good food for
thought. I was especially impressed by
the part of the statement by Mr. Krock
which reads as follows:

The Texas Senator voiced a high hope that
would be long in maturing, possibly too long
to avert the debacle of civilization which
would be the consequence of international
nuclear war. But the Johnson method would
supply an atmosphere in which this hope
would have a good chance of survival.

The speech of the Senate majority leader
provided his party with a firm and construc-
tive position on the greatest issue of the day.
And of this the Democrats stand in need,
frustrated as they are by the Presidents
advocacy of domestic and International pro-
grams they could not as a party oppose l)e-
cause so much of the basic structure is their
own product.

The incident illuminates the type of lead-
ership, never partisan for mere partisan-
ships sake, by which Johnson has been able
to effect more legislative unity among
the Democrats than they have shown for a
number of years.

The speech by the distinguished ma-
jority leader is just another indication
of the respon.slble attitude which the
Democrats have shown during the course
of this administration. It is to be hoped
that responsible officials downtown will
be able to read the majority leader's
speech and give it the credit which is Its
due.

So far as the writer of the commen-
tary, Arthur Krock, Is concerned, he Is,
of course, as everyone knows, one of the
great journalists of our generation. He,
like our distinguished majority leader,
has also performed a service to the
country in giving publicity to construc-
tive, well thought out, and intelligent
views.

Mr. MANSFIELD subsequently said:
Mr. President, the news ticker has just
brought us the report that Secretary of
State John Foster Dulles welcomes the
proposal of our majority leader for an
open curtain policy.

This Is good news Indeed. It is my
hope that the Secretary will not only
welcome the Idea but will Instruct
America's representatives to press It
vigorously, forthrlghtly, and in the same
Imagir.ative spirit In which the Senator
from Texas spoke.

Mr. Dulles tells us that a similar pro-
posal was made by the United States.
Great Britain, and Prance In 1955. At
the time, he said. It was rejected by the
Soviet Communist leaders but presum-
ably it still stands.

I do not believe we should be dis-
couraged because a proposal for recipro-
cal exchanges has been rejected once. I
believe we should renew it with full
vigor and with full enthusiasm.

When the proposal was made In 1955.
there was no adequate springboard. We
now have that springboard— the Khru-
shchev broadcast — and we should use It.
I hope the Secretary of State wlU In-
struct America's representatives to press

the proposal at every opportunity. I
hope it will be raised in the United Na-
tions; in the current disarmament talks;
whenever a Soviet representative is
within earshot.

There is no time to be lost. The great
need of this war-weary world is for an
end to strife and conflict and the best
way to end it is to submit the case to the
people.

LABOR LEADERSHIP

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent to have printed
in the body of the Record a letter dated
June 10. 1957. which I sent to Mr. George
Meany, president of the American Fed-
eration of Labor and Congress of Indus-
trial Organizations.

There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed In the Record,
as follows:

UNrrm States Senate,
Committee on Public Wokxs,

June 10. 1957.
Mr. George Meant,

President, American Federation of
Labor and Congress of Industrial
Organizations, Washington, D. C.
Deae Mk.Meant: I should like to take this
opportunity to compliment the leadership of
the AFL-CIO for the prompt and effective
manner in which they are moving to elimi-
nate from the ranks of lalior those officials
who have violated their trust. Only If in-
tegrity and union democracy are safeguarded,
can the labor movement fulfill Its basic pur-
pose of protecting the living standards and
working conditions of tbe membership.

In this connection, may I please call to
your attention the action of certain high offi-
cials of the carpenters union who have Just
taken the fifth amendment before the Sen-
ate Public Works Roads and Highways Sub-
committee, in connection with alleged mis-
use of Federal highway funds in the State
of Indiana.

I know that you and your associates will
scrutinize this situation quite as thoroughly
as you already have been doing with the
conditions prevailing among some of the top
leaders In the teamsters union.
With every good wish, I am.
Sincerely,

RiCHAKD L. NeUBBIGEE,

United States Senator.

NEUTRALIZATION OF NORWAY

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, a
great many fine people of Norwegian
ancestry live in my State, and they al-
ready have started to communicate with
me over the unfortunate suggestion by
the Republican leader of the Senate, the
distinguished senior Senator from Cali-
fornia I Mr. KnowlandI. that the United
States agree to neutralize Norway as
quid pro quo for Soviet troop with-
drawals from Hungary. Naturally, these
people of Norse heritage are indignant.

It Is my hope the minority leader will
acknowledge that his suggestion was in
error, lest it do incalculable damage to
our prestige abroad. Surely it Is a seri-
ous thing for our standing among nations
when a responsible leader of the admin-
istration's party in the Senate implies
that a valiant nation like Norway is a
pawn, to be moved about at will by the
United States. Dare we imply that only
we possess sovereignty and others merely
suplneness?

During World War II, the men and
women of Norway bravely opposed Nazi
invasion. Only a few months ago. these
same people courageously rejected a
Soviet threat of atomic retaliation unless
Norway would submit to the Russian
orbit. Is such a country to be regarded
as a mere missile in the rivalry between
the United States and the Soviet Union?

For many decades Britain suffered In
world opinion because, in the words of
the poet of empire. Rudyard Kipling,
other lands were considered "lesser
breeds without the law." If eminent
American political leaders are now to
consign to such a fate a proud people
with a great legacy and tradition like
Norway, then all our military might and
pomp will not bring us true or enduring
friendship.

In conclusion. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent that an editorial
from the Washington Post and Times
Herald of June 11. 1957. be printed in
the Record.

There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the Record.
as follows:

Knowland's Beainstorm
It is difficult to believe that Senate Minor-
ity Leader Knowland was serious when he
suggested that Norway be neutralized In re-
turn for withdrawal of Soviet troops from
Hungary. Of course, he, along with all the
free peoples of the world. wo\ild like to see
Hungary liberated. He realizes that the Rtis-
slans are not likely to consider the evacua-
tion of that unhappy land without some
major concession. But this scarcely justifies
him in reaching into his grab bag and com-
ing up with the mischievous idea of sacri-
ficing Norway.

Mr. Knowland was apparently not trying
to speak for Norway but only suggesting that
the United States pressure that country into
leaving the North Atlantic TYeaty Organiza-
tion in exchange for Hungarian freedom.
This does not, however, make his suggestion
any less reprehensible. Rather, It carries an
outrageous and wholly unwarranted impli-
cation that Norway is an American pawn In
somewhat the same way that Hungary is a
Russian pawn.

A few months ago the Kremlin tried to
blast Norway out of NATO by threatening
her with obliteration if she permitted her
bases to be used for an attack on Russia.
The Oslo government calmly replied that it
was none of the Kremlin's business how
Norway might choose to defend herself.
Washington might get an even sharper an-
swer If the State Department were foolish
enough to adopt Idi. Knowland's suggestion.
Norway Is a member of NATO because of the
protection it affords her against aggression.
Members of this alliance have solemnly
pledged themselves to regard an attack on
one as an attack on all. Nothing would
destroy this bulwark of peace and freedom so
qulclUy as a suggestion from the United
States that one of the partners be sacrificed
in an International horse trade. Since Mr.
Knowland has chosen to publicize his own
brainstorm, the State Department should
publicly consign It to the first avaUable
trash can.

BIRTHDAY ANNIVERSARY OP
SENATOR BYRD

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, yes-
terday was the 70th birthday anniversary
of our distinguished colleague. Senator
Harry P. Byrd. of Virginia. I regret
that I was not personally present to ex-
tend my felicitations to him on his 70th

8750

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATF

R7?;i

1

.1
I'?

8750

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

birthday anniversary, but I may say now
that since I have been a Member of the
Senate there has been between us a
friendship I have cherished de<?ply.

I extend to Senator Byhd my personal
felicitationa. and wish for him many
more years of service to his country and
to his State, and wish him a long life of
good health and happiness.

Mr. MARTIN of Pennsylvania. Mr.
President, yesterday was a great day in
the history of the United States Senate,
when Harry P. Byrd, the distinguished
senior Senator from Virginia and the
Chairman of the Committee on Finance,
celebrated his 70th birthday anniversary.

Senator Byrd s a statesman of the old
school. I have h-^d the honor of serving
with him on the Committee on Finance
since I Prst cnme to the Senate. He is
fair and impartial, and renders every
decision according to what he thinks
will be in the best interests of the United
States.

I extend to him my sincere congratula-
tions on his birthday anniversary yester-
day, and I wL«h him many more years of
health and happiness.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Pres-
ident. I am happy to join with my col-
leagues in offer! n.^ congratulations to
Senator Harry F. Byrd. who celebrated
his 70th birthday anniversary yesterday.
I did not knew of it at the time; I have
Just now received news of It.

There is no Senator in the whole body
whom any of us reveres, re'T>ects, and
loves more than Harry Byrd. the distin-
guished senior Senator from Virginia.
Harry came to the Senate long before I
did; but in all the time I have been a
Member of the Senate I have always felt
that he was a tower of strength in his
convictions with regard to the fiscal
structure of the United States.

I am more than happy to join In the
encomiums, as we might call them, of this
great Senator.

PAN AMERICAN WORLD AIRWAYS

Mr. BEALL. Mr President, momen-
tarily, it Is hoped, the Civil Aeronautics
Board will be reaching a decision on the
New York-Washington-Mexico City non-
stop service case. The people of the
State of Mar>-land and the city of Balti-
more hope that the successful applicant
for this route will be Pan American
World Airways.

This desire of ours Is not just wishful
thinking:, becau'^e a Civil Aeronautics
Board examiner who conducted exten-
sive hearings in this matter several
months ago has been most decisive in
his recommendations. Without qualifi-
cation, the examiner has recommended
that Pan American be awarded the cer-
tificate.

Our selfishness — if It may be so
called — stems from our continued behef
that Baltimore's Friendship Airport of-
fers unlimited facilities for any airline
vMth foresight enough to use it as a ba^se
of operations. Pan American has in-
formed the Civil Aeronautics Board and
the public that It intends to use Friend-
ship as its Washington terminal upon
being certificated by the CAB.

Mr. President, this Is a most unique
case In many respects. Here we have a

case Involving 2 litigants, only 1 of
which has ever flown a commercial oper-
ation between the United States and
Mexico. This Pan American has been
doing for more than 23 years. The is-
sues have become so confused that a
nationally syndicated columnlrt, on his
radio program, accu.sed Pan American
of having done no pioneering in Mexico.
I offer for this body's consideration page
12 of the Metico City News issue of
Thursday, Ma> 23, 1957, and a story en-
titled 'P.AA Completes 29 years of Travel
Service Here," and I ask that a copy of
the article be printed in tlie Rccord at
the end of my remarks.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.

tSee exhibit 1.)

Mr. BEALL. Mr. President, the
char'rfe has also been made that to
give Pan American this route would
provide that carrier with a monop-
oly. Where is the monopoly? East-
ern Air Lines, as soon as it com-
pletes the necessary formal steps re-
quired by the Mexican Government, will
begin operations between Sew Orleans
and Mexico City. Pltase keet in mind.
Mr. President, that Eastern ims one of
the most extensive route systems of all
our domestic carriers through which to
flow traffic into New Orleans for flights
to Mexico City. Remember also, Mr.
President, that Eastern already has a
nonstop operation between New York
and New Orleans and once it implements
its service to Mexico City it will have a
traffic generatmg center tar outstripping
the facilities available to Pan American
which, we must always keep in mind, has
no domestic operations whatsoever.

Where Ls the monopoly. Mr. President?
The only way a monopoly could exist
would be for the Civil Aeronautics Board
or the President of the United States,
who rules in international cases, to over-
ride the powerful and unequrvocal rec-
ommendations of the Civil Aeronautics
Board examiner and give tins nonstop
operation to Eastern. Such action —
which we hope and trust will never
come — would give Eastern Air Lines two
exclusive routes mto Mexico City from
New York and Washincrton, one nonstop
and the other via New Orleans, and
would still confine Pan American to its
short-haul operation originating In
Houston.

The charge has been made, Mr. Presi-
dent, by some of our distinguished col-
leagues, that the airlme-subsidy bill
would be increased should Pan American
be awarded this certificate Nothing
could be further from the truth. All
evidence presented in the hearings be-
fore the examiner were to the contrary.
As recently as May 29. the general coun-
sel for Pan American in oral argument
before the full Civil Aeronautics Board
waived any subsidy claims for Pan Amer-
ican. Actually, Mr. President, there Is
every reason to believe that subsidy pay-
ments to Pan American, as a result of
this route award, would be substantially
reduced. Pan American has estimated
these reductions to be $2,300,000 and.
while the examiner did not accept this
figure, he agreed the reduction would
be very large.

I hold no particular brief for either of
the litigants \n this matter. We. in
Maryland, insist that Friendship Air-
port Is deserving of consideration as an
alternate for the overcrowded facilities
at Washington National Aiiport. We
will support any reasonable offers of
service from a recognized scheduled car-
rier. Pan American has made this offer
and we see in the Mexico City service a
great opportimity for the city of Balti-
more to be placed on the air-trade routes
of the world.

Mr. President, any examiner for a reg-
ulating agency has an important position
of trust. He is the man who sits through
many hours of argument, hearing all
sides of any controversy. In this case.
the examiner's final recommendations
are worthy of careful consideration:

The selection of Pan American will con-
tribute to a ct nslderable reduction of mall-
pay eubsldy. ThU carrier alone haa experi-
ence >s an orerseaa comfwtltor with the for-
elgn-fiag operat.jr ncjw entrenched In tha
New York-Mexico City market. Pan Amer-
ican can a'..io effectively fierve the Mexico
traffic that does not procectl eaat of New York
becauae It la In a position to provide hlRh.
quality Mrvtce for the local New Tork-Mexlco
City Udveleri; It haa the capacity for promot-
Ing large-scale tourist j-avel to Mexico: and
It ca" pr-vide o:ie-carrlpr service to polnta
beyond Mexico City, thus Intec.atlng tourl.«m
In the (teneral Lntin American area with lia
service to Mexico City. Of tha two appll-
canta. Pan American la In the far bet tar posi-
tion eventually to exploit and promote the
potentially large vacation and tourUt market
of Mexico City. • • • other counlrles regard
a proper participation by their flag carriers
In the movement of traffic between third
countries as an Important and legitimate
goal of national policy. It Is no less so for
the United States.

In sum, the C-ongreealonal policy aa ez-
preaaed In section 2 of the act as applied to
the facts of record In tbla case requires the
nonstop authorizations for Pan American.
This carrier, as the only applicant able to
provide all the types of public service re-
quired by the route and afford one-carrier
services tieyond each end of the route, can
provldj the most effective United Statea-flag
competition In an area of travel now domi-
nated by a foreign-flag operator. Pan Amer-
ican's certification will save the Governn:ient
mcney In mail-pay costs and Insure the
proper development of a potentially strong
foreign market. These vital considerations
of our national interest outweigh any pref-
erence for Eastern's proposal stemming from
greater opUmlsm. Initial p'.ans for all-oo«ch
fllghu, mute integration with domestic serv-
ice, probable diversion of Elastern's revenues,
and any color of right Eastern may have on
the ground that Its 194« award for Mexican
service failed of implementation. In other
words. If the needs of the traveling ptibllo
are best to be prompted and served, If full
American-flag participation In the two large
markets herein involved is to be recaptured
and held. IT we are to take advantage of In-
tegrating and solidifying our own flag serv-
ices between Europe and Latin America. If
a rare opportunity for reducing alr-canier
subsidy Is to be taken — in short. If the pub-
lic interest In an economically sound, finan-
cially strong and aubsldy-free air transport
la paramount — the choice of carrier In this
proceeding Is crystal clear. The choice la
Pan American.

Pan American Is a long-establlahed carrier
holding certificates of public convenience
and necessity and alr-operatlng certlflcatea.
Pan American's history of successful opera-
tions and Its showing on this record, leave
no doubt that It la fit, wlllicg. and able to

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8751

perform the services herein found required
by the public convenience and necessity.

It Is understandable, Mr. President,
that local geographical and political con-
siderations should enter Into a case of
this kind. But I fail to understand how
certification of Pan American from New
York and Washington to Mexico City
could adversely affect any of our sister
States to the southeast. Certainly their
commerce would be best served through
an aggressive campaign by Eastern to
build up its New York-New Orleans-
Mexico City operation. Virtually all of
our friends to the south can be fimneled
through New Orleans, via Eastern one
way or other. Certainly on operations
of these types, one carrier cannot pro-
vide maximum service in duplicate. One
of these routes would have to suffer.

In conclusion, Mr. President, let me
suggest that there is plenty of potential
air traffic available to both Pan American
and Eastern. In fact, a lively and
spirited competition could be generated
between the two carriers because I am
certain that a great many travelers
would enjoy a brief holiday in historic
and enchanting New Orleans before con-
tinuing on to Mexico City. It seems to
me that any argument from any of my
distinf^uished colleagues from the South-
east against certificating Pan American
on this nonstop service becomes irrele-
vant when the great potential of East-
ern's flights to Mexico through New
Orleans is realized.

Mr. President, I know that I speak for
the great majority of the people of Mary-
land and Baltimore when I earnestly
suggest to the President of the United
States and the Civil Aeronautics Board
that rapid certification of Pan American
Airways to serve Mexico City through
the modern and uncrowded Friendship
Airport be accomplished.
ExHnrr 1

PAA CoMPLrrEs 20 Tears or Travel Sexvicx
Kexe

Pan American World Airways has complet-
ed 29 years of providing air travel service In
Mexico.

PAAs first United States-Mexico route was
put Into operation in March 1929 from
Brownsville to Mexico City via Tamplco,

During this time Pan American has Invest-
ed 112 million In promoting tourism In Mex-
ico, according to a company pamphlet re-
cently published citing Pan Am's role In
pioneering aviation here and in other parts
of Latin America.

"One of the positive results of that pio-
neering Job by Pan American is the steady
growth In traffic between the United States
and Mexico.

"Ten years ago. PAA carried 62,510 passen-
gers to and from Mexico City. Last year the
figure rose to 89.597." the pamphlet stated.

"In Its program of fostering United States-
Mexico air ties. Pan American, through Cla
Mexlcana de Avlaclon, established schools for
mechanics, navigators, meteorologists, and
radio operators in Mexico City. For this,
Mexican employees awarded PAA executive
vice president Wilbur L. Morrison, a gold
medal • • •.

"Hundreds of Mexican pilots and other
technicians have been brought to PAA bases
In Miami and other points In the United
States for special training," It added. •

The publication was prepared as an answer
to a radio broadcast by Drew Pearson stating
that a group of Southeast Senators would
fight PAA certification for the New York-

Mexico City route which will be awarded
soon. According to Pearson, one of the Sen-
ators had said that another airline had plO'^
neered the route and should be awarded the
certificate.

ALEXANDER MEIKLEJOHN

Mr. MURRAY. Mr. President, on
May 10 of this year, on the campus of
8t. John's College, in nearby Annapolis,
Md., a meeting was held to honor one of
the greatest educators this or any other
nation has ever known — Dr. Alexander
Melklejohn. The occasion marked the
85th anniversary of E>r. Meiklejohn's
birth and the 30th anniversary of his
establishment of the experimental col-
lege at the University of Wisconsin.

The meeting was arranged by alumni
and former faculty member of the ex-
perimental college, acting on behalf of a
far greater group of Alexander Meikle-
john's friends and admiers. This wider
group includes those acquainted with
the many other facets of his work over a
period of 60 years— dean at Brown Uni-
versity, president of Amherst College,
founder of the California School of So-
cial Studies, and eloquent defender of
constitutional liberties.

On this occasion there was announced
the establishment of an annual Alex-
ander Melklejohn award for academic
freedom, to be administered by the
American Association of University Pro-
fessors, through a gift from the experi-
mental college alumni — a most fitting
tribute and memorial.

A few years ago I had the rare and
stimulating privilege of traveling with
Alexander Melklejohn as we were en
route to the initiation of UNESCO. His
breadth of vision and depth of imder-
standing. his kindness, his gentleness, his
alertness of mind and his ever-present
sense of humor Impressed me no less
than they have all the others who have
been privileged to know him. I am sure
he is well known to other Members of
this body, through his writings, and
particularly because of his eloquent
statement on the meaning of free speech
and the first amendment, delivered be-
fore the Senate Subcommittee on Con-
stitutional Liberties in the autumn of
1955.

Mr. President, I have read with keen
interest and a deep awareness of its great
Importance to our country, the address
delivered by Dr. Melklejohn at the An-
napolis meeting. At a time when we In
the Congress are belabored by demands
that we undertake crash programs aimed
at the rapid development of great nimi-
bers of scientists, specialists, and techni-
cians of all sorts, when we are told that
our national survival depends on our
engaging in a race to turn out greater
and greater numbers of highly trained,
albeit little learned, men of knowledge,
It behooves each of us and all of those
charged with a more direct responsibil-
ity for the education of Americans to
study and to ponder and to act on the
basis of the principles so clearly set forth
by Dr. Melklejohn in his address, for
unless we see to it that our men of
knowledge are primarily men of under-
standing, and that our scientists are men
of wisdom, rather than of training alone.

while we might win the battle of num-
bers, we would be sure to lose the war
for freedom, for justice, and for the
preservation of the truly great values
without which nothing is of value.

Because of its great import. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that Dr.
Meiklejohn's address, entitled "The
American College and the American
Freedom," be set forth at this point in
the Congressional Record.

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

Thz Amebican Collecz and Ameeicam
Freedom

Pi-esldent Welgle, Dean Klein, the faculty
and other members of the St. John's com-
munity, we of the Experimental CoUege
come here, In response to your very kind Invi-
tation, to celebrate the 30th anniversary of
the birth of our own college. May I express to
you our deep appreciation of an act of cour-
tesy which Is. I think, unique In the academic
life of the United States. There are, as you
know, many differences in the method and
the content of teaching of our two institu-
tions. And yet, your invitation and our
acceptance of It indicate, I am sure, a funda-
mental kinship, an Identity of purpose, be-
tween us. Through many happy and ex-
citing days and weeks and montiis on tiiia
campus I have recognized the depth and the
warmth of that kinship, and have delighted
in It. Coming here, we of the Experimental
College find ourselves at home.

The committee In charge of this celebra-
tion haa commissioned me to discuss with
this assemblage the theme "The American
CoUege and American Freedom." Before
plunging Into my topic may I single out my
fellow guests and say to them two brief
words of greeting and of gratitude? Quite
apart from their intrinsic appropriateness
these words may serve, after a long separa-
tion, to bring us on speaking terms again.

First of all. my fellow Ex -Collegers, it is for
me, highly stimulating and very pleasant, to
be with you onee more. To the organizers
who, by imagination and industry and good
will, iiave finally brought us together, aU of
us, including the organizers themselves, owe
a debt of gratitude which, I trust, we shall
pay in full by enjoying the fruits of their
labors.

And second (speaking personally for my-
self) I must thank you for the kindness
with which, while celebrating the anniver-
sary of the college, you speak to one another,
and to me, of my birthday. No one could
ask, no one could give to a man of so many
years, a more welcome birthday present than
your assembling here, In mood of recollec-
tion, now gives to me. Thirty yean ago
when — to quote from Robert Burns — "we
were first acquent," you were wide-eyed boys
agog to enter college. At that time I was
not very much older than some of you are
now. Together with a dozen or so good
friends whom we called advisers I was try-
ing to think through and to bring Into active
and lusty being a college which would start
you, or speed you, along the road toward
educated living. And now, by some strange
miracle of generosity on yotir part, you give
me, as a birthday present, one more fling at
you, one more chance to teach — I did not
say "instruct" — to spur and challenge you
about the purpose which, in the years be-
tween 1927 and 1932, we served together in
Adams Hall, on the shore of Lake Mendota,
In Madison, Wis.

The committee in charge of our celebra-
tion has requested, or directed, me to pre-
sent my topic by posing a question or ques-
tions and offering an answer or answers in
such a way that tliroughout all our meet-
ings there may run a continuous effort of

■'

!■

IM

8752

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

reflection and dlacuaaion concerning men
•nd their minds, and eapecliUiy concerning
the freedom of American minds. The plan
teems to b« that, so far as we are capable
of it, our reunion shall take on that min-
gling of gaiety and seriousness, of belief and
bewilderment, which the STmposlum of
Plato long ago established as the model of
reTelry and conversation which are proper
to reasons bis beings. As I sajr that, I am
wondermg If you recaU as vividly as I do that
morning meeting of the coliege at which
George Russell, whom his readers knew as
**A£." spoke to us about the symposium,
telling us that whatever he had won of
human wisdom had Its source In the sayings
of the wLse Dlotima as she was quoted by
Socrates In that beautiful and powerful pla-
tonic duscussion of the nature of human
love. At this point, too, before the argu-
irent begins. I must pay my respects to
my two very good friends, Alan Burth and
Harold Taylor, who have been summoned
by the committee to give my argument a
going over when I have got It stated. They
are dangerous fellows both. It may be that
when they have had their say there will be
nothing left of my suggestions tor you to
talk about.

Shall we. howerer, siimmcn our courage
to try what the committee tells uj to do?
Shall we go Socratlc to the limit fir a day
or two? If we do follow that progriim. then
our celeb.-atlon must find Its fun in gay and
fearless questioning of whatever we are.
whatever we think, and whatever we care
for. We must subject to critical a&sessment
the truth or falsity of what we believe,
must ponder ruefully over much that ws
have done and plan to do In a confusing
and self-defeating contemporary world. The
committee is, I am sure, right in thinking
that these are the activities which our col-
lege would wish us to carry on and to enjoy
In celebration of Its birth. Can we enjoy
them? If not. It Is. I fear, all too clear
that however much we celebrate, we are not
celebrating a college.

Since we have been separated from one
another for many years and have traveled
many different paths. It will be wise. I think
to make a slnw beginning of our sympo-
sium. Let me then. In reminiscent mood.
seek to reopen the lines of conununlcatlon
by referring to two features of the past
which we have In common.

T>II EXPERIMrNT.*L COLLEGE

First, then. I remind ycu that at the re-
Union of 1942. when we celebrated the col-
lege on the 10th anniversary of its ending.
B wise young members of the alumni group
were called upon to answer on paper and
by voice the quesuon, "How do I fit In?"
These men had worked In many occupations
since leaving Madlscn and each of them
spoke of his special work with deep :oncern.
They were a lawyer, a doctor, an administra-
tor of the Tennessee Valley Authority, an
organizer fcr a labor union, a sculptor, a
university teacher of history, a machinist,
an employment supervisor, a writer of plays.
And yet. to my keen delight, they were also
speaking as members at a college whose gen-
eral Interest, while referring to all their oc-
cupations, was wider and deeper than any
one of them, than all of them together. As
I listened to their words. I knew the recorded
fact that Henry Adams had died 30 years
before those papers were read and that
Plato's writing had come to an end 24 cen-
turies earlier than that. But still, on that
happy morning I heard both Adams and
Plato speaking. They were there In the
W' rds and phrases through which 8 stories
were told. In the questions and answers by
which 10 years of busy living In the United
States were critically examined and Inter-
preted That was true. I am sxire. In 1942.
We had tried to make tt true from 1927 to
1933. I now suggest that it Is still true In
^oT. since we are a college. Plato and

Adams are here, waiting and eager to ta'k
with any one. with any group, which seeks
to find Its way toward educated living. But
so, too, are msiny others. John Oewey. wboas

gospel we often challenged, and who chal-
lenged ours, and Thorsteln Veblen, Arls-
tophanet. and Lincoln StefTens. Thucydldes.
and Frederick Turner, the builders of the
Parthenon, the builders ol American rsll-
roads. Solon, and Thomas Jeflerscn — these
and a host of other friends and teachers are
always present where a genuine college Is.
They are now ready to talk with us here,
just as. three decades ago. they stirred and
puzrled us and tried to make us think, in
Adams Hall. The road toward understand-
ing of men and their world Is often hard to
travel; Just now It Is even hard to And; but
It Is not. for one who looks around him as he
goes, a lonely road To go to college. If one
really ijoes to a college. Is to be Initiated Into
a fellowship of learning. It Is that per-
manent fellowship which our Impermanent
httle college now celebrates as. in these
meetings, it celebrates Itself.

And. second. It will perhaps stir old mem-
ories, and !0 reestablish old relations of con-
troversial give and take. If we look once more
at the curriculum, the course of study, which
our college required of all its members.
There were no separate subjects, so called In
that curriculum. We made no carefully de-
vised Incursions Into such special fields of
Investigation as economics or art. physics,
or logic, and the like. We were seeking to
learn, not how new kr.owledge may be won.
but how knowledge already svallable to us
may be so Interpreted and reinterpreted as
to be of use In the planning of human wel-
fare. To that end. we studied not subJecU
but clvilisauons — civilizations taken each In
Its entirely— end only clvilizaUons. In the
freshman year, advisers and pupils alike were
thrown into the attempt to become ac-
quainted with the city-state of Athens, m
the age of Pericles and the decades which
followed. After the fashion of crtUcal ob-
servers Just come to town. Interested in the
manner of life, the successes and failures, the
Joys and sorrows, tiie merits and defecu. of
a human enterprise, we read and considered
together the records which that most self-
expressive of clvll'.jatlons has left of its dally
experiences. Its great achievements. Us tragic
blunders. So far as we could do it we shared
in those experiences, those achlevemenu and
blunders, as if they were our own. And ths
study culmmated In the endeavor to see and
feel the city as Plato saw and felt It, to Join
with him, as pupils and critics. In the re-
flecting upon and planning of his Republic.
The second task was assigned to our pupils
at the end of the freshman year. It was to
be worked at durini? the summer vacation
and c Jtitinued. as a separate project, during
the first half of the sophomore ye<u-. We
called It a regional study of some American
community which each of you chose as hav-
ing special interest for htm. Dealing with
vastly different intellectual and cultural ma-
terial, you were commissioned to write a
critical examlnaUon of a nearby human en-
terprise Just as you had tried to interpret
that Grecian city, distant from us In tlma
and space and clrciunstancc. which sUll gives
guidance and Insight and warning to ths
Western World.

And. flnaUy. as your third task, the main
business of the sophomore year, you were
asked, with the help of your advisers, to de-
rive, from the records of the crestlve activ-
ities of the United SUtes of America, the
beginning of an understanding of this Na-
tion of ours, what it cares for. what It does
and fails to do. what It thinks about and
fails to think about. As youthful Ameri-
cans, you were to share, with mind and feel-
ing and win. In the making and stistalntnj
and transforming of the commtmJty of which
you are members. And here again your
success In the venture was assessed by your

ability to read a book. Ton were asked

to write a review of the account whlcli
Henry Adams gave of hU own educauon.
It seemed to the advisers that, insofar as
you could see and interpret what Adams was
saying about the United Sutes and his at-
tempt to understand It. could critically give
assent or dissent to his assessment of our
national career (our naUooal desUny), you
would have made a beginning in that proc-
ess of education which the college wUhed
you to suffer and enjoy.

Now. Jt U easy to see what was. and what
was not. what U. and what Is not, the pur-
pose which animated that curriculum.
When we asked you to size up, as a going!
or not -going, concern, some American vUlaga
or city or district, when we culUvated and
tested your a Si lily and your eagerness to
share with Plato and Adams the Intellec-
tual criticism and the em -tional solicitude
with which they planned for their respec-
tive communiUes, we were trying to initl-
ste you into an art. the most difficult as
well as the most Important, the most prac-
tical as well as the most Intellectual, activ-
ity in which the human mind can engage.
It Is the art of Intelligent practical Judg-
ment. of understanding your own life and
that of the community of which you are a
member, of so understanding them that you
can share with your fellows In the making
of those decisions which determine Individ-
ual and social welfare. As I say this I
must remind you that the college which 'we
celebrate m.^de no provUlon for the teach-
ing of the techniques of scholarly Investiga-
tion, gave no training in the methods by
which new knowledge is won. Other insti-
tutions should do that work. But we as a
college, had neither time nor interest for
It In our final report to the faculty of tha
University of Wisconsin, we said

"To put the matter very bluntly, the col-
lege Is as much and as little lnt«Tcsted In the
training of schotars as It Is In the making of
bankers. legislators, grocers, or the followers
of sny other specialized occupation or pro-
fession."

We Imposed upon you and upon oiuwlvee
a required curriculum, with no elective be-
cause we were convinced that standing apart
from all special Interest, from all specialized
studies, there Is a common Interest, a com-
mon un.'?peclallzed form of study, which stir-
passes all of them In urgency and difficulty
and significance. It is the need of under-
standing what we know. And that requires
of us that we learn to use our minds In a
way which. In content. In method, in pre-
supposlUon, and In result, U radically dif-
ferent from any of the kinds of thinking by
which scholarly research is done. To de-
velop the power and sest for engaging In that
creative inquiry Is, In our opinion, the only
legitimate purpose of an American college.

Having thus Ulked shout what colleges
should be trying to do, may I dose and sum-
marlae thu part of my argument by reading
some lines from a poem. Pc«ts are very
useful for bringing together Into a single
flash of insight the labored thinking of our
prose. The lines are taken from John Mase-
fleld-8 poem called Blograpl y Looking
back upon the dellghU of his youth, Mase-
fleld savors sgaln the excitement and Joy of
belonging to a coUege. He says—

"O Time, bring back those midnights and
those friends.

Those glittering moments that a spirit lends

That all may be Imagined from the flash.

The cloud -hid god-game through the light-
ning gash;

Those hours of stricken sparks from whlcb
men took

light to send out to men In song or book.

Those fk'tends who heard St. I>an eras' belta
strike two

Yet sUyed untU the barber's cockerel crew.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8753

Talking of noble styles, the Frenchman's

best,
The thought beyond great poets not ex-
pressed.
The glory of mood where human frailty

faUed.
The forts of human light not yet assailed.
Till the dim room had mind and seemed to

brood
Binding our wills to mental brotherhood.
Till we became a college, and each night
Was discipline and manhood and delight,
Till our farewells and winding down ths

stairs
At each gray dawn bad meaning that Time

spares,
That we, so linked, should roam the whole

world round
Teaching the ways our brooding minds had

found
Making that room our chapter, our one mind
Where all that this world soiled should be

refined."

I have tslked long — I fear too long — and,
perhaps, too sentimentally at>out what an
Amerlcin college is and. hence, what it ought
to be. We muct now discuss as briefly as we
can, what American freedom is. and hence,
ought to be. When that has been done we
may be ready to try to determine the rela-
tion of each of these to the other.

rSKEDOM AND LIBERTT

As we enter upon the attempt to recognize
freedom whcu we see It, and when we are
troubled by Its absence, we should, I think,
recall some dl&courr.<;lng remarks about that
venture, which were uttered by Abraham
Lincoln In a public speech given In 1864.
In characteristically ahrewd and ironical
words. Lincoln says that we Americans who
love freed im so passionately do not seem to
know what It Is. Using what Is for him the
equivalent term "liberty," he speaks of free-
dom as follows:

"The world has never had a good definition
of the word "liberty," and the American peo-
ple. Just now, are much In want of one. We
all declare for liberty; but In using the same
word we do not all mean the same thing.
With some the word "liberty" may mean for
each man to do as he pleases with himself,
and the product of his labor; while with
others the same word may mean for some
men to do as they please with other men,
and the product of other men's labor. Here
are two. not only different, but Incompatible
things, called by the same name, liberty.
And It follows that each of the things Is,
by the respective parties, called by two dif-
ferent and Incompatible names — liberty and
tyranny "

And having thus stigmatized our failure
to understand the most significant factor In
our lives. Lincoln proceeds to Ulustrste that
failure In a form which cuts deeply into our
current controversies about segregation as
between white men and black. He continues:
"'The shepherd drives the wolf from ths
sheep "8 throat for which the sheep thanks
the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf
denounces him for the act, as the destroyer
of liberty, especially as the sheep was a black
one. Plainly, the sheep and the wolf are not
agreed upon a definition of the word 'liberty';
and precisely the same difference prevails to-
day among us human creatures, even in ths
North, and all professing to love liberty.
Hence we behold the process by which thou-
sands are dally passing from under the yoke
of bondage hailed by some as the advance of
liberty, and bewailed by others as the de-
struction of all liberty."

Is It true, as Lincoln here suggests, that
much which we Americans call freedom Is
found, when carefully examined, to bs
tyranny? shall we agree that much which
Is commonly called tyranny Is. In fact, •
necessary feature of our freedom? I. for one,
am sure that, at both these |)olntB, he Great
cm 551

EmsAclpator Is right. And, ftirther, the sm-
blgultles and self-contrsdlctlotis In our
thinking about ourselres are much wider and
deepo" than ths brief statement here quoted
from him can tell. I venture as a generaliza-
tion which will run through the arguments
which are to follow In this paper, the asser-
tion that when we Americans talk about
otir Nation as free, we do not know very well
what ws are talking about, In fact we prefer,
on the whole, not to know what we are talk-
ing about. In explanation and I hope, in
support, of that acciisatlon, I begin by offer-
ing two less general remarks.

First, throughout our history, but espe-
cially In recent decades, our Nation has had
unequaled opportunities for the creation of
external wealth and power. With a new
world open before us for our conquest, we
have seized upon those opportunities by the
methods of what we call private or competi-
tive business enterprise. The success of
these methods has been so quick and so
great that it has become a sotux^ of amaze-
ment, of envy, and of terror to the rest of
the world. But the strains and stresses of
that success, the preoccupation with mate-
rial achievement, have been so Intense that
we have more and more substituted for the
Ideal of inner dignity and self-respect which
lies at the heart of our Institutions, the
peeudo-ldeal of competitive efficiencies, of
victory over others. Our prevailing maxim
for young people, as well as old. Is not now
"Be good" or "Do good." but rather "Make
good." Under the guidance of that maxim
we have become eager and aggressive In de-
fense of our Individual competitive rights.
But oiu" only effective common purpKJse Is
that of forever raising higher and higher
what we call the standard of living. And
the illusions, the meaninglessness Inherent
In that purpose have penetrated Into every
corner of our common life. Ihat Is the
basic reason why the schools and colleges
whlcb are, presumably, commissioned to
study and teach the ways of freedom are so
weak, so confused, so Ineffectual. My first
remark Is. then, that insofar as a society Is
dominated by the attitudes of competitive
business enterprise, freedom. In Its proper
American meaning, cannot be known and,
hence, cannot be taught.

And. second, this subetltutlon of a false
Ideal for a true one has built up among us
a national defect of disposition or of char-
acter which hinders all our attempts to edu-
cate ourselves. That defect Is a strong de-
fensive antipathy against self-critldam. an
insistence upon Intellectual conformity, an
Irrational fear lest by the use of our minds,
we might discover that we are not. in fact,
what we Intend or profess to be. I am not
here suggesting that we fear Intellectual ac-
tivity as such. We have, of cotu"8e, no terror
of the brilliant investigations which make
possible the curing of oiu: diseases, no dread
of the scientific research or the technologi-
cal Inventing which enables us to create ex-
ternal wealth and power with enormous ef-
ficiency. But the men whom we fear be-
cause of their thinking are the critics, men
who would question the value or wisdom of
these Intellectual achievements, who would
block progress by standing, like Socrates, in
the middle of the busy thoroughfare, AJtiring
themselves and others whose ears they can
catch, where the road leads. Such men ere,
as of old. 'corrupters of our youth and de-
niers of our gods. They do not follow loy-
ally and contentedly what we call ths
American way of life. They are dreamers,
do-gooders, eggheads, to bs Ignored or
laughed at; or. If that does not suffice, pun-
ished and suppressed. And this craving for
Intellectual conformity, this timidity of
mind, more than any other single factor, has
brought It about that our teachers labor in
Tain as they seek to educate ths people of •
Nation which fears and despises the very
essence of what education is.

What, then, is American freedom? Uay I
say to you, my fellow ex-coUegers, that ever
since you and I parted company 25 years ago,
the major part of my time and energy has
been given to the attempt to answer that
question. In reporting to you now "How I
fitted in," I shall not give you an organized
lecture on my findings. 1 shall follow the
usual procedure of the college by telling you
of a series of questions and assertions which
still puzzle me. I do so in the hope that we
may discuss them together.

First, I mention a point on which there is,
I think, some progress to report to you. Fol-
lowing a suggestion given to me 40 years
ago by Walton Hamilton, and worked out*
with my colleagues in the San Francisco
School of Social Studies, I seem to have dis-
covered that, as we study American freedom,
the best reading material available for the
purpose is found in the Federal Constitution
and in the Judicial opinions by which It has
been Interpreted. That material is filled
with controversy and with significance for
the understanding of our national life. I
deeply regret that when we puzzled out a
sophomore course of study in the Experi-
mental College we had not realized how it
might be used. If any one of you or any
number of you should someday share la
starting another experimental college, or in
making more experimental one which Is now
conventionalized, I hope you will consider
the suggestion I am now making.

My second topic is, in form, semantic. It
has to do with the defining of the difference
between the two terms "freedom" and "liber-
ty." as they are used in the Bill of Rights.
ITiese two terms serve as Instruments for de-
fining the relations between Individual
Americans and the governing agencies which
they have collectively established. And the
Constitution has great value for our dis-
cussion because, in its own reference, it
sharply separates these two words which are
commonly regarded as interchangeable. The
fifth amendment, on the other hand, speaks
of religion, speech, press, assembly, and pe-
tition. And its tremendous assertion is that
Congress and, by Implication, all other gov-
erning agencies, are denied any authority
whatever to abridge those freedoms. The
fifth amendment, on the other hand, speaks
of liberty. And liberty, It appears, is within
the scope of governmental restraint. The
Declaration of Independence, It is true, had
mads the flaming pronoiuioement that all
men are "endowed by their Creator with un-
alienable rights" and that "among these are
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
But the Constitution, in flat contradiction of
the earlier document, soberly provides that,
by action of the Government, all three of
these rights, as we call them, may be taken
from us, may be aUenated. That may not
be done "except by due process of law." And
yet the fact remains that, when public needs
seon to justify such action, and when it is
done fairly and with proper procedure, men
may be ordered to go into battle to destroy
other men's lives, to lose their own. their
business activities may be confined within
this or that set of limits; they may be re-
quired to pay into the public treasury such
unequal shares of their yearly Income as the
Government decides that it needs to take.
But those men are still, in the meaning of
the Bill of Rights, freemen, whose liberties
are properly abridged.

The third intellectual venture In which
I invite you to Join is that of defining the
revolutionary conception of freed<Hn which
dominates the Constitution and which finds
Its most expUclt indication. If not expres-
sion, in the first amendment. Why did our
forefathers adopt ths dictum, "Congress
shall make no law respecting an establish-
ment of religion, or prohibiting the free ex-
ercise thereof: or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of ths

i{W\

\'M

11

'I

8754

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

people peftceftbly to Maemble. and to peti-
tion tbe Oovemment for a redress of griev-
ances"? And why do we. when our minds
are clear, bold fast to the nme intention?
At tbls point In the argument. I am sorely
tempted to draw you into discussion of the
paradoxes and controversies Into which, dur-
ing the last 15 or 30 years. I have been
plunged by proposing an answer to that
question. I would much like to have your
belp In holding my ground or your consola-
tion if I am forced to give It up. But the
lack of time forbids me to yield to that
temptation. I can only try very briefly to
tell you wh'at. as I see It. la the Idea .'ur
which the American Revolution was and la
being fought and won.

The constitutional principle which, for
ptirposes of warfare and rebellion had been
effectively, though Inaccurately, proclaimed
by the Declaration of Independence was that
of political seL'-govemment. For centu-
ries our forefathers had suffered, and had
seen other common men suffer, from the
tyranny of being governed by others.
Priests, kings, barons, nonrepresentatlve
parliaments had, by superior force. Imposed
an arbitrary control upon them. But now
the time and the opportunity had come to
establish a political order In which the peo-
ple governed would also be the governors.
The rulers and the ruled would be the sanie
persons. No man would be required to ot)ey
a law In the making of which he had not
had an equal share with his fellow citizens.
Against this background, the first anjend-
ment finds its significance In the fact that
the terms "religion." "speech," "press." "as-
sembly." and "petition" refer to those activi-
ties of Judarment-maklng In which the proc-
ess of governing constsu. And It Is obvious
that unless the Judgment making of the peo-
ple Is. Individual by Individual, completely
Independent, unless It can be kept safe from
any external Interference, the program of
popular self-government becomes futile and
a sham. Now It was at this point that the
makers of the Constitution envisaged the
danger that representative ofBclals and agen-
cies chosen by the people might, under the
new regime, attempt, as tyrants had done
before, to govern the sovereign people with-
out their consent by exercising powers
which had not been delegated to them.
And It Is to prevent that catastropl^e that
the first amendment makes \ra ringing dec-
laration, setting an absolute limit to the
power of the legislative body and, by im-
plication, to the powers of all other repre-
sentative agencies. The need for that pro-
vision and for Its unqualified enforcement.
was never more clearly revealed than dur-
ing the war-tormented years through which
we have passed since 1919. Just as the
tyrants of old had always Justified their
acts of suppression by the plea that reli-
gion, speech, press, assembly, or petition, in
this case or that, threatened danger to the
general welfare or to the national security,
so our ofllclals and our courts of these cur-
rent days have Invaded our freedom, ap-
pealing to the same Justification. But the
first amendment will have none of It.
Speaking for a society whose members
have decided to be free. It denies and out-
laws that plea of danger. If the amend-
ment does not mean that. It docs not mean
anything. Whatever political freedom
turns out to be. we Americans have de-
cided to have it and to take It straight.

Fourth. I have Just spoken with much
enthusiasm concerning the first amendment.
And yet. for the purposes of the teacher, for
dealing with the questions with which we
are here concerned. It U a strangely unsatis-
fying statement. It takes under Its protec-
tion five different human activities, but
gives no unifying principle which could bind
them together Into a common significance.
But. even worse than that. Its provisions'
are merely negative. It seeks to prevent

something from being done rather than to
get something done. It protects our free-
doms, but gives no assurance that. In actual
practice, we Americans have and use any
freedoms which are worth protecting. The
difficulty Just suggested does not. I presume,
trouble those who, under the spell of the
Declaration of Independence, think of free-
dom as a gift with which all men are en-
dowed from birth. But to those of us who
have spent our Uvea, as teachers. In the
desperate attempt to find some way by
which Americans. Including ourselves, can
become free, that belief seems meaningless
and negligible. Freedom Is not a gift. It Is
an achievement. It can be won only by
hard work and good fortune — the good for-
tune Including normally much help from
others.

Now, If these things are true It follows
that our ittempt to understand the Con-
stitution must go beyond p<illtics, must at-
tempt to find elsewhere the goal toward
which the education of our self-governing
people Is. or should be. directed. And here,
the teacher, more directly than any other
member of our community, must be able to
serve as our guide, the Interpreter of our-
selves The persons who are commissioned
to lead our people, young and old. Into the
ways of freedom, must understand what
freedom Is What, then, have they to tell
us about It?

Before trying to answer that queaUon. we
must carefully note the fact the educaUon,
good or bad, is won from the personal and
social influences of a surrounding commu-
nity, as well as from the teaching given In
schools and colleges. Which of these la
more Important, It would be hard to tell.
But. In any case, they must be considered
separately.

As a starting point for some brief remarks
about schooling. I offer you a provocative
statement concerning British teaching which
I picked up when In Oxford 3 years ago.
It was written by a master of Eton College
In the days, three-quarters of a century
ai?o, when Brlttanla still ruled the waves,
and the upper class boys and young men
who went to Eton and like public schools
were belni? educated to rule Brlttanla. As
a teacher in the service of that aristocratic
governing (?roup, William Johnson Cory wrote
as follows:

"At school you are not engaged so much
in acquiring knowledge as In making mental
efforts under criticism A certain amount
of knowledge you can Indeed with average
faculties acquire so as to retain, nor need
you regret the hours you spent on much
that Is forgotten, for the shadow of lost
knowledge at least protects you from many
Illusions. But you i?o to a great school not
so much for knowledge as for arts and habits;
for the habit of attention, for the art of ex-
pression, for the art of assuming at a mo-
ment's notice a new Intellectual position,
for the art of entering quickly into another
person's thoughts, for the habit of sub-
mitting to censure and refutation, for the
art of Indicating assent or dissent In grad-
uated terms, for the habit of regarding mi-
nute points of accuracy, for the art of work-
ing out what Is possible In a given time, for
taste, for discrimination, for mental courage
and mental soberness."

That description of what should go on In
the minds of persons who are being pre-
pared to govern a community seems to me
unusually significant and suggestive. What
I have to say here alx)ut the teaching of free-
dom In our American schools and colleges
may be said In a few brief comments on Mr.
Cory's words.

Since we are. as a nation, committed to
self-government rather than to an aristo-
cratic tyranny. It Is evident that, as con-
trasted wltb the special privileges of Mr,
Cory's upper class group, all our citliens
must, so far as possible, be equally educated

And that being true. It follows that otir task
of educating our rulers la Immeasurably more
difficult than that which confronted the
public schools of England. 75 years ago. It
Implies, for example, that, for a long time,
we as well as the' Britain of today must
accept a lowering of the standards of teach-
ing achievement set by an aristocracy.

Further, in spite of the quantitative dif-
ference Just suggested, Mr. Cory's words go
straight and piercingly to the heart of our
American teaching enterprise. Every phrase
which he utters about the "arts and habits"
of "making mental efforts under criticism"
should startle us Into awareness of the fail-
ure of our schools and coUf ges to provide the
preparation needed for the "Judgment-mak-
ing" which free men must be able to do.

But a strange and striking feature of Mr.
Cory's account cf the purpose of teaching is
that he does not mention tlie curriculum, the
content of study, with which a school or
college should deal. And the explanaUon of
that fact Is. I think, that. In the Eton which
he knew, the choice of subject matter on
which pupils should practice their aru and
habits was made, not by the school, but by
the compact social group to which, both by
external and inner commitment, teachers,
pupils, and school, ail alike, belonged. In
fairness, I must add that. In the life and
manners of that group, as in lu schools,
there were great poaslbllltles of smugness, of
cruelty, of stupid and Insensitive conformity.
And yet It had a purpose and could teach it.
I doubt that. In the making of the modern
world, the public schools of Britain have been
surpassed with respect to their success in
teaching the arts and hablU needed by those
who govern.

It should also be said again that In sharp
contrast with Mr Cory's Eton, our American
schools and colleges do not find In our society
any such intellectual and cultural purposlve-
ness as that which he could count on to give
content and direction to his work. As a new
and highly conglomerate people, still in the
early stages of its making Into a Nation, we
have. It Is true, a code of behavior which we
call a way of life. But, as Abraham Un-
coln suggesu, that way of life U sadly
unaware and afraid of Its own meaning and
intention. There is throughout our society.
I am sure, a generotis passion for freedom!
But that passion, marching blindly on under
the banner of liberty, drives us toward en-
slavement of our fellowG and of ourselves
toward tyranny and. hence, away from free-
dom. Our national educaUon U. as yet. In
Its crude and unformed beginnings. We fall
to educate our children chiefly because we
have not had time or Integrity or courage to
educate ourselves.

The fifth step In our argument should by
logical sequence deal with the Influence
upon education exerted by nongovernmental
attitudes and agencies. I can. however, take
time merely to mention 2 or 3 of these.
Supporting our teaching Is the Intense but
often misguided American belief In the use-
fulness of scholastic learning. But on the
other side, our attempt at understanding U
blocked and misdirected by a wide array of
privately managed activities which are clear-
ly hostile to education In self-government.
One of these forces against which the col-
leges especially need to be protected at the
present moment Is the Insatiable greed of
the corporations and other business agen-
cies for an output of technologically trained
scientists as well as of potential business
executives. At a time when our private col-
leges are suffering from financial stringency,
that greed threatens their teaching with a
fundamenui distortion. And, further, cor-
relative with this threat to the colleges U
the dreadful effect upon public attitude and
opinion which comes from the mase-com-
munlcatlon industries, as they are con-
ducted by business enterprise. In my opin-
ion, thoae agencies, and especially radio «nd

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8755

television, are, day by day, year by year,
doing more damage to the minds of our
people than the schools and colleges are
doing good. They have made dominant
again In our society the mental trlckinesa,
which, long ago, Plato saw corrupting the
mind and spirit of Athens — the trickeries
which can prove (that Is. make plausible)
any belief, whether true or false, can, at a
price, make the worse appear the better
cause. Because of them, our national intel-
ligence is. I believe, steadily losing ground.
Madison Avenue Is more powerfiU and more
dangerous than the hydrogen bomb. What
shall we do about it in defense of our free-
dom?

And now, in conclusion, I must summarize
my argument by telling of the mortal com-
bat which, during the 60 years of my teach-
ing, has been waged in the American col-
lek,'e If I had the art for doing It, the story
might be told in the form of a medieval
mystery in which God and the devil con-
tt nd fur possession of the souls of men.
The devil, one of whose favorite devices Is
that of raising for men the standard of liv-
ing, thereby succeeds in lowering the stand-
ard of human intelligence. Since the bat-
tle, as we see it. takes place within colleges,
it is fought In the field of the mind. Two
sets, two kinds of intellectual activities are
at war with one another. In spite of their
hoBiility they are strangely akin in origin
and In character. After all. the devil is, as
yu know, an angel. But he Is a fallen
ar.gel, a rebel. He must, therefore, ht sub-
dued. brouKht back to fellowship and sanity.
Can It be done? How can It be done?

The two contestants, as seen within the
college, are the passion for knowledge and
the passion for understanding. In one
camp are the intellectual strivings by which
men seek to add new knowledge to the vast
stock of It which, in various departments,
we already po.«!?es8. In the other camp are
the intellectual strivings to so interpret and
reinterpret what we now know that it will
play its proper part as the servant of an
understanding which plans for human wel-
fare. The question at issue Is not "Shall
knowledge be destroyed?" It is, rather, "For
what ends shall knowledge be used, and by
what kind of thinking ahall the using be
done?"

As I phrase that question my mind goes
back to the days when, in 1897, my teaching
began. Through the strange, mechanical,
and, shall I say. devilish, device of an elec-
tive system, the old classical curriculum had
been giving way before the inroads of a new
Echolarshlp. And I can stUl feel the thrill
f f excitement and hope, mitigated by a con-
fused anxiety, with which we younger teach-
ers welcomed the broadening and deepening,
which the new forms of investigation prom-
ised to bring to our learning and teaching.
We began to speak proudly and confidently
of our newly devised university college
which, through the addition of sf>eciallzed
graduate teaching, would fuse together the
pursuit of knowledge anc the pursuit of
understanding on a higher level of intellec-
tual enterprise. But today, so far as I can
Fee. that hope is dead. The two elements did
not fuse. Scholarship has not informed and
ln.«plred the search for understanding. On
the contrary, stimulated and made powerful
by its strong appeal to the externalized and
competitive impulses of American life, it has
specialized in disconnectednefis. In lack of
meaning. It has thus obsciu-ed the older
purposes of the college and driven them from
the field. The curriculum htM now become
merely a vast collection of mutually unin-
telligible subjects. The members of the fac-
ulty have, professionally. Uttle if any in-
tellectual acquaintance with one another.
And pupils are encouraged to pursue each
his own separate studies, without regard for
or Interest In what, in other classrooms, his
friends may be doing. The combining of

the university and the college into a uni-
versity college has torn Into fragments the
community of learning which the older col-
lege Intended to be.

How shall the damage be repaired? How
shall the college become again a place of
understanding? First of all. It must be sep-
arated from the university, must become a
distinct and Independent Institution, aware
of its own purpose, which is radically dif-
ferent from that of the university, and reso-
lute In the piu-sult of that purpose. And,
further, the college must be small enough
and coherent enough to be In a vital and
dominating sense, a community which will
bind together all its teachers and all Its
pupils In the carrying on of their common
enterprise.

I have said that the pursuit of knowledge
has heretofore invited disaster by tearing
apart what we know about men and their
world into relatively meaningless fragments.
As against that procedure what we now need
is that In pursuit of understanding there be
cultivated and practiced an equally severe
and rigorous intellectual discipline which
will endeavor to put the minds of men to-
gether again into a pattern as meaningful as
the facts allow. That pattern will not be
created by mere good will. The needed unity
can be won, only as the total body of hiunan
knowledge and purpose is brought within the
scope of an organizing group Intelligence.
The brilliant achievements of scholarly In-
vestigation must be matched, they must be
surpassed, by the concerted efforts of Intel-
lectual Interpreters. The college must think
Its way through knowledge toward wisdom.
I need hardly add that If this transforma-
tion of the college is to be attempted, the
demands made upon the teacher whether he
works In Ghaiui or Russia or England or
Israel and so on, will be radically changed
and magnified. His work will be both more
important and more difficult than that of the
Investigator. He will no longer be merely
an instructor in English composition or
banking or chemical engineering or foreign
language. He will be. in the meastire of his
ability, one of the world's thinkers, Just as
all free citizens should be. grappling with
the world's problems, carrying assurance to
his pupils and to the surrounding community
that it is a free man's business to do what he
can with his mind In relation to these prob-
lems. He must think and teach In the In-
terest of freedom for all men.

The situation which now faces the teacher
and all of us is one of tragic severity.

It Is possible, as we all know, that this
blundering untutored race of men. through
the sudden access of brutalizing power which
knowledge brings, will soon destroy Itself.
But there is also hope that for the first time
since man began his education among the
carnivores, we may by patience and intelli-
gent use of knowledge construct a world that
sensitive and timid nattires cotild regard
without a shudder.

It is that hope which must guide us as we
press forward toward the radical transforma-
tion of all our American llbered teaching up
to and through the college and far beyond it.
May I In closing leave with you some words
written by Rablndranath Tagore of India In
which our teaching purpose finds fitting ex-
pression? He says:

"Where the mind is without fear, and the

heart is held high —
There knowledge Is free;
Where the world has not been broken up

Into fragments by narrow domestic

walls;
Where words come out from the depth of

truth;
Where tireless striving stretches Its arms

towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason hat' cot

lost its way into the dreary desert sand

of dead habit;

Where the mind Is led forward (by Thee)
Into ever-widening thought and ac-
tion—

Into that heaven of freedom (my Father)
let my country awake."

ALEXANDER HAMILTON

Mr. POTTER. Mr. President, I have
long been an aj^dent admirer of Alex-
ander Hamilton, and have been de-
lighted that this bicentennial year has
brought him greater honor by the people
of the United States.

Every day we as Americans may be
thankful for his brilliant efforts in con-
structing our Constitution and govern-
mental setup, and it gives me personal
pleasure when a young constituent also
realizes his worth.

James Copeland, a senior at Ann Arbor
High School, because of his knowledge of
the times and work of this founding
father, has been selected to represent
Michigan at the American Students Con-
stitutional Convention at Independence
Hall in Philadelphia, June 18-21. My
letter of congratulations to Mr. Copeland
follows :

Deas Ms. Copeland: Sometimes In the
vlciseitudes of hlstcx'y, otir greatest men are
not given as exalted a place in our history as
they deserve. Alexander Hamilton Is one
of these men.

Surrounded by other historical greats
such as George Washington and Thomas
Jefferson, these flgtires have tended to take
the limelight. The Alexander Hamilton Bi-
centennial year, and perceptive young men
like yourself competing on contests based
on the life and work of Alexander HamU-
ton, are Important aids in giving him the
honor he deserves.

Congratulations on your winning thl*
award. May I wish you an inspiring time
in Philadelphia and extend the hope that
you may be successful In achieving fiu:-
ther honors.

Sincerely yotirs,

Chaxles e. Poms.

ORDER OP BUSINESS

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I am about to suggest the absence
of a quorum. When a quorum has been
obtained, I hope the Senate may proceed
to the consideration of the appropriation
bill for the District of Columbia.

I appeal to all Senators to be present in
the Chamber as much of the time as pos-
sible during the consideration of the ap-
propriation bills which will be brought
before the Senate this week.

I also express the hope that Senators
will cooperate by confining their remarks
to the pending business. I realize that
there are occasions when Senators must
discuss subjects not relevant to an issue
under debate, but I hope they will not do
so during the remainder of the week of
June 10, because there are four appro-
priation bills which must be passed and
go to conference, and the conference re-
ports must be agreed to and sent to the
White House before the end of the fiscal
year.

If my colleagues will cooperate with
me, we shall have a morning hour each
morning, so that Senators may transact
routine business and make statements.
Then we shall proceed to the considera-
tion of the appropriation bills and have

i^:

' !":f j

u>

;

<

!' f

8756

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Junp. 11

8756

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

thorough, detailed explanations of them
and perhaps get some action on them.

Mr. President, I now suggest the ab-
sence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that the
order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.

DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA APPRO-
PRIATIONS. 1958

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I move that the Senate resume the
consideration of Calendar No. 416, Hou.se
bill 6500, the District of Columbia ap-
propriation bill.

The motion was a(?reed to; and the
Senate resumed the consideration of the
bill tH. R. 6500 > making appropriations
for the government of the District of
Columbia and other activities chargeable
in whole or in part against the revenues
of said District for the fiscal year end-
ing June 30. 1958. and for other purposes.

Mr. WILLIAMS Mr. President. I do
not think the Senate should consider
this appropriation bill without havin^,' a
quorum of the Senate present. There-
fore. I sugge.st the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll.
and the followmg Senators answered to
their names;

Aiken Hlrkenlooper Mors*

Barrett Ivm Morton

Beall Jaclcson Murray

Bible Javlts NeubeiKer

Carroll J»'n.^e^ P.i.store

Chrt'.f-r, Johnson, Tex. Robt-rtson

Church Knowland Rus,«»»ll

Dirlt.sen I.a-,i.sclie Smith N J

Ellender Mansfield Talmadse

Goldwu'.er Martin. Fh. Wiil.aaia

Hiiyden McNamara

Mr MANSFIELD. I announc" that
the Senator from Arkansas iMr. Mc-
ClellanI is absent by leave of the Sen-
ate on official business.

The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. FcL-
BRiGHTl is absent on official business.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I announce that the
Senator from Nebraska IMr. Hruska!.
the .^Senator from Nevada 'Mr. M.alone!.
and the Senator from North Dakota ' Mr.
Young! are absent on official business.

The Senator from New Hampshire
[Mr. Bridges!, the SenatiDr from North
Dakota I Mr. Lancer 1. the Senator f.'-om
Maine iMr. Payne!, and the Senator
from Utah I Mr. Watkins] are absent be-
cause of illness.

The Senator from South Dakota [Mr.
Mundt; is detained on official business.

The Senator from Vermont [Mr.
Flanders! is necessarily ab.sent.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. A quo-
rum IS not present.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Piesi-
dent. I move that the Sergeant at Arms
be instructed to request the attendance
of absent Senators.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion
of the Senator from Texas.

The motion was agreed to.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Sergeant at Arms will execute the order
of the Senate.

After a little delay. Mr. Allott. Mr.
Anderson, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Bricker,
Mr. Bush. Mr. Butler. Mr. Byrd. Mr.
Capehart. Mr. Carlson. Mr. Case of
New Jersey. Mr. Case of South Dakota,
Mr. Clark, Mr. Cooper. Mr. Cotton. Mr.
Curtis. Mr. Douglas, Mr. Dworshak,
Mr. Eastland. Mr. Envnt. Mr. Prear. Mr.
Gore. Mr. Green. Mr. Hennings. Mr.
Hn.L, Mr. Holla.nd, Mr. Humphrey, Mr.
Johnston of South Carolina. Mr. Ke-
fauver. Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kerr. Mr.
KucHEL. Mr. Long. Mr. Magnuson. Mr.
Martin of Iowa. Mr. Monroney, Mr.
Neely. Mr O Mahoney. Mr Potter. Mr.
PuRTELL, Mr. Revercomb. Mr. Salton-
stall Mr. Schoeppel, Mr. 6cott, Mr.
Smathers. Mrs. Smith of Maine. Mr.
Sparkman. Mr. Stennis, Mr. Symington.
Mr. Thurmond. .Mr. Thye. Mr. Wiley.
and Mr Yarbokough entered the Cham-
ber and answered to their names.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. A quo-
rum IS present.

Mr. PASTORE obtained the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texa.v Mr Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?

Mr. PA.STORE. I yield.

Mr JOHNSON of Texa.v This Is the
second quorum call we have had. I
thought It only fair to notify all Sena-
tors that the Senate was about to con-
sider an appropriation bill, therefore, I
su^jKested the absence cf a quorum.
After the roll had been called through
the "Ys," I asked that the order for the
quorum call be rescinded. .<;o a general
statement could be made. But at the in-
si.'^tence of the Senator from Delaware
[Mr. Williams!, who is a very prudent,
careful, and economy-minded Senator,
there was another quorum call and Sen-
ators had to leave committees they were
attending.

I have no desire to bring the business
of the Senate to a stand.st;:i while Sen-
ators make t;eneral statements on the
District of Columbia appropriation bill.
I think it outjht to be po.s.sible for them
to carry on then committee business and.
when we reach the vctinij staples on the
bill, to summon them into the Chamber
by a quorum call. But I have no other
course open to me. In view of the po.<;ition
which has been taken by my friend, the
Senator from Delaware. Therefore I
want each Senator to know that when
the ab.sence of a quorum is .sut;^ested and
wiien the order for the quorum call is not
re.scinded. Senators who fail to appear
and to have their names recorded will
not be listed in the Record.

Lender present conditions 48 Senators
constitute a quorum. Some thirty-odd
other Senators are in committees trans-
acting the public bu.sinf'.ss, or are en^aued
on ether official busine.ss. Some of them
come to the desk, as the distmKui.'-hed
Senator from South Carolina i Mr. John-
ston I. who IS now in the well. Is doin^.
and ask that their names be put on the
quorum call

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Mr President. I was already recorded.

Mr JOHNSON of Texas. I want my
friend from South Carolina to be re-
corded. I want all of my colleagues on
both sides to under.stand that duniu the

consideration of the appropriation bills,
when a quorum Is requested and ob-
tained, the Senators who do not happen
to have answered to their names will not
be listed automatically on the roll. With
that notice. I ask the Parliamentarian
and the Chair hereafter, when quorums
are suggested and the suggestions are
not withdrawn, to record only the Sen-
ators who are present in the Chamber.

Mr. WIUJAMS. Mr. President, wiU
the Senator yield?

Mr. PASTORE. I yield to the Sen-
ator from Delaware.

Mr. WIIUAMS. Mr. President, the
Senator from Texas (Mr. Johnson] saw
fit to make reference to the fact that
I insisted upon the presence of a quo-
rvm.

I mieht point out that I have no ob-
jection to the Senate convening at 9:30
a. m . if that is the Senator's wish. I
am perfectly willing to cooperate. Two
appropriation bills are to come before
the Senate today, 1 providing for
nearly $200 million and 1 providing for
more than $3'j billion. There were
present five Members of the Senate.
Certainly the American people have
every right to expect, even under the
leadership of the Democratic Party, that
a quorum of the Senate will be present
when we are passing upon bills totaling
nearly $4 billion.

I point out to the majority leader,
since he appears to be in such a great
rush to yet these four bills through, that
one, the District of Columbia appropria-
tion bill, was reported on June 6, and
the other 3 on June 7. and the 4 appro-
priation bills involve about $15 billion.
These bills have been before the com-
mittees of Con»:re.ss about 8 or 10 weeks.
They have been on the Senate calendar
only a few hours.

The Senator from Texas Is now In a
great rush, although the Senate was in
ses.'^ion only 3 days last week. Appar-
ently he now wants to keep the Senate
in session from 9:30 a. m. until about 10
p. m., .so that Senators will not have time
to study these bills, and also so that the
Senate can go back to a democratic 3-day
week.

Mr. P.\STORE. Mr. President, a par-
lia.mentary inquiry.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator will state it.

Mr. PASTORE. What Is the pending
order of busme.ss?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Consid-
eration of the District of Columbia ap-
propriation bill. H. R. 6500. Order No.
416.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator from Rhode Is-
land yield?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the
Senator from Rhode Island yield to the
Senator from Texas?

Mr. PASTORE. I yield.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the distinguished chairman of the
subcommittee. I assume. Intends to
make a detailed explanation of the bill
which his committee has reported.

Mr. PASTORE. I do.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I should like to inform the Senate
that the reason we did not take up this
bill yesterday, and the other bills yester-

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8757

day, was because of our desire to pro-
vide every Senator with as much time as
possible to consider them before they
were brought before the Senate. This
bill was reported last Friday, I believe;
is that correct?

Mr. PASTORE. Last Thursday.

Mr, JOHNSON of Texas. Last Thurs-
day. At that time I asked that copies of
the hearings, the bill, and the report
be delivered immediately, Thursday af-
ternoon, to certain individual Senators.

I do not know th.'.t it is unusual to
have hearings, bills, and reports de-
livered on Thursday or Friday, and to
have the bill taken up the following
Tuesday. I think perhaps more delay
has ensued in this case than is normal
in connection with appropriation bills.

I have no desire to have any bill con-
sidered without the presence of or the
knowledge of as many Members of the
Senate as is possible. During the gen-
eral statements, during general discus-
sions, and during speeches on extrane-
ous issues, I shall not ask that a quorimi
be present. Bat before we start reading
the bill for amendments or before we
vote on the bill. I shall ask that a quo-
rum be obtained. I shall ask that we
have a yea-and-nay vote on final passage
of the bill.

I now ask. Mr. President, that the yeas
and nays be ordered on final passage, so
that all Senators may know we will have
the yeas and nays when debate is con-
cluded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas
and nays are requested on the passage
of the bill.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I have one additional statement.
It involves repetition, but I want all
Senators to know about it.

We will ask that a quonmi be present
before the bill is passed and before we
start amending the bill. If a live quo-
rum is demanded Senators who do not
appear in the Chamber wiU not be
lisied.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent that the committee
amendments to H. R. 6500 be agreed to
en bloc, w ith the exception of the amend-
ments on page 2. line 1, relating to the
Federal payment; on page 4. Ime 3, con-
cerning funds for the executive office;
and on page 7. line 21. relating to the
appropriation for public schools; and I
ask that the bill, as thus amended, be
considered as an original text for the
purpose of amendment, and that points
of order shall not be waived.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the unanimous-consent re-
quest of the Senator from Rhode Island?

Mr. MORSE. Reserving the right to
object. I desire to ask the Senator from
l:hode Island one question.

I understand my colleague, the Senator
from Pennsylvania [Mr. Clajik], is going
to offer an amendment as to housing.
Is that covered?

Mr. PASTORE. That is not covered
in the three items I have mentioned, but
I am perfectly willing to include it. That
is not a Senate committee amendment
as such, which is the reason it was not
included.

Mr. MORSE. That Is perfectly satis-
factory.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the request of the Senator
from Rhode Island? The Chair hears
none, and it is so ordered.

The amendments agreed to en bloc
are as follows:

Under the heading "Federal Payment to
District of Columbia", on page 2, at the be-
ginning of line 21, to strike out "$0,121,100"
and Insert "Sfl.sai.lOO", and on page 3, at the
beginning of line 1. to strike out "»5,971,100"
and Insert "f 6.481. 100."

Under the subhead "Department of Gen-
eral Administration", on page 4, line 18,
after the word "Incorporated", to strike out
"e4. 526.000" and insert "»4,545,000."

Under the subhead "Regulatory Agencies",
on page 6, line 16, after the word "morgue",
to etrlke out "$1,200,000" and insert
"•1.216,000."

Under the subhead "Department of Occu-
pations and Professions", on page 6. line 18.
after the word "Professions", to strike out
"$237,000" and Insert "$294,800."

Under the subhead "Public Schools", on
page 7. line 11, after the word "Agriculture",
to ftrlke out "$376,598" and Insert "$408,666"
and on page 8, line 6, after the word "Dis-
trict", to insert a colon and "Provided fur-
ther. That this appropriation shall be avail-
able for the payment of retirement costs to
the public school food services fund."

Under the subhead "Recreation Depart-
ment", on page 8. at the beginning of line
22. to strike out "$2,145,000" and Insert
"$2,161,000."

Under the subhead "Metropolitan Police",
on page 10. line 13, after the word "otner-
wlse", to strike out "$18,100,000" and Insert
"$18,201,000", and In line 14, after the word
"amount", to strike out "$1,952,850" and
Insert "$1,969,000."

Under the subhead "Department of Voca-
tional Rehabilitation", on page 11. line 18,
after the word "Habllltatlon", to strike out
"$200,000" and Insert "$208,500."

Under the subhead "Courts", on page 12,
line 2. after the word "Justice", to strike out
"$4,488,500" and Insert "$4,534,600."

Under the subhead "Department of Pub-
lic Health", on page 12. line 25, after the
word "mile", to strike out "but not more
than $840 per annum for such automobile"
and Insert "with the limitation of the annual
amount available for such automobile to be
fixed by the Commissioners"; on page 14,
line 3. after the word "Health", to strike out
"$28,130,000" and Insert "$28,229,300", and In
line 6, after the word "exceed", to strike out
"$16" and insert "$18."

Under the subhead "Public Welfare", on
page 16. line 15, after the word "committed",
to strike out "$12,450,000" and Insert
"$13,136,000", asd In line 19, after the word
"Individual", to Insert a colon and "Provided
further. That when speclflcally authorized
by the Commissioners this appropriation
may be used for visiting any ward of the
Department of Public Welfare placed out-
side of the District of Columbia and the
States of Virginia and Maryland."

Under the subhead "Department of
Buildings and Grounds", on page 17. line 4,
after the word "Investigations", to strike out
"$2,000,000" and Insert "$2,010,000."

On page 17, line 10, after the word
"amount", to strike out "not exceeding 4
percent of a total of not more than $2 mil-
lion of appropriations made for such con-
struction projects and not exceeding 33^ per-
cent of a total of the appropriations In ex-
cess of $2 million" and Insert "to be
administratively determined by the
Commissioners . "

Under the subhead "Department of Ve-
hicles and Traffic", on page 19. line 12. after
the word "years", to strike out "$1,350,000*'
and Insert "$1,438,000."

Under the subhead '^otor Vehicle Park-
ing Agency", on page 20, line 8, after the
word "meters", to Btrlke out "$519,000" and
Insert "$602,900."

Under the subhead "Washington Aque-
duct", on page 21, Une 21, after the word
"water", to strike out "$2,250,000" and Insert
"$2322,000."

Under the subhead "National Zoological
Park", on jiage 24, line 23, after the word
"keepers", to strike out "$770,000" and In-
sert "$798,000."

On page 25, after Une 5. to Insert:

"PEXSONAL GZSVICES. WAGX SCALX ZMFLOTZK8

"For pay Increases and related retirement
costs for wage-scale employees, to be trans-
ferred by the Commissioners to the appro-
priations and funds from which the em-
ployees are properly payable. $1,162,500 of
which $142,000 shall be payable from the
highway fund. $101,600 from the water fund,
and $56,400 from the sanitary sewage works
fund."

Under the heading "Capital Outlay — ^Pub-
lic Building Construction", on page 27, line
11. after the word "expended", to strike out
"$10,496,000" and Insert "$10,733,000"; in
line 13. after the word "and" to Insert "such
amount as may be determined by the Com-
missioners", and In line 14, after the amend-
ment Just above stated, to strike out
"$569,475."

Under the subhead "Department of High-
ways", on page 29, at the beginning of line
11, to strike out "$14,591,000" and Insert
"$15,301,000". and In the same line, after the
word "which" to strike out "$14,391,000" and
Insert "$14,901,000."

Under the subhead "Washington Aque-
duct", on page 33, line 20, after the word
"For", to Insert "continuing construction of
flocculatlon-sedimentatlon basin at Dalecar-
lla", and on page 34. Une 9. after the word
"expended", to strike out "$190,000" and
Insert "$958,000, of which $768,000 shaU
not become available for expenditure untU
July 1, 1958."

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the Record at this point as a part of my
remarks a portion of the committee re-
port, from page 1 through page 6.

There being no objection, the excerpt
from the report (No. 409) was ordered
to be printed in the Record, as follows:

The Committee on Appropriations, to
whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6500)
making appropriations for the government
of the District of Columbia and other activ-
ities chargeable in whole or In part against
the revenues of said District for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1958, and for other
purposes, report the same to the Senate
with varioxis amendments and present here-
with Information relative to the changes
made:

Amount of bill as passed

House $192, 530, 300

Amount of Increase by Senate

(net)— 4, 052. 420

Amount of bill as re-
ported to Senate 196, 582, 720

Amount of regular and supple-
mental estimates for 1958 209, 504,800

Amount of appropriations,

1957 - 198. 253, 379

The bill as reported to the
Senate —
Under the estimates for 1958. 12, 922, 080
Under the appropriations for

1957 _ 1, 670, 659

CENERAL STATCMZKT

The blU provides a total of $196,582,720
for the 1958 expenses of the District of
Columbia government. This sum is $1,670.-
659 below the 1957 total appropriations, is

mi

8758

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

JuJie 11

III

r

$13^22^80 b«U)W Um 1958 budget estimates.
and t4^2.420 la azcesa of the Hoxise allow-
ances. Included In the Increase recom-
mended over the House bill U »2.715^00 In
supplemental requests not prevlou5l7 con-
sidered by the House.

Percentagewise, the total recommended Is
0 8 percent below the 1957 available funds,
6 2 percent under the total budget astlmates.
and 2.1 percent over the House allowance.

A summary of the appropriation bill, by
type of expenses, follows;

1057 ippro
prwtioiu

1
lOMMttmatps

1

Rouse

blU

.<5.»n »f

• mm-
r"Ht>ni 1

S.

U

Tilt.

.n-

I mend

UIT

<in.Titirii{ ►•xiHTi.ses ir'A I H. ''•^1 »I«I 417. irt) ' ll.'.T I'Xl .Vm »l "iU. «H. TW | $2..«7.<*i

C\i|iitdi outlay I 4K.llU.iiJV «,(»«: mw ; M.*\\».\AAi jr.. «r>4. iji«i I I, ■•liiMi

Total f IW«,353.37ti I 3D9. 504. <«li! 112. OO. 3no ! IWV .Wi TJO

4.'.

42l(

The major Increases In operating expenses
Involve $1,163,500 for wage-scale employees
and •570,000 for an expanded public-
assistance pro-am. For the capital outlay
Increases, the sum at 1768.000 Is essential
for solicitation of bid* and award of con-
struction contracts on a new plant f;»cility
of the Washington Aqueduct, and to 10.000
la necessary for cost of destining and con-
structing a bridge on Park Road over Piney
Branch to replace the existing closed struc-
ture.

Since 19S5 the capital outlay appropria-
tions have aggregated •119 507.819. and with
the 1958 proposai of •35.449.000. there would
be available •154.956.819 In the 4-year period
of the 10-year public works program Initially
scheduled at an estimated overall cost of
•305 million.

rZCKKAI, PATMEMT AND LOANS

The committee recommends that 120,500,-
000 be the payment by the Federal Govern-
ment to tlie general fund of the District of
Coliunbla. This sum is •500 000 over the
Rouae allowance but •2.500.000 below the
vxax authorized by the Revenue Act of 1956.
In ^proving the additional amount the
oommlttee recognizes that there exists an
obligation on the part of the United States
to contribute toward the ever-Increasing ex-
penditures of the Government of the District
of Columbia, many of which are uncontrol-
lable aaid highly essential. Furthermore,
the committee concluded that the Increased
pajrment was Justified In consideration of
the supplemental requests submitted and
the amendments proposed to the House bill.
as well a.s the overall fiscal position of the
District Government.

The conunlttee has agreed with the House
on the Federal payments and loans proposed
to other funds, except In the highway fund
where the loan authorization has been In-
creased by $510,000 to finance the construc-
tion of a bridge on Park Road over Plney
Branch, as a replacement of the existing
closed structure. It was the unanimous
opinion of the committee that the estimated
cost of 8500.000 for construction of a flshway
at Little Falls Dam Is greatly In excess of
the original estimate of •350,000, and la
quite disproportionate to the overall cost
($776,000) of the dam Itself. Therefore, the
construction of the flshway should be re-
evnlu.ited and serious consideration given
before any authorization Is made.

Krvmrvts, obligations, and surplus

In the bin recommended to the Senate
the estimated surplus as of June 30. 1958,
Is $4,448,747 as compared to $2,223,167 under
the House bill. The difference of $2,225,580
represents the Increased fund requirements
of $4,234,420 proposed In the Senate bill
($3,284,420 for cost Of amendments, proposed
and $1,000,000 reserved for supplementals)
minus the $6,510,000 Increased revenue
availability ($5,500,000 above the revenue
estimates of April 11, 1957. •500, OOO In-
creased Federal payment, and $510,000 in
additional loan authorization to the high-

way fundi. The surpluses are distributed
by funds as follows:

General fund... $3,350,702

Highway fund 26.335

Water fund 385.778

Sanitary sew.ige works fund 311043

Motor-vehicle parking fund 1.374.839

OPERATING CX-'^RNSES

Executive office. The committee recom-
mend* an appropriation of $369,770, an In-
crease of $7,270 uver the Huuse allowance
and $17,630 under the budget estimates
The additional sum is required to enable
the Board of Elections to carry out the re-
quirements of Public Law 376. 84th Con-
gress, In maintaining a permanent registry.

Department of General Admlnlsti-atlon:
The committee has approved the sum of
$4,545,000 for the operating expenses of this
Department In the fiscal year 1958. This
sum is $20,000 uver the Huuse allowance,
and $28,000 under the budget estimates.
The Increase proposed is considered neces-
sary to help alleviate the Increased work-
load in the Divisions of Administrative Serv-
ices. Finance, Personnel and Management.

Regulatory agencies: The commTTtee has
approved the additional sum of $15,000.
which added to the House allowance of
$1,300,000 will provide a toUal of $1,215,000
for operating c<j6ts of the 8 activities. The
recommended allowance is $33,300 under the
budget estimate of $1,248,600 and $134,386
above the 1957 available funds. Testimony
presentvd t'l the committee indicated the
additional sum Is needed to cope with the
workload In four activities; namely, control
of alcoholic beverages, administration of
parole laws. Wage, Safety and Hour Division,
and filing, recording property and corpora-
tion papers.

Department of occupations and profes-
sions: The committee proposes an appropria-
tion of $294,800. the budget estimate, and an
increase of $7,800 over the House allowance.
The Increase will provide for 2 additional
positions required In the processing and Is-
suance activity where It was Indicated the
workload has increased 18 4>ercent over the
previous year.

Public schools: The committee recom-
mends the appropriation of $37.2*6.050 for
operating expenses of the 6 activities Indi-
cated In tlie Districts public-school system
for the fiscal year 1958. This sum Is an In-
crease of $86,050 over the House allowance,
is $543,150 below the revised budget esti-
mates of $37,789,200, and is $1,749,374 In ex-
cess of the 1957 available funds aggregating
$35,496,626.

The additional $86,050 will provide $57,200
requested In the supplemental estimate sub-
mitted to the Senate In Senate Document
42 for costs (•42.000) In reallocation of 241
wage-board employees, and coets (•17,300) In
promoting 86 class 18-B teachers to class
18-C: and •26.850 to provide $1,500 addi-
tional for curriculum printing, •4.950 for
group testing material, and •20.400 for In-
structional supplies and materials.

In disapproving the reque.*;! for $440,250 to
proTlde 88 additional teaching poalClona, the
oommlttee oonaldered the House allowance
of 175 additional positions In the supervision
and instruction activity for the ensuing fia-
cal year to be sufficient to continue the Im-
provement in program now under a'ay. The
funds provided will al*o reduce the pupil-
teacher ratio from the present 35 to 1 to the
ratio of 33 to 1

The committee also believes that within
the funds provided, school officials can maln-
tiiln couiiouous reevaiuatlon of this pro-
gram for remedial reading and speech thera-
py, and al.so provide three additional teach-
ers for extremely m'^ntally retarded children,
with the pos.vibtllty of Increasing the num-
ber of pupils now attending the Military
Road School.

Testimony adduced in the bearings Indi-
cated that certain improvements are neces-
sary for coiiuuued accreditation of the
teichcrs college. The commltt;?e is aware of
the lack of physical facilities for the college.
School officials are now considering plans for
transferrin": the college to an exl.-^tlng build-
ing until such time as a new building can be
provided. Provision of the requested addi-
tional library books must await this decision
since space la lacking in the present college
building. The necessary part of the printing
and binding requested can be provided, by
existing funds, as can the position of profes-
sor of elementary eduratlnn at the graduate
level The committee feels certain that
school officials will exercise all possible care
In malnuinlng the teachers college as a
completely accredited institution.

The committee Is likewise aware of the
grave problem presented by older retarded
children and children with severe behavior
problems In the regular clnssrooms. The
school udministratu^n should consider seri-
ously some means of providing school space
for this group, with separate clarsroon^s for
b<:)ys and plrls, and with a program of In-
struction geared to their abilities.

The committee also deems it advisable for
school officials to use the average dally mem-
bership rather than the peak enrollment fig-
ures In October as a basis for any compila-
tions of school population.

Department of Recreation: The committee
proposes the estimate of $2,161,000 for this
Department, or an Increase of •16,000 over
the House bill, and •258.000 In excess of the
current year appropriation.

The additional sum will permit the im-
provement of services and programs In 14
of the various recreation centers.

Metropolitan Police: The committee rec-
ommends the sum of »18,201,000, the budget
estimate, for operating expenses of the De-
partment In the fiscal year 1958. This sum
Is •lOLGOO over the House allowance and Is
•429.476 above the total comparative figure
for 1957. The added sum will provide 24 ad-
ditional full-year positions to the uniformed
force.

The committee agrees with the Depart-
ments' plan for separate promotional exam-
inations for the detective force and the
uniformed force, but feels the cost of the
necessary additional official positions should
be absorbed by funds already available.

Department of Vocational Rehabilitation:
The committee has approved the sum of
•208.500, an Increase of ^8,500 over the House
allowance. The additional sum was re-
quested In supplemental estimate. Senate
Document 42. and Is necessary to permit the
District to pay Its share of the rehabilitation
program for patients discharged from St.
Elizabeths Hospital, as authorized by Public
Law 565, 83d Congress.

Courts: The committee has approved the
revised budget estimate of •4.534,600 for op-
erating expenses of the courts In the fiscal
jear 1958. This amount Is $46,100 over the

1957 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE 8759

Bouse allowance and U oonaldered necessary $83,900 oyer the allowance of t519,000 and la trlcal Wiring In elementary and second-

f or the efBclent operation of the varloua In the amount of the budget estimate. Thla ^^TV schools ' and $99 300 to orovide the

courts. The stun la to be applied as foUows: Increase will cover the coets of the fringe #„,, pc-tlmfltp rMUP<sti«d hv th*. H«mirftl

Juvenile court. •31.900 (•13,600 for reallo- parking project proposed at Michigan Ave- ^^,,^}rf^^,y^l^^.^^^^^

cations; »8.300 for a poaltlona and related nue and Harewood Road NK. (Soldier.* CouncU for the care of indigent patients

costs). Home area). ^ ^h© private hospitals of the District

Munclpal court, $21,700 ($14,410 for addl- Washington Aqueduct: The committee Of Columbia.

tlonal personnel and related costs In civil recommends $2,322,000, an Increase of $72,000 The bill as reported Will provide the

division: •7,290 to annualize positions In do- over the House bill and a reduction of $6,000 District with sufficient funds to carry

mestlc relations branch. .„ ._ , ^^ t^* budget estimate. The Increase Is In Q^t its financial responsibilities in the

Municipal court of appeaU. $2,800 for the amount of the supplemental estimate to gnsuimr vear and vetDrovlde an overaU

equipment In the clerk's office. cover wage-board increase, for employee. ®t^l^ ^ L^, ^ H L inJI #

Department of Public Health: The com- and relatwl costs. estimated surplus on June 30. 1958. of

mlttee recommends $28,229,300, or an Increase National Zoological Park: The committee approximately $4,400,000. Such surplus,

of $99,300 over the House allowance. The recommends $798,000, an Increase of $28,000 Contained in five different funds, is re-

addltlonal sum Is needed for care of Indigent over the House allowance of $770,000 and Is quired to meet the ever-increasing ex-

patients In the contract hospitals of the Dls- in the amount of the budget estimate. The penditures of the District government,

trlct of Columbia, and such sum added to the Increase over the House allowance will pro- ^ Senators well know the city is Still

^^""^ 1^yl^r^J\^xT^^J^tV!^V^ Vide for additional p«.ltlons foi Increased growing in population, knd added flnan-

the fiscal year 1958. This amount Is $439,800 workload and for maintaining new restroom °,„, w„,j^J1 „ i^' „j *.\,^^..„\. *u-.

above the current-year allowance for medl- building. ^^^^ burdens are imposed through the

cal charities. Also reconunended Is an in- Personal services, wage-scale employi.es: necessary expansion of the school sys-

crease In the Inpatient per diem rate to $18. The committee recommends $1,162,500, an tem and the health and welfare de];>art-

Increase of $2 over the House bill, and $4 over Increase of $1,162,500 over the House bill, and ments, as well as the increasing obliga-

the budget estimate. Is In the amount of the budget estimate, tion of affording adequate protection

Department of Public Welfare: The com- This amount Is necessary to pay the average through the police and fire departments.
mlttee recommends an appropriation of $13,- Increase of 11 cents per hour for the District j* seems only fair that the Federal
136,000 for operating expenses of the Depart- regular wage-board employees. Government should assume Its share of
ment in the fiscal year 1958. This sum Is an Public building construction (capital out- ^iJi ,T^ L^w „„^ !!^v,I i JSt^^^^
Increase of $688,000 over the House allow- lay) : The committee recommends $10,733,000, '"^ increasea ODllgailon. ine lOCai lax-
ance, and Is considered essential for an ex- an Increase of $237,000 over the House biU, Payers having contributed their share
panded program of public assistance In the and a reduction of $3,644,800 In the estimate, through the increased taxes imposed
District. It was the feeling of the com- The $237,000 Increase was requested In a sup- by the Revenue Act of 1956. Accord-
mlttee that the additional sum. of which plemental estimate (S. Doc. 42) and Is need- ingly, the bill provides for a Federal
$570,000 was submitted as a supplemental ed to carry out the electrical modernization payment of $20,500,000. as compared
estimate, was sufficient to permit this Impor- program In District elementary and secondary ^i^h the HOUSe allowance of $20 mil-
tan t program to function until such time a. schools. The total program will eventually ,, ^ .^ authorized allowance of
the Commissioners could more clearly deter- cost around $810,000. i^]?' ^^,. ^^® ,Si?!^ ^^- ,*!«««««
mine what portion of available revenues Highway Department (capital outlay): *23 milhon. This additional $500,000
might be apportioned to this new program. The committee recommends $15,301,000. an seems adequate, in proportion to the $4
The $686,000 Is distributed as foUows: Increase of $510,000 over the House allowance million plus which is proposed to be
Continue payments at current of $14,791,000. The proposed Increase Is for added to the House figure.

level $116, 000 the construction of the bridge on Park Road That, in a very concise, and I hope very

Surplus food program 150,000 over Plney Branch, as a replacement of the clear, fashion, pretty well recapitulates

Assistance payments In Ueu of un- existing closed structure. ^j^g jj^j ^^^ states the general point of

paid court orders __ 200,000 Washington Aqueduct (capital outlay) : ^^^ underlying the bill whlch IS noW

Emergency assistance grants 75,000 The committee recommends $958,000, an In- -p^^.--

Improve services 100,000 crease of $768,000 over the House allowance PciiumB.

Remove celling on payments. 45, 000 of $190,000. and Is In the amount of the I wish to relinquish the floor at this

budget estimate. Testimony In the course of moment, before a quorum call is asKOd

The committee has restored to the bill lan- ^^^ hearings was to the effect that with thl. for. and before the bill is read for

guage to enable offlclaU of the Department authorization It would be possible to adver- amendment, because I understand that

to visit ward, located outside the District of ^i^ j^r bids and award a contract for con- Qt^er Senators wish to speak.

ix)iumDia. Btructlon during fiscal 1958 without expendl- rrv.. ■D-o-vaTTtTKn, cwwxfVVi TVi«

Department of Building, and Grounds: ^^^ _, iMnAi in 1958 "^^ PRESIUINCJ OFFICEK. ine

The committee recommends $2,010,000. an Cleifc Will state the first committee

Increase of $10,000 over the Houm allowance Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, in or- amendment passed over.

and $86,oco under the budget estimate. Thla der to recapitulate. I desire to make a The Chut Clerk. On page 2, line 1,

Is the amount requested In Senate Document few brief remarks with respect to the after the word "and" it is proposed to

42 for survey of electrical wiring. District of Columbia appropriation bill strike out "$20,000,000" and insert in Ueu

enSirtr^ommiiTon^rdeSn^^^^^ forl958 which carries the unanimous thereof "$20,500,000".

mlnlstratlvely the amount to be allocated for approval of the committee. The PRESIDINa OFFICER. The

plans and specifications for the various con- The bill is $12,922,080 under the esti- question is on agreeing to the commit-

Btruction projects, as I. the practice foUowed mates for 1958; $1,670,659 imder the ap- tee amendment.

by executive agencies. propriations for 1957; and $4,052,420 Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I wish

Department of Highways: The committee over the bill as passed by the House. to make a brief statement on the general
agrees with the House allowance of $7,050 000 included in this increase is $2,717,200 problem which confronts us. but I think
lppJove?''thrmcre'.2J ^u«tod T th" ^^ supplemental requests not considered I shall base it upon an amendment to the
amount of $177,100 to provide $157,500 for by the House. Some of these essential committee amendment, which I now send
Increased contract coets and Increased work- items are as follows: tO the desk on behalf of myself, the Sen-
load on street projects, and $19,600 for the One million one hundred sixty-two ator from Nevada [Mr. Bible], the Sena-
purchase of driver training cars. However, thousand five hundred dollars for Wage tor from Maryland [Mr. Beall], the Ben-
in denying the request; the committee ha. Board increases to so-called blue-collar ator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Clark], and
no objection to the financing of these proj- workers— an uncontrollable item; the Senator from West Virginia [Mr.
''*'fln»V\m".nT"n?\'^MH.- ..nrt Traffic- Fivc hundrod and scvcnty thousand NEELTl. I offer the amendment and ask
Th^'^commuL^rUlmends $M38.(S!"an dollars for the cost of expanding a that it be stated. " is «ally a sutet^^^
Increase of $88,000 over the House allowance much-needed pubUc assistance pro- tute for the the committee amendment,
of $1,350,000 and a reduction of $19,000 in the gram; The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
budget estimate. The Increase over the Five hundred and ten thousand dol- amendment to the amendment will be
House allowance wUl provide for the instal- j^j.^ jqj. construction costs involved in stated.

lation of a central control of the District'. ^^^ replacement of the Park Road The IjEGiSLATivE Clerk. On page 2,

I'^if.L"!!"*' rf^*""- ,'^^.r'iJ^t'l"*T^,1' bridge, an item extremely important to line 1. In lieu of the figure proposed to be

ment'^fi amount In Senate Docu- Jj^^'o^j^^est tax-paying public for inserted by the committee, namely. "$20.-

Motor vehicle Parking Agency: The com- crosstown travel; $237,000 for a modem- 500,000". it is proposed to Insert "$23.-

mlttee recommends $602,900. an Increase of ization program in coimection with elec- OOO.OOO."

8760

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

N

f 1

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I shall be
exceedingly brief In my comments on
this Important amendment.

At the outset I wish to say. with all
the sincerity at my command, that I
deeply appreciate the work of the Sena-
tor from Rhode Island IMr. PastoreI,
as chairman of the AppropriaUcns Sub-
committee on the District of Columbia
Affairs. There is no doubt in my mind,
and in the mmds of other members of
the District of Colimibia Committee —
because we disciissed the differences
which exist between the District of Co-
lumbia Committee and the Appropria-
tions Committee at a special meeting
yesterday afternoon — that the Senator
from lUiode Island has done a conscier-
tious and exceedingly able job as chair-
man of the Appropriations Subcommit-
tee on District of Columbia Affairs.

I wish to say to the Senator from
Rhode Island that although some
marked differences exist between the
District of Columbia Committee and the
Appropriations Committee with respect
to certain matters of policy, which also
Involve appropriation issues, without ex-
ception we are deeply appreciative of
what the Senator from Rhode L«land has
done in the interest of the District of
Columbia on item after item. I wish to
say today that in my opinion the people
of the District of Columbia are, indeed,
fortunate to have as chairman of the
Appropriations Subcommittee on Dis-
trict of Columbia Affairs, to whom is
entrusted the consideration of Distiict of
Columbia appropriations, a man with a
social conscience, a man who Is dedicated
to the welfare of the District of
Columbia.

Therefore it pains each one of us on
the District of Columbia Commit"-ee to
find ourselves in opposition to the Sena-
tor from Rhode Island and his comimttee
on any point, major or minor. We wish
to assure him and the Appropriations
Committee that our differencp in regard
to this appropriation bill springs only
from our deep conviction that more
money should be appropriated in the in-
terest of doing what we consider to be
deserved fiscal justice to the District of
Columbia.

Whatever I may say, and waatever any
other member of the District of Colum-
bia Committee may say in the course of
the debate today, based upon discussions
which we have had among ourselves,
must not be mterpreted m the slightest
degree as any criticism of the Senator
from Rhode Island or any other mem-
ber of his subcommittee or of the full
Committee on Appropriations We have
an honest difference of opinion, as a
matter of public policy, in respect to the
subject matter of the first committee
amendment.

The Hrst amendment Roes to the ques-
tion of the appropriations Congress
ouKht to contribute to the District of
Columbia budget. It goes back to the
fact that in our opinion Congress is
bound, we think, to appropriate the full
$23 million, which we believe previously
was promised the District. There can
be very sincere and honest difference
of opinion about that, but I shall state

our ease. We pray consideration of It
on the p<ut of the Senate.

We realize that the EMstrlct of Co-
lumbia in the last year has raiaed more
In taxes than was expected. However,
we do not believe that is any justifica-
tion for Congress not going forward with
what we consider to t>e its commitment
of the full $23 million.

Before I read the ju.stiflcation for the
Federal payment based upon previous
legislation passed by Congress. I wish
very quickly to cover these points.

We believe that the $23 million should
be appropriated, first, because the Dis-
trict is limited in taxation. It Is not
really what we can call a free-taxing
district. It i.<5 not free to impose some
of the taxes which are imposed by mu-
nicipalities In our own States. It Is lim-
ited because the Federal Government is
the largest industry m the District, and
it is tax free. The District of Columbia
is not in a positior. to impo.se taxes on
the great Federal noldincrs in the Dis-
trict.

In the second p'ace, 42.8 percent of
the land in the Dis rict is owned by the
Federal Government. That is a ter-
rific amount to take out of the tax re-
sources of any municipality.

It is estimated— I am satl.sfled reli-
ably— that if this Innd were taxable, it
would yield $20 400 Of 0 in real-estate
taxes alone. If the Federal Government
were taxable &s a private employer c'
comparable size would be. the Federal
payment would be $47.5 milhon.

One hundred and eighty-seven mil-
lion dollars, in round Reures. represented
by property belonging to foreign govern-
ment.s and tax-exempt agencies, is ex-
empt from taxes in the District. Then,
too. we have imposed — and rightly so —
building restrictions in the District of
Columbia which hold down real-estate
values. If such restrictions were not
impo-sed by Congress, it would tw pos-
sible to permit the construction of taller
buildings in the District of Columbia,
which would be greater revenue-produc-
ing buildings, and therefore would pro-
duce a greater tax return.

Furthermore, we must keep in mind
that a great many of the people who earn
their living in the District of Columbia
have their residences outside the District
or have their legal domicile elsewhere.
It is a remarkable percentage, compared
With other municipalities in many other
parts of the country.

Then, too. we have a great many mili-
tary personnel in the District, who are
not paying Uxes into the District
treasury.

The District cannot extend its bound-
aries. In our own States, when a great
metropolitan area grows up around a
large city, soi^ner or later the metropoli-
tan area is taken in by the city as the
city expands, thus increasing the tax in-
come of the city. That cannot happen
in the District of Columbia because of
Its physical situation.

Therefore, the members of the Com-
mittee on the District of Columbia feel
that the Senate should take mto account
this situation, and that the Senate should
restore the full $23 million which, in our

opinion. CoogreaB. In fact, has committed
Itself to pay.
I ask unanimous consent to have

printed In the Rbcoud at this point, with-
out taking the time to do more than to
hit the highlights, some material on page
76 of the hearings of the Joint Commit-
tee on Fiscal Affairs of the House and
Senate Commitees on the District of
Columbia, held on January 11, 16, and 17,
1956.

There being no objection, the material
was ordered to be printed in the RccoRO,
as follows:

Turning to the matter of expensea, the
District Incurs Increased costs over and above
those Incurred by an ordinary city because
It Is the Nation's Caplt.il. S >me examples
of these Increases are as follows:

1. The Pine Arta Commlaslon and the Na-
tional Capital Planning Commission requlr*
that most public works structures be de-
signed to harmtnilze *ith the Federal master
plan for the Capital City. The new High-
way Bridi^e cost tl 3 million, or 31 percent
extra because of this. The Municipal Cen-
ter Is also an Illustration of fine monumen-
tal construction consistent with such con-
cepts.

3 The federally conceived plan of the city
calls for wide, beautiful, tree-linid streets
such a.s few other major cities enjoy. Plant-
ing and malnl&tnir.g these trees Is costing
$400,000 this year, and further Increases are
In sight. Wide streets also mean additional
pavmg costs.

3. An unusually fine federally operated eoo
la wholly paid for by the District of Co-
lumbl-i. The cost this year Is about SVOO.OOO.

4 The Nr.tu luil Park Service receives about
13 mlilion each year from the District of
Columbia for maintenance and operation
of federally ovncd and ccntroi:<d parks In
the city.

In addition, the District pays approxi-
mately $540. Cro per year to support the Park
Police. This l.s considerably more park land
and more park ex(>end;tures than are cus-
tomary In comparable cities

5 The large vulume of Federal structurea
imposes sli^ntncant demands on our p>ollce,
ftre. sanltatiMii. and other serv.ces. which
cannot be preci.sely computed In dollars, but
which nonetheless add to the cot.t of build-
ing and operating the city. Approzimatlon«
of some of these costs are as follows:

P'Hce, special details $60,000

Fire, special services 90.000

Cleaning streets In Federal areas 175,000

InsUlllng curbs and gutters abut-
ting Federal property 50,000

Motor-vehicle titling, etc.. of Federal

vehicles 15,000

Temporary home for soldiers end
sailors 35. OOO

8 The District Is unique In being subject
to Federal legislation that adds considerably
to the cost of maintaining th« city. For
Instance, under Public Law 648, 79th Con-
gre.ss. as amended, the District Is required to
•hare the cost of Federal grants for the con-
•tructlon of a hospital center and other hos-
pitals. The potential Uablllty for these pur-
poses is •ITS million.

7 Because of Federal expansion In the
»rea. Washlngron Is now completely encircled
by a thlcklv settled area that Is more popu-
lous than the city Itself, and which requires
the construction of expensive arterial high-
ways U) enable suburban populations to move
to and from the city. The fact that two
rivers have to be crassed by much of this
trafllc requires the construction ol very costly
brld^jes.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, as Is
stated in these hearings, the District in-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SEN ATE

8761

curs Increased costs oyer and above those
incurred by an ordinary city because it
Is the Nation's Capital.

On page 76 are cited some of the ex-
amples of these Increases:

1. The Fine Arts Commtssion and Nationtfl
Capital Planning Oommlsston require Uiat
most public works structures be designed to
harmonize with the ¥t6ienX master plan for
the Capital City.

2. The federally conceived plan of the city
calls for wide. beautlXul, tree-Uned streets
such as few other major cities enjoy.

The memorandum I have inserted seta
forth the total cost of this Item.

3. An uniL-jually fine federally operated zoo
Is wholly paid for by the District of Coltim-
bla. The cost this year Is about $800,000.

5. The large volume of Federal structures
imposes significant demands on our poiloe.
^t, sanitation, and other services.

6. The District is unique in l>elng subject
to Federal legislation that adds considerably
to the cost of maintaining the city. For
Instance, under Public Law 64*, TBth Con-
gress, as amended, the District U required
to share the cost of Federal grants for the
construction of a hospital center and other
hospitals. The potential liability Xor these
purposes Is $17.5 million.

7. Because of Federal expansion In the
area. Washington Is now completely endreled
by a thickly settled area that Is more popu-
lous than the city Itself, and which requires
the construction of expensive arterial high-
ways to enable suburban populations to
move to and from the city.

In fact, Mr. President, we cannot even
pet a full contribution from the Federal
Government to build a bridge across the
Potomac, to bring Govemment workers
from Virginia into the city, but insist
that a considerable part of the cost of
the construction of any stich bridges be
paid by the District.

Thus I could go on and point out that
there are many special costs which the
District must bear because it is the Na-
tion's Capital and l>ecause it is the Fed-
eral City, and that there Is an increased
obligation on the part of Congress to ap-
propriate the $23 million, for which some
of us plead this morning.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. DOUGLAS. May I ask the Sena-
tor from Oregon how the extra $2,500.-

000 would be spent if his amendment
were adopted?

Mr. MORSE. It could be spent for a
great many of the items we win discuss,
which must necessarily be restricted.

Mr. DOUGLAS. First, let me say that

1 congratulate the Senator for the In-
terest he has taken in the many children
of the District who lack food and who
are really half starved. My wife made
some inquiry into the subject some
months ago. and she was shocked to find
large numbers of children, living in areas
bordering on high-rent residential dis-
tricts, who were obviously half starved.

The Senator from Oregon and his col-
leagues have done an excellent job In
publicizing that fact. I would heartily
approve of adding appropriations for
that purpose. I would also approve ol
added appropriations for hospitals,
schools, and for the general welfare func-
tions of the city, vhlch I think are under-

financed. Will the Senator give any as-
surance as to what he intends to do on
those pxHnts?

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, we shall
make some specific recommendations, as
the Senator win learn, as the debate pro.
ceeds. Let me name one such expendi-
ture.

For example, we have the so-called 83
percent formula which is now being used
for welfare cases. That ought to be 100
percent. What actuaUy happens Is that
needy families in the District get only
83 percent of the allowances

Mr. DOUGLAS. For mininnim sub-
sistence.

Mr. MORSE. For minimum subsis-
tence ; and the experts believe that ought
to be 100 percent. T^at item alone
would amount to $1,500,000.

Mr. DOUGLAS. That would take the
major proportion of the $2,500,000.

Mr. MORSE. It would take the major
proportion. The Senator from Pennsyl-
vania jl Mr. Clark] will offer an amend-
ment proposing an increase in the num-
ber of schoolteachers. One cannot sit In
the Committee on the District of Colum-
bia an(* listen to the testimony of the
educational authorities who come before
us without knowing that a serious short-
age of teachers exist.

I hope Senators will mark my words,
because I want the Senate to know that
I engage in no conscious overstatement
In the course of this debate; to the con-
trary. I intend to lean over backward to
make certain that the arguments I make
this morning wiU have to be classified as
understatements with respect to the need
for more funds.

Let me discuss the question of the
shortage of schoolteachers. We have lis-
tened to the school authorities who have
testified before our committee. The
members of my subconmiittee are
alarmed over the serious educational
crisis which is developing in the Nation's
Capital. It happens to be our opinion,
I may say to the Senator from Illinois,
that we cannot remain silent concerning
a failure to provide the $23 million when
we know what the schools of the District
of Colimibia need.

My recollection Is that $440,000 Is
needed to provide the 89 additional
teachers who the school authorities were
imanimous In stating should be provided.

I turn now to the matter of hospitals.
There is a dreadful shortage of hospital
beds in the District of Columbia. Let me
say xsiosli respectfully that there are
many good hospitals here. But the testi-
mony shows that the District of Colum-
bia is operating 1 hospital, a part of the
structure of which dates back to 1876.
When one walks Into it, he knows it Is
that old. Tet, let me very quickly say
to those In charge of that hospital that
they are deserving of the appreciation of
every citizen of the District of Colimibia
for the magnificent work they are doing
in keeping th&t old structure In a usable
condition and in a remarkably sanitary
condition, considering all the handicaps
under which they work.

But it is the handicaps about which we
are speaking. As the doctors and sur-
geons who testified before us made clear.

• time simply comes when there Is a
limit to what can be done with an ob-
solete structure.

Again I speak most respectfiOly when
I say that, as the chairman of the Sub-
committee on Public Welfare of tha
Committee on the District of Cc^umbia,
Z shall do everything that is within my
power, at least, on the floor of tha
Senate today to plead for the restoration
of the funds which I think C(»gress is
really committed to appropriate, lor
reasons I shan set forth in a minute, in
order to meet the great social and hu-
manitarian needs of the District of Co-
lumbia. That happens to be our thesis.

Mr. E>OUGLA8. From my observa-
tions and from living In the District of
Columbia 9 years, I think the DisUlct
does need to spend more money for wel-
fare, for schools, and for hoapitals, and
that the specific items by which tha
Senator from Oregon aiKi, I mxlerstand.
the Senator from Poinsytvania would
increase the budget are very worthy
causes.

But this is the doubt in my mind:
whether the increase of $2,500,000,
which I am certain Is needed, should be
made from an added Federal appropria-
tion or should l>e made by added taxes
upon the real estate located in the Dis-
trict of Coliunbia. I should like to de-
velop that point for a mcxnent, if I may.

Mr. MORSE. If the Senator wiU per-
mit me to interrupt him, I should like to
make a modification of what I said, be-
cause I do not want anyone to be misled
by what I said.

When I said that increasing the per-
centage of the aUowances for needy
families would take care of $1,500,000 of
the $23 million. I mean that that amount
should be put in the budget, "nie money
ought to be there. Then, because of
certain parliamentary rules which con-
front us. It would be necessary to make
an additional appropriation for that
specific purpose by way of a supple-
mental appropriation blU. But now is
the time to make the money available.
Unless it is made available, it cannot be
handled by way of a supplemental appro-
priation bin.

Now I yield further to the Senator
from Illinois.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Two years ago my
•wife and I decided that we would build
a house In the District, because a Sena-
tor's duties compel him to be here from
9 to 10 months a year. Before we did
that, however, we canvassed houses al-
ready constructed, and we ctnnpared the
cost of constructing houses Inside and
outside the District, with particular ref-
erence to Maryland.

We found that one of the great advan-
tages of the District of Columbia in com-
parison with Maryland was a much lower
real estate tax level For Instance, in
the region near Bethesda, Chevy Chase,
and Silver Spring, we found that a house
on the District of Columbia side of the
street, which acted as the dividing line,
had a much lower tax rate than the house
on the Maryland side. I did not have tha
exact figures prepared on the subject,
but I can only say that the difference
was very appreciable. It was clear that

I -*

8762

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8763

the District of Columbia tax rate was
much lower than the Maryland tax rate.

This, on the surface, would seem to be
extraordinary, because the District of
Columbia is not a manufacturing city:
and generally It is necessary to have
manufacturing where the value per acre
Is higher, in order to support a low tax
rate.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield for an observation of
this point?

Mr. DOUGLAS. Yes; I yield.

Mr. PASTORE. I think at this junc-
ture it would be rather pertinent to
state that such a study is underway now.
and that a report is expected to be made
in a very short time. However, I am not
justifying the lower rate.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Can the Senator
from Rhode Island confirm my general
Impression that the effective tax rate In
the areas of Chevy Chase. Silver Spring,
and Bethesda is appreciably higher than
the effective tax rate for a house and
lot of equal value in the District of Co-
lumbia?

Mr. PASTORE. It is my understand-
ing that in the areas which have been
mentioned by the able Senator from
Illinois, an appraisal has already been
made, and the tax has gone up some-
what.

The Senator from Illinois used the
word "appreciable." That is a hard word
to use ui making a comparison. But the
tax rate in the District of Columbia is
lower than it is in the Maryland com-
munities to which the Senator referred.

Mr. DOUGLAS. It is lower in the
District of Columbia.

Mr. PASTORE. It is lower in the
District.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Could the Senator
from Rhode Island estimate how much
lower?

Mr. PASTORE. No : I would not dare
to do that ; but I can place the informa-
tion in the Record.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I hope the Senator
from Rhode Island will do so. I think
it would help very much in a discussion
of the bill.

I heartily agree with the purposes for
which the Senator from Oregon and the
Senator from Pennsylvania are striving.
I think they are to be commended for
so doing. But, very frankly, what has
been taking place in the District of Co-
lumbia, so far as I can tell, has been a
determined effort by the Board of Trade
to keep down the tax rate in the District
of Columbia. The effect of that has been
to stan'e city services, to starve welfare,
to starve education, to starve hospital
and medical care, and, in general, to
exercise a blighting influence upon the
District.

Ao Senators well know, the District of
Columbia is probably unique among the
big cities of the country in having the
largest proportion of houses which have
a high valuation. Let one go through the
Northwest section of this city, in which
I suppose most of us live, and instinc-
tively the question arises. Where does all
the money come from to buy and main-
tain these houses and keep the grounds
up? There is square mile after square
mile of extremely high valued houses.
I think this is largely due to the fact

that the District of Columbia Is the capi-
tal of the United States. I do not sup-
pose that the $22,500 salary which we
receive as a salary will maintain many
blocks; but there are also here large
numbers of Federal employees. Despite
the fact that they are constantly plead-
ing poverty — and I think perhaps many
of them are underpaid— It is true that
when two members of the family work —
which is quite common — there Is then
a relatively large family Income, and
that Is another very real reason why peo-
plo like to put their money Into homes.

There is not much night life in the
city of Washington, at least so far as I
have been able to observe. I am frank
to say that I have not hunted for it very
much. I Laughter.)

So Washington is a community of home
dwellers, and that Is all to the good.
However, that means that the average
value per house is high. The location in
the city of Washington of the Congress,
which passes the laws, draws to the city
large numbers of diplomats, the retired
wealthy lobbyists and public relations
men and also persons who have large
expense accounts, and who can obtain
deductions, for income-tax purposes, for
many of the expenditures they make.
The result is that lart;e numbers of per-
sons with relatively high Incomes are
drawn to the city of Washington; and.
as a result, the tax rate is low.

I think the social services of the city
of Washington should be supported more
adequately than they are. In times
past — until I was forced to make a
study of the comparative tax rates — I
thought that the Federal Government's
share of the expenses of the Government
of the District of Columbia should l)e
increased, since as it is perfectly true
that a very large percentage of the
ground, namely approximately 40 per-
cent, in the Di-strict of Columbia is used
for public buildings. But after I made a
study of the tax rates in the periphery
of the District of Columbia, and observed
the striking fact — 2 years ago — that
property in Maryland was taxed at a
much higher rate than property in the
District of Columbia, it seemed to me
that the tax rate in the District of Co-
lumbia should be increa.«:ed. It was my
impression, as a result of that study, that
the tax rate In Maryland was much
higher than that in the District of
Columbia.

In view of that fact, It seemed to me
that the best remedy was to increase the
tax rate in the District of Columbia.
That would mean that those of us who
own homes in the District of Columbia
would pay more taxes, but I think we
should accept that, and I wish to say
that I think the Board of Trade of the
District of Columbia has followed a very
shortsighted policy in using all its in-
fluence to keep down the tax rate. I
think the property owners In the Dis-
trict of Columbia should bear the in-
creased municipal costs to the degree of
their ability, rather than constantly de-
mand that the Federal Government meet
the increased costs. For although the
Federal Government removes property
In the District of Columbia from taxa-
tion, the Federal Government draws to
the District of Columbia the lobbyists.

diplomats, the relatively high -paid Gov-
ernment employees, and the jiublic-rela-
tions men; in other words, all those
found n the modern periphery of the
Gove, aent, and the entourage which
thus is attracted to the District of Co-
lumbia, live well. In good houses — which
Is fine — and they could pay increased
taxes if the board of trade would per-
mit the District of Columbia Commis-
sioners to Increase the real-estate tax.

I should like to ask thl.s question:
Would not it be possible for the District
of Columbia Commissioners to increase
the tax rate on real estate in the District
of Columblt ?

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I am
very glad the Senator from Illinois has
raised this point. I shall comment on
It in a moment.

First. Inasmuch as the Stnator from
New York (Mr. Javits] has been on his
feet, I shall be glad to yield to him at
this time, if he desires that I do so.

Mr. JAVrrs. Yes. Mr. President:
will the Senator from Oregon yield to
me?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. JAVITS. I should 11 ie to point
out to the Senator from lU.nols that I
think he makes a very persuasive case
for Increasing the real-estate tax In the
District of Columbia. However. It seems
to me that the lncrea.sed revenue thus
obtained should be used for quite an-
other purpose. In other words, Wash-
ington, D. C, is one of the very few
cities in the United States which has a
1 -percent levy on food purchased at
grocery stores — a levy whlcn is regres-
sive, and which bears very heavily on the
persons of the lowest Incomes. The tax
at present yields approximately $2,-
225.000 a year — incidentally, almost ex-
actly the amount the Senator from Ore-
gon wishes to have added to the contri-
bution the Federal Government makes
to the budget of the District of Colum-
bia.

In this connection, let me point out
that the Senator from Oregon and I
have Joined In sponsoring ii bill which
would repeal the present I f>ercent sales
tax Imposed In the District of Columbia
on food purchased for consumption in
homes. Let me say, in that connection,
that a sales tax on food consumed in
homes is basically a levy upcn those who
can least afford to pay taxes; and
among the Nation's largest cities, such
a tax Is Imposed only In Chicago. De-
troit, and St. Louis, in additi<)n to Wash-
ington. D. C. On the other hand. New
York. Philadelphia, Boston, Los Angeles,
San Francisco, and Baltimore, among
other cities, have no such tax.

If the Federal Governm«-nt does Its
part in increasing the contribution it
makes to the budget of '.he District
of Columbia — and for that reason I in-
tend to support the amend-iient of the
Senator from Oregon, which, inciden-
tally, would mean that in that event
the Federal Government would pay only
approximately 12 percent of the aggre-
gate cost of maintaining th.j District of
Columbia, which certainly would not
seem to be inequitable — then, in view of
the present regressive sales tax on food
consumed In homes in the District of
Columbia — a tax which is quite an un-

usual one — and in view of what the
Senator from Illinois has said regarding
the deficiencies of the real -estate tax
Imposed In the District of Columbia, It
seems to me that the Senator from Illi-
nois would have a much better case in
favor of increasing the real-estate tax In
the District of Colimibla after the pres-
ent tax on food consumed In homes in
the District of Columbia had been re-
moved.

Mr. EKDUGLAS. Mr. President, I
should now like to ask whether It is
within the power of the District of Co-
lumbia Commissioners to increase the
real-estate tax rate In the District of
Columbia?

Mr. MORSE. Yes: It is.

Mr. DOUGLAS. If it Is within their
power, could not the revenue thus ob-
tained l>e used for welfare, hospitals, and
education in the District of Columbia?

Mr. MORSE. Before I reply to that
question, let me say that I have been ad-
vised by the counsel of the committee,
Mr. Gulledge, that the rule in the Dis-
trict of Columbia is that the Commission-
ers cannot reduce the real-estate tax be-
low $2.20, but they can Increase It.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Precisely so. But,
they can increase the tax rate on real
estate In the District of Columbia: Is
that correct?

Mr. MORSEl Yes; and in a moment
I shall conuncnt on that point.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Second, if the real
estate tax rate in the District of Colum-
bia were increased, could not the addi-
tional revenue thus obtained be used to
make increased appropriations for wel-
fare activities in the District of Columbia,
which I believe are needed, and for added
hospital care and for added education?

Mr. MORSE. The answer is 'Yes."

Mr. DOUGLAS. Then why should not
we put pressure on the Commissioners
of the EHstrict of Columbia to increase
the real estate tax rate, rather than have
Congress increase the Federal grant to
the District of Columbia, thus making it
imnecess&ry for the Commissioners to
Increase the real estate tax rate.

Mr. MORSE. I shall discuss that
point in a moment.

Mr. BEALL. Mr. President

Mr. MORSE. First, Mr. President, I
yield to the Senator from Maryland.

Mr BEALL. Mr. President. I thank
the Senator from Oregon for yielding
to me.

The Senator from Oregon answered
the Senator from Illinois by stating that
the real estate tax rate in the District
of Columbia Is $2.30. Let me say that
the same Is true In the case of Mont-
gomery County, Md. Furthermore, a
reassessment of properties Is now being
made in the District of Columbia. The
assessment of properties, rather than the
tax rate, is the crux of the entire matter.
During the last 3rear there has been set
up the necessary machinery for the re-
assessment of real estate In the District
of Columbia.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Let me ask the Sen-
ator from Maryland, who Is very much
interested In matters affecting the Dis-
trict of Columbia, whether it is true that
the tax rate on real estate in Mont-
gomery County has now been Increased,

so that It Is on a level with that In the
District of Colimibla.

Mr. BEALL. I tmderstand It Is now
the same, namely, $2.30.

Mr. DOUGLAS, That was not the
case 2 years ago, was It?

Mr. BEALL. I do not know as to that.

Mr. DOUGLAS. 'What Is the rate In
Prince Georges County, as compared
with that In the District of Columbia?

Mr. BEALL. I do not have that in-
formation, but I shall get It.

Mr. DOUGLAS. What is the compara-
tive rate across the river In Virginia, as
compared with the rate in the District
of Columbia?

Mr. MORSE. I shall ask the com-
mittee clerk to obtain that Information
for the Record.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President. If the
Senator from Oregon will yield to me,
let me say we shall obtain all that Infor-
mation In 15 or 20 minutes.

Mr. DOUGLAS. But we need the in-
formation in connection with the amend-
ment of the Senator from Oregon; and
It will not do us much good to have the
Information tomorrow morning, inas-
much as we are to vote today on the
amendment.

Mr. PASTORE. I realize that: but we
shall obtain the information within a
very few minutes.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Is It the Impression
of the Senator from Rhode Island that
the tax rate in the adjoining counties of
Virginia is higher than that In the Dis-
trict of Columbia?

Mr. PASTORE. That Is correct.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Is It appreciably
higher?

Mr. PASTORE. That Is a difficult
question to answer. In that connection,
we should wait imtil we obtain the infor-
mation which is about to be provided.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Let me inquire of the
Senator from Maryland as to the situa-
tion in Takoma Park, Md.?

Mr. BEALL. A part of Takoma Park
is in Prince Georges County, and an-
other part is in Montgomery County.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Does the Senator
from Maryland have any information
as to the tax rate in Prince Georges
County, as compered with that in the
EMstrict of Columbia?

Mr. BEALL. We are now obtaining
that Information.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President. I do
not wish to iisurp the role of the Senator
from Oregon, but this is a very Impor-
tant matter.

Mr. MOEISE. I am glad to have the
Senator from Illinois proceed, and of
course I appreciate the Importance of
the matter.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Incidentally, Mr.
President, let me say that I do not think
the Senate should be dealing with this
subject, because In tMs connection the
Senate Is acting merely as a city coun-
cil. Instead, I think there should be
home rule in the District of Columbia, so
that these matters could be dealt with by
the local authorities.

However, since the Senate is at pres-
ent forced to act as the city counsel for
the District of Columbia, It Is obvious
that the Senate must do its duty in that
connection.

Mr. MORSE. I am glad the Senator
from minols has raised that point, and
I should like to have the people of the
country realize that today. In connection
with the pending measure, the Senate Is
acting as the city coimcll for the District
of Columbia.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I was once a mem-
ber of the Chicago City Cotmcil and
realize the importance of the matters we
are discussing.

Mr. MORSE. Then the Senator from
Illinois should feel very much at home at
this time

Mr. DOUGLAS. But I wish to say
that I think the Washington Board of
Trade has dominated the District of
Columbia Commissioners for a long
time, under both Democratic adminis-
trations and Republican administra-
tions: and they have helped to keep down
the tax rate, and have helped to starve
the welfare facilities of the people of the
District of Colimibia, and then they have
blamed the Federal Government for not
dishing out enough money to support
the welfare activities.

When we come to act on the apjn-opri-
ation bill, I think we should vote for
added appropriations for welfare, for
health. aiKl for hospitals. I think we
should vote that way, but at the mc»nent
I am uncertain whether we should vote
for an increase in the Federal contribu-
tion to the District. I would rather vote
for appropriations for the specific pur-
poses, and make compliance mandatory
on the District, and then compel the
District Commissioners to increase the
tax rate, and therefore overcome the
opposition of the Board of Trade. I
think there has been a news blackout
over the District on these Issues with the
Board of Trade helping to keep down the
tax rate, and then "passing the buck" to
the Federal Government.

Mr. MORSE. I am very glad to have
this contribution from the Senator from
Illinois. I shall comment on his state-
ment, but first I yield to the Senator
from Rhode Island.

Mr. PASTORE. I merely wish to make
the observation that I do not know whose
fault It ts, but I believe this whole metro-
politan area should be made consonant
as an area with respect to the tax struc-
ture, health benefits, social welfare, and
what have you.

Fundamentally, there are substantial
problems Involved, and more so on the
District level than are normally foimd
on the national level, because here In
the District we have direct contact with
the personalities Involved. The human
problems sometimes become even more
himian, because we are dealing directly
with the people who are affected by our
decisions.

I might say at this point that I whole-
heartedly agree with the distinguished
Senator when he talks about home rule
for the District. There will be at least
some semblance of home nile. So long
as the responsibility Is ours, we will meet
It with all tlie alertness, conscientious-
ness, and Industry at our disposal; but
I hope the day will come when there will
be some semblance of home rule In the
District, whereby the people who pay the
taxes will decide how the tax money

87W

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8765

1,^

I

I

shall be spent. After all. the Federal
Government makes a contribution of ap-
proximately 10 percent to the expenses
of the EWstrlct. It may be a little higher
or a little lower than that. But it is a
rather incongruous situation for us to
be telling the people who pay the taxes
how they should spend the tax money,
when the Federal Government contrib-
utes only 10 percent of the amount to be
spent.

The fact remains that, no matter what
we do with respect to the $23 million
Item, we still have the problem of the
sales tax, which was raised by the dis-
tinguished Senator from New York [Mr.
jAvrrs!. We still have the problem of
only 83 percent of the subsistence allot-
ment being paid. We can decide tho.se
questions, but they belong in the District
committee. That committee has juris-
diction over them. That, however, does
not relieve the Senate of the responsi-
bility of deciding what it shall do about
the $23 million.

I desire to say. in fairness, that while
I represent the committee in this par-
ticular matte/, one of the problems I
wrestled with, one of the items which
affected my consciousness more than
any other, was the question of what we
shall do about feedin? the poor. An
item amounting to about $170 000, as
suggested by the committee, has been
placed in the bill to take care of that
matter. We have a plan for setting up
five food centers in the area. Thus far
we have had an emergency program.
Now we expect to have a permanent
program. All the things that have been
projected must be done, but they will
not assist the Senate this morning in
reachmg a decision on the $23 million
Item.

I say a legal and a moral responsi-
bility rests on the Federal Government
to make a fair contribution to the Dis-
trict, because about 42 percent of the
land in the area is owned by the Federal
Government. However, let us not de-
lude ourselves with the idea that it is
not a great advantage to the people of
the District to have the Capital located
here. I only wish it were in Providence,
R. I. I would complain very little about
that fact.

Mr. PASTORE. Let us not worry
over the fact that the Capital is located
here. It is a wonderful thing for the
District. I wish it could je located in
Rhode Island. We could use it there,
and use it very well. But that is not the
point before the Senate. The question
we have before us is what is legally and
morally right. We are confronted with
certain practical and realistic matters
which we must face.

Certainly, my responsibility In dealing
with the bud«et for the District of Co-
lumbia is slightly different from the re-
sponsibility of the Senator from Oregon,
for whom I have the highest respect. I
have to measure the tone and tempera-
ment of the Congress. I have to meas-
ure the feeling of the House. I have to
look into the background of various mat-
ters. I have to look into the question of
surpluses. The District of Columbia
Committee has done all those things.
The Appropriations Committee has not
come forward with this budget because

the committee did not love the people
of the District as much as it loved every-
body else. I do not say we love them
more or less. We are just as conscious
of social problems as is anybody else.
But we have come forth with a bill which
I think we have shaped and rounded to
make sense and that will do the things
which should be done for the District.

If the Federal contribution is in-
creased by $2' J million, it will not go for
operatmg expenses. What will happen?
The yield from income taxes paid in the
District of Columbia has amounted to
S5'j million more than was estimated.
I do not think we can shy away from
that fact, or shy away from our moral
and legal responsibility of making an
appropriate contribution. Realistically
and practically, the House voted $20 mil-
lion. Since that time there has been
an increase in the yield of District in-
come taxes amounting to SS'a million.
There has been a surplus on paper, be-
cau.se this money is still in the United
States Trea-sury. When something is
said of money being available or not
available. I point out that the United
States can never afford to have the Dis-
trict of Columbia become bankrupt.
This is a model city, and it should be a
model city, because the National Capital
is located here.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. P.\STORE. I >'ield.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I should like t.j have
Wa.'^^hinston be a model city. It Is a
model city in many respects, but in many
other respects it is not a model city. It
i.s not a model city so far as the Potomac
River IS concerned, which, as the Senator
from Oregon has pouited out, is an open
and running sewer. It is not a model
city so far as care of the poor is con-
cerned. It is not a model city so far as
ho.spitals are concerned. The poor peo-
ple in the city of Washington fare very
badly indeed.

The only question in my mind is
whether the taxpayers of the country
should meet the costs, or whether those
who live in $25,000. $35,000. $45,000, $50,-
000, or $100,000 houses should not pay
more taxes for the relief of the people in
need in the city, instead of keeping the
tax rate down and starving the welfare
services.

Mr. PASTORE. The Senator Is cor-
rect: when I said "model city." I meant
It in a comparative sen.se.

Coming back to the point I was mak-
ing, there exists an estimated surplus of
$4,400,000. The money about which we
are talking is money which has been paid
by the taxpayers of the United States.
Whether we are talking about a debt we
owe as a nation, or whether we are talk-
ing about an obligation we owe to the
District of Columbia, we are talking
about the same people. We are talking
about the same money. We are talking
about the same responsibilities. We are
talking about the same burdens.

This is one of the problems on which
the Senator from Rhode Island spent
some restless nights in trying to arrive
at a solution in his own mind. We have
a national debt of approximately $275
billion. We have the largest peacetime
budget we have ever had in the history

of the Nation. $71,800,000,000. The yield
from income taxes in the District of
Columbia was not known to the Members
of the House when the Hous€ voted for a
Federal contribution of $20 million. The
yield from income taxes was $5*2 million
more than was estimated. There is al-
ready a surplus of $4,400,000 In the Dis-
trict treasury. So what do we do? Do
we go to the taxpayers of the Nation with
this practical picture and say, "Let u-s
take $2 'a million more out of the right
hand and put it in the left hand, so it
can be invested and pay an Interest re-
turn"? That is the proposition with
which I had to deal.

I realize that the argument docs not
avoid our re.sponsibility of meeting our
obligations, but we tried to act as fairly
as we could. We recognued the fact
that we raised the budget over the House
figure by $4 million. Therefore. I was
one of those who insisted that we raise
the Federal contribution. We did it as
fairly as we could by way of compromise.
I am afraid that if we raise it any fur-
ther, first of all, the only result will be a
great many speeches on the floor of the
Senate and .second, it will not be agreed
to by the House. We have the stark
reality facing us that there is a current
fluid surplus. True enough, the Com-
miiisioners could build up a greater sur-
plus. I am all for that. As a practical
proposition, the Governmen", owes $275
billion, and the national budget calls for
$71.8 billion. On the other hand, the
District has a surplus of mere than $4
million. What should we do in a situa-
tion like that?

I love the District as mui'h as does
anyone else, and I desire to be fair to
Its people: but we also have to be fair
to all the citizens of the United States.
We reached at>out as sensible a solution
as possible. If we are wrong, in the
opinion of the majority of the Senate,
we shall be bound by whatever the Sen-
ate decides, but I have expliined why
we acted as we did.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. Pres dent, will
the Senator yield to me for the purpose
of asking a question of the Senator from
Rhode Island?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Suppose t.ne Senate
votes down the Morse amendment and
then adopts amendments increasing the
appropriations for welfare, for health,
and for education. In the sum of $2'2
milhon. Will that action be binding on
the Commissioners, and will they then
have to meet these mandatory Increases?

Mr. PASTORE. Yes: out of the Dis-
trict's own money, the $4.4 million.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Out of the surplus,
or by Increasing taxes?

Mr. PASTORE. I do not b< lieve they
are going to raise the real-estate taxes
as of the moment. I do not think they
should, until the full report on reap-
praisal is available. When that Is made,
I hope taxes in the District will be on
a comparative level with taxes in the
neighboring communities.

Speaking for myself. I am sure the
Commissioners are conscious of the sit-
uation. I do not know tha*; there Is
any fault on the part of the board of
trade or of the Commissioners, and I do
not want to get into that kind of dis-

cussion. They all seem to be very fine
people.

Dealing: with the District appropria-
tion bill is a new experience to me. It
was the first time I had to do deal with
this budget. It was very interesting. I
devoted much time and study to it and
I enjoyed myself Immensely.

I have always wondered why I, from
the State of Rhode Island, should be de-
ciding the fiscal problems of the people
of the District of Columbia. It seemed
to me it would be better if people solved
their own problems. But that is beside
the point. The responsibility is ours
now. We must meet it. We did meet
it.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I think It Is extraor-
dinary that in times past we have not
had this comparative study of the rela-
tive actual rates of real-estate taxation
in the District of Columbia, as com-
pared to Montgomery and Prince
Georges Counties in Maryland and Pair-
fax and Arlington Counties in Viriginia.
I can only say. after having personal ex-
perience with this matter 2 years ago,
that the actual tax rate In Montgomery
County was appreciably lower than the
rate in the District. The tax rate in
Prince Georges County. I believe, was
lower. The Senator from Maryland has
a.«!sured us that now the tax rate in
Montgomery County is equal to that of
the District, but we have had no com-
parative figures for Prince Georges
County and no comparative figures as to
the neighboring Virginia counties.

Mr. PASTORE. We will have them.

Mr. DOUGLAS. The very expert Sen-
ator from Rhode Island states that in
his opinion the eflfective tax burden in
Fairfax and Arlington Counties, Vir-
ginia is appreciably higher than that In
the District of Columbia.

Mr. PASTORE. It is higher.

Mr. BEALL. Mr. President, wlU the
Senator yield to me?

Mr. PASTORE. Before any yielding Is
done, I should like to say to the Senator
from Illinois that everything he has said
is true, but let us not forget that if the
real estate taxes or the appraisals are
raised In the District of Columbia they
should not be u«ed as an excuse for cut-
ting down the Federal contribution, be-
cau.«e the Government makes Its contri-
bution in lieu of taxes. If the burden is
raised on the real estate owners in the
District of Columbia, then we will have
to raise the $23 million cellm«. I am
in favor of that. As the obligations
move up on the part of the real estate
owners, we must not forget that the
United States Government is a real estate
owner.

Mr. BEALL. The Goveniment owns
about 40 percent of the property.

Mr, PASTORE. Absolutely. We
should raise the $23 million when the
taxes are raised. It may be necessary.
All that remains for the future, I do not
think we are going to straighten that out
today.

Mr. BEALL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield to the Senator
from Maryland.

Mr. BEALL. I should like to answer
a question propounded by the Senator
from Illinois [Mr. Douglas].

The tax rate In Prince Georges County,
I understand, is now $4.25. In Virginia
the rate in Arlington County is $3.24 per
himdred, and in Fairfax County from
$3.25 to $3.31. They have a graduated
tax there. In Alexandria it Is $2.75 per
hundred. So the taxes are really higher
In suburban Washington than they are
in the District.

Mr. DOUGLAS. That is what the
Senator from Illinois has been saying.
May I, furthermore, ask about the valu-
ations? The actual tax which one pays
depends both on the percentage of mar-
ket value at which a proiierty is assessed
and the normal tax rate itself.

Mr. BEALL. The Senator Is correct.

Mr. DOUGLAS. What is the valua-
tion, let us say, fixed on a $25,000 house?
Is the relative valuation lower in the
District than It is on the same property
In the surrounding communities?

Mr. BEALL. I do not know what it la
on a $25,000 house. I cannot take one
item. We do know that some 2 years
ago the District Commissioners set up a
perpetual assessment system. We found
that the properties were far under-
assessed. '

Mr. DOUGLAS. In the District?

Mr. BEALL. In the District.

Mr. DOUGLAS. As compared with
other localities.

Mr. BEALL. Compared with some of
the other localities, yes.

Mr. DOUGLAS. That is the point.

Mr. BEALL. That is not true in Vir-
ginia, because they have dl£ferent rates
because of the assessments in Virginia.
I understand, though I do not have the
figures, that that is true. I may be
wrong.

Mr. DOUGLAS. With a lower rate in
the District as compared with most of
the adjoining coimties, and with a low-
er percentage valuation as compared to
the real value, that means the effective
tax rate on a $25,000 or $50,000 home is
appreciably less in the District than in
the subtu'bs. The actual rate is less. It
seems to me that great pressure should be
put upon the District Commissioners to
raise the real-estate tax rate,

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I shall
now take the fioor In my own right for a
few minutes to tie the ends of the debate
together. I shall yield again as soon as
I make some comments upon the very
helpful observations of my colleagues in
this debate.

First I should like to have the attention
of the Senator from New York [Mr.
jAViTs]. He was engaged on another
matter yesterday afternoon, so that he
could not be with us in our discussion of
these budgetary problems, with the re-
sult that I took his name on the fioor of
the Senate, not in vain, I hope. I should
like to have him check the Congressional
Record to make certain that Tin no way
misrepresented his point of view. I did
not say that he had taken a definite posi-
tion. As he will see in the Record, I
said in effect that I was sure I could say
the Senator from New York would agree
with the general policies which we have
advanced, because I know the great help
he has been to me on the District of
Columbia Committee in regard to these
problems. However, I thought I owed
It to the Senator to invite his attention

to the Record, where his name was used
by me in debate yesterday afternoon.
If the Record should need a modifica-
tion in any way, he knows I would be the
first to propose the modification.

Now I should like to have the atten-
tion of the Senator from Illinois [Mr.
Douglas] for a moment. I wish to give
him assurance, as chairman of the Sub-
committee on Public Health, Education.
Welfare, and Safety of the District of
Columbia Committee, that although I do
not go forth looking for work, I do try
to perform my duties. He has raised a
question, namely, that of taxes, which
I think it now becomes a duty of my
subcommittee to go into. I wish to give
the Senator assurance that I shall pro-
ceed forthwith to put the staflt to work
on an investigation of the tax problem
from the standpoint, first, of an accu-
rate comparison of tax rates not only
between the District of Columbia and
outlying districts in this area, but be-
tween the District of Columbia and cities
of comparable size in the United States,
and also in regard to the assessment
valuation matter, which is even more
controlling than the rate. In my Judg-
ment.

I desire to have the staff ascertain
what the policy is in regard to the val-
uation assessment. I am not a good
witness on this subject, because my ex-
perience is exceedingly limited. I hap-
pen to own a hoiise in the District of
Columbia, and I own a house just out-
side the city limits of Eugene, Oreg.
Taking into account the difference in
valuation of the two pieces of property
and the taxes I pay on each, I should
say that my taxes in the District of
Columbia are not lower than the taxes
on my Eugene property. However, I
shall check Into that subject again, from
the standpoint of the two issues which
the Senator has raised. However, I have
no doubt that there could probably be
some Improvement on the part of the
officials of the District of Columbia in
following either a rate policy or a val-
uation policy which would raise more
money from real property privately
owned in the District of Columbia.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I do not wish to pro-
long the discussion with the Senator. I
have been a guest of the Senator from
Oregon in his charming home outside the
city of Eugene, and I have spent some
very happy hours with him there.

As the Senator from Oregon realizes,
he lives in a relatively sparsely settled
area outside the city of Eugene. The
cost of the public facilities, roads, sewers,
welfare programs, and so forth, would be
very much less there per capita than it Is
in Washington. Even so, the Senator's
offhand judgment that his taxes are not
any higher here in Washington than
there is rather eloquent, because we
might expect them to be much higher, in
view of the greater per capita cost of lo-
cal government.

I hope the Senator will have the study
to which he has referred made, dealing
with both the tax rate and the relative
assessment of the given percentages of
valuation. If I felt that it was necessary

i

-i

8766

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8767

I '<■

to increase the Federal contribution to
prevent youngsters from starving to
death, or being hall starved in the city of
Washington. I would certainly vote for
an increased Federal contribution. I in-
tend to vote for the specific appropria-
tions for welfare programs as they come
before us. because I think the Govern-
ment should concern itself more with the
welfare of men and women, and not make
the management of money the dominant
standard. But if by denying an increase
in the Federal share, and by voting for
specific increases in the detailed budget,
we could force the Commii.sioners to in-
crease the real estate tax rate, I would
be for that.

Mr. MORSE. I assure the Senator
from Illinois that the tax study will be
made. I shall set it in motion imme-
diately.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator srield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. PASTORE. Apart from the dis-
tinguished senior Senator from Illinois
IMr. Douglas], who is always interested
to the budget, and the distinguished
>unlor Senator from Illinois TMr. Dirk-
sen I, who is the ranking Republican on
our subcommittee, it is a great compli-
ment to this community to have present
on the floor of the Senate today 4 mem-
bers of the District of Columbia Com-
mittee, who are vitally concerned with
these problems and are willing to stand
tip and say something about them. I
think it is a refreshing scene. It is a
great compliment to the people of the
community.

That has been my experience with the
committee. Fine public-spirited people
come before the committee and testify
on behalf of the budget, in an effort to
aee to it that the local schools are prop-
erly maintained, and that the social pro-
grams of the District are kept in order.
There is a tremendous amount of interest
In this community.

Coming back to the perennial gripe —
r think that is perhaps the best way to
describe it — In connection with home
rule. I believe that if we should leave the
people of the District of Columbia alone,
and allow them to operate their own
community, it would become a marvelous
community.

Mr. MORSE. The Senator Is quite
right.

Mr. JAVrrS. Mr. President, will the
Senator jield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. JAVITS. I believe that this
theme should be underlined time and
again. Perhaps, with so many of us
vitally Interested in the problem, some-
thing at long last can be done. It Is al-
most ridiculous that a community of
adult persons living in the District of
Columbia cannot have the right to con-
duct their own affairs. This debate il-
lustrates the situation. It is high time
for us to get our teeth into the problem.
It is ridiculous that Congress should
have to act as a common council for the
City of Washington in connection with
such elementary matters as real estate
taxes, welfare yrograxzis, and so Xorth.

At a time when the energies of Mem-
bers of Congress are to so great an ex-
tent devoted to questions involving the
defense and security of the United
States. I am appalled and shocked at the
situation in which Congress must act as
a city council. More and more of us
are coming to feel that we cannot afford
to allow that situation to continue.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I cer-
tainly agree with the Senator from New
York. I thank him for adding to our
argument for home rule. Home rule has
been the subject of a running debate
ever since I first came to the Senate.
13 years ago. I hope to see the time
when Congress will enact a home rule
law for the District of Columbia.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

I quite agree with the Senator from
New York. Home rule for the District
of Columbia is needed.

In my opinion, one of the chief quiet
forces working against home rule for the
District of Columbia has l)een the Board
of Trade. If there were an elected mu-
nicipal council in the city of Washing-
ton, there would be greater appropria-
tions for schools, greater appropriations
for welfare programs, and greater ap-
propriations for hospitals. Therefore, in
order to keep down the tax rate, as well
as for reasons involving the question of
segregation and the race issue, certain
interests in the District of Columbia wi.sh
to keep the District under Federal
tutelage. I think Federal tutelage
should be abandoned as rapidly as
possible.

However, in the meantime we have a
responsibility. I regret that we must
take time from more important duties to
become a common council for the city of
Washington; but so long as we are a com-
mon council, we must do that Job as best
we can. So while it may be ridiculous
to take up as much time as we do on this
subject, in view of the other problems
before us. nevertheless, with the legal
distribution of responsibility as it Is, we
have a duty to make as wise and humane
decisions as possible.

Mr. BEALL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. BEALL. It seems that we are sill
In accord with respect to the question of
home rule. I do not see why we do not
now temporarily lay aside the appropri-
ation bill and pass a home-rule bill. No
one is arguing against it.

I think we should invite the attention
of the Senator from Illinois to the fact
that, at long last, the Washington Board
of Trade has now endorsed home rule.
More recently the junior chamber of
commerce has sponsored home rule. So
I think we are all getting together.
Bodies which have opposed it in the past
are now sponsoring home rule. Every-
one wants it.

If I may proceed for a moment. I eon-
cur in what the Senator from Oregon
[Mr. MoRSxl has said. In particular, I
wish to compliment the Senator from
Rhode Island [Mr. P.^sioaxl for the fine
Job he baa done.

For 4 or 5 days I sat with him as a
member of the Appropriations Subcom-
mittee. He approached the subject just
as he would have approached >in impor-
tant subject when he was chief execu-
tive of his own State. He was Governor
of his own State for several terms. I
was very much pleased with tie intelli-
gent, workmanlike manner in which he
approached the subject under considera-
tion.

To get down to the propose*! Increase
In the Federal contribution, Congress,
sitting as a city council, has authorized
certain expenditures; and we have rec-
ommended certain expenditui es. With
Congress acting as a city council and
recommending expenditures, the least
we can do is to provide a part of the
money to pay for them.

As the Senator from Oregon pointed
out. we have the health prolilem. We
have the problem of providiikg for the
necessary number of teachers, and for
an adequate police department, of which
the people of the District of Columbia
are very proud. There is no finer police
force in the country. But if we are to
assume the responsibility of recommend-
ing additional appropriations for these
purposes, we certainly should provide the
money.

The question arises as to the proposed
figure of $23 milhon for the Federal
contribution. We all agreed, Individ-
ually and collectively, at one time or
another, that the Federal Government's
contribution should be greater than it
now is. We say so privately. Why
should we be concerned about what the
other body will do? If we think the
appropriation, for this purpos)^ should
be larger, let us tell the other body,
and tell the people of the country, how
we feel about supporting the Nation's
Capital and providing for the cost of
operating it. We cannot disregard the
District of Columbia. After all, this is
the Nation's Capital. It is our respon-
sibiUty.

Some reference has been made to the
Potomac River. I should like to call
to the attention of the Senator from
Illinois that the Potomac River, to the
high watermark on the Virgmia side of
the river, belongs to the State of Mary-
land. The State of Maryland has full
jurisdiction over it. However. I know
that the State of Maryland wishes to
cooperate with the District of Columbia.

I certainly do not believe that the
measley little amount we are asking for.
in an additional appropriation, should
be objected to. It is certainly little
enough to do, when we sit here in Con-
gresss and take first one building and
then another building off the tax rolls
of the city.

I am not criticizing any of the local
organizations. However, it certainly
seems to me that, as the Senator from
Oregon ha* pointed out. the Federal
Government should make a substantial
contribution. Let us do the right thing
lu the Senate, and I am sure the Mem-
bers of the other body will see the light
and go along with ub.

Mr. MORSE. I thank the Senator
from MarjUmd. I BpiTreciate hit help

very much. I now yield to the Senator
from Rhode Island.

Mr. PASTORE. I have before me a
comparison of real estate taxes as be-
tween the District of Columbia, Mont-
gomery and Prince Georges Counties In
Maryland, and nearby localities In Vir-
ginia. I wonder whether the Senator
from Oregon wishes me to put this ma-
terial In the Record.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I wonder whether the
Senator from Rhode Island would sum-
marize it.

Mr. MORSE. I suggest that the Sen-
ator put it In the Record first.

Mr. PASTORE. I shall put It In the
Record at this time. I ask unanimous
consent. Mr. President, that the state-
ment I have before me be printed in the
Record at this point.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows :

Real PnopnTT Taxxs

DISnUCT OF CX)LI71CBIA

Rates: Effective rate of approximately
$1.15 to tl 38 per HOC. Actual rate of 12.30
per $100 of assessed valuation. Assessed
valuations are between 50 and 60 percent of
current market value for most properties.

MASTLAND

Rates: Montgomery County: Effective rate
of approximately $1.15 to $1.63 per $100
depending upon the location of the property
and the services rendered. Actual rates vary
from a base of $3.30 to $3.23 per $100 of
assessed valuation. Assessed valuations are
between 60 and 60 percent of current mar-
ket value for most properties.

Prince Georges County: Effective rate of
approximately $1.21 to $1.32 per $100 de-
pending upon the location of the property
and the services rendered. Actual rates vary
from a base of $2,425 to $2.6325 per $100 of
assessed valuation. Assessed valuations are
between 50 and 60 percent of current mar-
ket value for most properties.

vmaiNiA

Rates: Arlington County: Effective rate of
approximately $108 per $100. Actual rate
of $3.24 per $100 of assessed valuation.
Assessed valuations are .approximately one-
third of current market value for most
properties.

Alexandria: Effective rate of approxi-
mately $1 per $100. Actual rate of $2.75
per $100 of assessed valuation. Assessed
valuations are approximately 42.5 percent of
appraised value which is between 80 and
90 percent of current market value for most
properties.

Fairfax County: Effective rate of approxi-
mately $1.08 to $1.10 per $100. Actual rates
vary from a biise of $3.25 to $3.31 per $100
of assessed valuation. Assessed valuations
are approximately 32 percent of current
market value for most properties. There Is,
In addition, a flat fee of $18 for each prop-
erty unit for refuse collection.

Mr. PASTORE. First, with reference
to the District of Columbia: The effec-
tive rate is approximately $1.15 to $1.38
per $100. This refers to real estate
taxes, of course. The actual rate is
$2.30 iser $100 of assessed valuation.
Assessed valuations are between 50 and
60 percent of current market value for
most properties.

Those figures are for the District of
Columbia. I think the figure the Senator

from Illinois Is interested in is the 50 to
60 percent of current market value.

With relation to Maryland, in Mont-
gomery County, the effective rate is ap-
proximately from $1.15 to $1.62 per $100,
depending upon the location of the
property and the services rendered.
Actual rates vary from a base of $2.30 to
$3.23 per $100 of assessed valuation.
Assessed valuations are between 50 and
60 percent of current market value for
most properties. That is in Mont-
gomery Coimty.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. PASTORE. I yield.

Mr. DOUGLAS. So that the actual
rates In Montgomery County are higher
than they are in the District of Colum-
bia.

Mr. PASTORE. They are slightly
higher.

Now with reference to Prince Georges
County. The effective rate Is approxi-
mately from $1.21 to $1.32 per $100, de-
pending upon the location of the prop-
erty and the services rendered. Actual
rates vary from a base of $2,425 to
$2.6325 per $100 of assessed valuation.
Assessed valuations are between 50 and
60 percent of current value for most
properties. These rates are again
slightly higher than In the District.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Again the actual
rate, in Prince Georges County, is higher
than In the District.

Mr. PASTORE. Only slightly higher.
I think It Is fair to say that.

Mr. DOUGLAS. By 10 percent at
least.

Mr. PASTORE, Oh, no. They vary
from 2.425 —

Mr. DOUGLAS. It is 2.3, is it not?

Mr. PASTORE. It is 2.3 in the Dis-
trict.

Mr. DOUGLAS. That is what I
mean. $2.43 is 5 percent above $2.30,
and $2.63 is over 10 percent greater.

Mr. PASTORE. That is $2.30 to
$2.40 per $100. Of course if we take the
ceiling, it might be $3.23.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Exactly so. Not all
the taxes are levied at the lowest rate,
any more than a man's golf game can
be always better than his average.

Mr. PASTORE. Without quibbling
over decimal points. I believe the Senator
from Illinois Is correct

In Arlington County, the effective rate
is approximately $1.08 per $100. The
actual rate Is $3.24 per $100 of assessed
valuation. This is important to note.
Assessed valuations are approximately
one-third of current market value for
most properties.

Mr. DOUGLAS. There the actual rate
Is 40 percent higher than In the District
of Columbia.

Mr. PASTORK In Alexandria, "Va.,
the effective rate Is $1 per $100. The ac-
tual rate is $2.75 per 100 of assessed valu-
ation. Assessed valuations are approxi-
mately 42.5 percent of appraised value,
which is between 80 percent and 90 per-
cent of current market value for most
properties.

Mr. DOUGLAS. But the actual rate
Is $2.75, as compared with $2.30, or 45

cents more or 20 percent more than in
the District.

Mr. PASTORE. That is coirect.

Fairfax County. The effective rate is
from $1.08 to $1.10 per $100. Actual
rates vary from a base of $2.25 to $3.31
per $100 of assessed valuation. Assessed
valuations are approximately 32 percent
of current market value for most prop-
erties. There is, in addition, a flat fee
of $18 for each property unit for refuse
collection.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Waiving the flat fee,
that Indicates an actual rate which Is In
places $1 higher than the District rate
of $2.35, or 40 percent higher than the
District rate. Then the $18 flat fee must
be added on top of this.

I thank the Senator from Rhode Is-
land for introducing these figures into
the Record. They establish clear proof
that the real-estate taxes In the District
of Columbia are appreciably lower than
the real-estate taxes on corresponding
valuations outside the District.

There is an obligation upon the Dis-
trict Commissioners, in order to provide
adequate funds for those children of the
District who are half starved — and there
are many who are half starved — and In
order to provide adequate hospital care
and proper public schools, to raise the
real-estate tax rate.

I am a little doubtful whether the
best way to do it is to Increase the Fed-
eral appropriation, or to put pressure
upon the District Commissioners to try
to put human values first.

Mr. MORSE. I wish to say to the
Senator that he should retain his doubt
a little longer, because I believe we can
shed some further light on this sub-
ject before we are through.

Mr. PASTORE. Of course, if we chop
this into bits, we can easily massacre the
whole thing. There is no sales tax in
some of these suburban areas as there is
in the District.

Mr. DOUGLAS. But a sales tax falls
most heavily on the low-income group.
It is a regressive tax. It is further proof
of how the tax policies of the District of
Columbia have protected the upper in-
come group. A sales tax is a tax on the
poor to help the poorest.

Mr. PASTORE. I am not debating the
philosophy of the various taxes. I am
merely stating the picture as It exists.
It was not my doing, and I doubt very
much that there will be any undoing
because of this debate.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I should
like to proceed with and complete my
argument, which will really be very
brief. I see the Senator from Illinois
[Mr. Dirksen] in the Chamber. He and
I had a little chat this morning. He has
another engagement today, and he said
to me, "'Vf&yne, how long do you think
you will be?"

I said, "I won't take very long."

I have not yet taken very long, but I
have been on the floor a long time, and
I have been very much heli>ed by my
colleagues in the debate. As a result
of what has been put in the Record, I
can be even more brief than I had
planned to be. However, I do wish to

i

i

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8767

very much, I now yield to the Senator
from Rhode Island.

Mr. PASTORE. I have before me a
comparison of real estate taxes as be-
tween the District of Columbia, Mont-
gomery and Prince Georges Counties in
Maryland, and nearby localities in Vir-
ginia. I wonder whether the Senator
from Oregon wishes me to put this ma-
terial in the Record.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I wonder whether the
Senator from Rhode Island would sum-
marize it.

Mr. MORSE. I suggest that the Sen-
ator put it in the Record first.

Mr. PASTORE. I shall put it in the
Record at this time. I ask unanimous
consent. Mr. President, that the state-
ment I have before me be printed in the
Record at this point.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows :

Real Pbopsitt Taxis
distkict of coltticbia

Rates: Effective rate of approximately
$1.15 to $1.38 per 9100. Actual rate of 12.30
per 1100 of assessed valuation. Assessed
valuations are between 50 and 60 percent of
current market value for moet properties.

MASTLAND

Rates: Montgomery County: Effective rate
of approximately tl.15 to $1.63 per $100
depending uF>on the location of the property
and the services rendered. Actual rates vary
from a base of $a.30 to $3.23 per $100 of
assessed valuation. Assessed valuations are
between 60 and 60 percent of current mar-
ket value for most properties.

Prince Georges County: Effective rate of
approximately $1.21 to $1.32 per $100 de-
I>endlng upon the location of the property
and the services rendered. Actual rates vary
from a base of $2,425 to $2 6325 per $100 of
assessed valuation. Assessed valuations are
between 50 and 60 percent of ciurent mar-
ket value for most properties.

VIEOtNIA

Rates: Arlington County: Effective rate of

from minols Is interested in is the 50 to
60 percent of current market value.

With relation to Maryland, in Mont-
gomery County, the effective rate is ap-
proximately from $1.15 to $1.62 per $100,
depending upon the location of the
property and the services rendered.
Actual rates vary from a base of $2.30 to
$3.23 per $100 of assessed valuation.
Assessed valuations are between 50 and
60 percent of current market value for
most properties. That is in Mont-

gomery Coimty.

Mr. DOUGLAS,
the Senator yield?

Mr. PASTORE.

Mr. DOUGLAS.

Mr. President, will

I yield.

So that the actual
rates in Montgomery County are higher
than they are in the District of Colum-
bia.

Mr. PASTORE. They are slightly
higher.

Now with reference to Prince Georges
County. The effective rate is approxi-
mately from $1.21 to $1.32 per $100. de-
pending upon the location of the prop-
erty and the services rendered. Actual
rates vary from a base of $2,425 to
$2.6325 per $100 of assessed valuation.
Assessed valuations are between 50 and
60 percent of current value for most
properties. These rates are again
slightly higher than in the District.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Again the actual
rate, in Prince Georges County, is higher
than in the District.

Mr. PASTORE. Only slightly higher.
I think it is fair to say that.

Mr. DOUGLAS. By 10 percent at
least.

Mr. PASTORE.
from 2.425—

Mr. DOUGLAS.

Mr. PASTORE.
trict.

Mr. DOUGLAS,
mean. $2.43 Is 5

Oh, no. They vary

It is 2.3, is it not?
It is 2.3 in the Dis-

That
percent

is what I
above $2.30.

and $2.63 is over 10 percent greater.

cents more or 20 percent more than in
the District.

Mr. PASTORE. That is coixect.

Fairfax County. The effective rate ia
from $1.08 to $1.10 per $100. Actual
rates vary from a base of $2.25 to $3.31
per $100 of assessed valuation. Assessed
valuations are approximately 32 i)ercent
of current market value for most prop-
erties. There is, in addition, a flat fee
of $18 for each property unit for refuse
collection.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Waiving the flat fee,
that indicates an actual rate which is in
places $1 higher than the District rate
of $2.35, or 40 percent higher than the
District rate. Then the $18 flat fee must
be added on top of this.

I thank the Senator from Rhode Is-
land for introducing these figures into
the Record. They establish clear proof
that the real-estate taxes in the District
of Columbia are appreciably lower than
the real-estate taxes on corresponding
valuations outside the District.

There is an obligation upon the Dis-
trict Commissioners, in order to provide
adequate funds for those children of the
District who are half starved — and there
are many who are half starved — and in
order to provide adequate hospital care
and proper public schools, to raise the
real-estate tax rate.

I am a little doubtful whether the
best way to do it is to increswe the Fed-
eral appropriation, or to put pressure
upon the District Commissioners to try
to put human values first.

Mr. MORSE. I wish to say to the
Senator that he should retain his doubt
a little longer, because I believe we can
shed some further light on this sub-
ject before we are through.

Mr. PASTORE. Of course, if we chop
this into bits, we can easily massacre the
whole thing. There is no sales tax in
some of these suburban areas as there is
in the District.

.t.

? I

* 4

«

8768

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8769

tie some of the loose ends together, as
I see the need for some knots.

I wish to call to the attention of the
Senate the fact that the 1956 family
income per household in Washington, as
compared with the urban areas, shows
an interesting comparison. The median
income for the District is $4,900, as com-
pared with $6,773 for the families in the
populous urban areas. I believe these
figures have some bearing on the prob-
lem of taxation. We have the figures
in the Rbcord. from the Senator from
Rhode Island, but Senators will receive
in the reasonably near future a memo-
randum on this whole picture.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield for a question?

The PRESIDING OFFICER <Mr.
K*NNSDY in the chair > . Does the Sena-
tor from Oregon yield to the Senator
Irom Ohio?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Did the committee
have before it a schedule showmsj the
per capita cost of government, with the
District of Columbia included?

Mr. MORSE. I do not know whether
the Appropnations Committee had such
a schedule.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I have here some fig-
ures which are interesting. I should like
to read them into the Record.

Mr MORSE. I should like to have the
Senator do so.

Mr. LAUFCHE. It appears that the
District of Columbia is 12th in the list
of cities in per capita expenditures. Its
per capita expenditure for governmental
purposes is $170.

Long Beach, Calif., seems to have the
highest per capita expenditure for gov-
ernmental purpo<:es, $257. My home
city. Cleveland, has $150; Cincinnati,
$180: Columbus. $115; Chicago. $135;
San Francisco. $190.

Washington, D. C, has a per capita
expenditure of $170. I recognize that
that is not reflective of the services
rendered in the fullest desree. I believe
these figures cover welfare, school, and
general administrative service expendi-
tures.

The table shows that Wa.shington is
12th with an expenditure of $170 a per-
son. Chicago, with an expenditure of
$135 per capita, is below Washington.
D. C.

I do not know exactly what Interpre-
tation must be made of these figures, but
they show in a measure that the District
of Columbia, from a per capita stand-
point, has maintained a pretty good level
compared with other cities throughout
the country.

I have one further question to ask of
the Senator from Oregon. I have been
reading the Record and have found a
table showing the number of teachers In
the District of Columbia, but I have not
been able to find a table showing the
number of pupils. The Senator from
Oregon stated that a part of the $3 mil-
lion would be used to aid schools. Does
the Senator from Oregon know the num-
ber of pupils per teacher In the District
of Coliunbia now?

Mr. MORSK Yes. Let me comment
on that question. We are well aware of
the problem of the overcrowded school-
room while the teacher Is teachmg a
class. But we also have the problem of
an inadequate number of schoolrooms,
making it impossible to conduct classes
on a full-day tiasis in some of the schools,
which, of course, increases the education
problem.

The teacher-pupil ratio, as I recall. Is
36 student.s to a teacher. I will .'^upply
the exact fr^ure for the Ricord. I thmk
it is 36 to 1. I think the appropriation
for which wc are a. king will reduce the
ralio to 32 to I.

Mr. CLARK. Mr President, will the
Senator from Oregon yield.' I think I
can aaswer the specuic question uf the
St'ii.Ttor Irrm Ohio.

Mr. MORhE. I y.eld.

Mr. CLARK. The ratio of pupils to
teachers m the Distnct of Columbia the
year before last was 36 to I. At that
point a 3-year plan was evolved, which
would permit the ratio to be brought
down, m 3 years, to 30 to 1.

Last year the first step in that 3 -year
program vas approved by Congress, and
additional teachers were authorized.
This year the second step was intend-
ed to bring the ratio down to 32 to I.
Next year it would reach 30 to 1

However, because of the action of the
Hou.'-e and of the Committee on Ap-
pr>.^priations. that .schedule has not been
met; and unle'^s the amendments which
we intend to offer in a few minutes are
agreed to, the ratio will remain at 33 to 1.
whereas the Board of Education wanted
to bring it down to 32 to 1.

I wonder if what I have said Is »n ac-
cordance with the understanding of the
Senator from Rhode Island.

Mr PASTORE I do not wish to Im-
pusrn the statement made by the distin-
guished Senator from Penr«ylvania. but
his statistics are a little incorrect. This
is what the latest fiijures show.

In the elementary schools, the ratio of
pupils to teachers Is 34.7 to 1. In the
Junior high schools it is 23 to 1. In the
senior high .«!chools it is 28 to 1. In the
vocational high schools it is 24 to 1.

As to elementary schools, the District
of Columbia is 12th in the list of com-
parable size cities in the teacher-pupU
ratio.

I am not trying to convey the Impres-
sion that I am satisfied that this should
be our goal; but the fact of the matter
is that the situation is not too tiad.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I certainly think w©
ought to be careful not to make It ap-
pear that the situation Is of a deferwible
character. The actual figure submitted
by the Senator from Rhode Island would
seem to indicate that except for the
elementary schools the ratio of pupils to
teachers is rather sound.

Mr PASTORE. And It ranks rather
high by comparison.

Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Oregon yield fiu-ther. to
permit me to ask the Senator from
Rhode Island a questloa?

Mr. MORSK I yield.

Mr. CLARK. I call the attenUon of
the Senator from Rhode Island, who, of
CQ.irsc. gave the matter far more atten-
tion than I did. to page 97 of the hearing
before the Committee on Appropriations,
which I read with some care. I quote
from the statement concernii\s the re-
quested Increase as presented to the
committee by Dr. Hobart M. Corning,
the Superintendent of the District oX
Columbia Public Schools:

The Doiird of Education approved. In March
lOSb II revised pupll-teacher ratio btandard
fir the eleineu'ary schnols. ^^ll.s reduced
the standard rtiTlo from 36^ 1 to ^O-l Hather
than attempt t<> effect this change all In I
year, the Board of Educ itioo decided that It
would b« m'»re pr:'..-tical t<j prc-rani It over
a 3->eiU- poriod The IjJd b.Kigct contains
the i»ecund iK.rtiuu of that propmrn. To keep
on schedvile it sh 'U!d be jxj'iiblc t-; esl.ib-
liah a 32 1 rntlo during the IS).' 8 flT.nl year.
This will reijiiire restorntKn of •.'^41 .S.SO fnr
69 teaching paaitlui.a. It la important that
eiemeiitary scikmjI c'assea be reaiiced in aize
as r.ipidly ak po«-!»;b.y In orucr t > facilitate
nujre h>.im.;.'ene> u.i ^.r^upliius ■ f .studer.ts and
als.) to permit niDre Individual ut'.cntl.jn
from the teachers Th'-^e iinprovementa In
ratios are tiecefi.«nrv to the raUinv; of the
achievemeut levels of the element:»ry achool
atudents.

My question is. Is Dr. Corning wron:;?

Mr PA;-iTOR?:. No. The Senator
from Pennsylvania reads well and reads
correctly. But I was reading statistics
which came to the committee only yes-
terday from the budget office of the Dis-
trict of Columbia. These are the latest
figures. What the Senator from Penn-
sylvania read is what Dr Corning testi-
fied to; and for Dr. Corning I have the
greatest respect and admiration. I do
not say he exaggerated anything; but
what I cited are the latest fl^ures we
have received from the District budget
office.

Mr CLARK. Could the distinguished
Senator from Rhode Island and I agree
that the situaUon with respect to the ele-
mentary schools, which is the bui-den ol
my amendment which will be debated in
a few minutes, was essentially correctly
stated by Dr Corning?

Mr. PASTORE. Essentially; yes. I
would go that far.

Mr. CLARK. I thank the Senator.

Mr. PASTORE. I would go that far.
But there is something else the Senator
from Pennsylvania must bear in mind.
The whole pre.sentation must be related
to and correlated with the lack of facil-
ities In the District of Columbia.

There are now 48 split classes In the
first and second trades. I do not think
that is a desirable way of educating chil-
dren. There ought to be full-day classes
for every pupil from the first grade up.
But because of a lack of facilities, there
are now. in the first and second grades.
48 classes in the morning and In the
afternoon.

The House figures will enable the
school system to have 175 .such clas.«>es.
If we allow what the House deducted,
there would be 300 such classes.

The big question before our subcom-
mittee was whether this amount could
be absorbed properly or whether the
pupii-teacher ratio would suCTer a case

of indigestion. Taking all that Into ac-
count, we went along with the figure of
the House.

Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, wiU the
Senator from Oregon further yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. CLARK. I may say to my distin-
guished colleague that assurances were
Riven to my office and the office of the
distinguished Senator from Oregon from
the Board of Education, through the
staff of the Committee on the District
of Columbia, that as of this morning
classroom space is available on the basis
that for the first and second grades only,
308 classes will be oiperating on a part-
time basis. The Board of Education
assured us that part-time classes are
less damaging at those grade levels, and
that part-time classes are preferable to
crowded classrooms on a full-time basis
for those age groups.

I know the Senator from Rhode Island
and I have gone through the happy fam-
ily experience of having young children.
And although I am opposed in principle
to part-time classes, I suggest to him
that perhaps children in the first and
second grades can absorb about all the
education they can get in either the
morning or the afternoon. Therefore.
I think that while It Is most unfortu-
nate to have part-time classes In the
first and second grades, it is far more
lm.portant in the higher grades to have
more teachers than to have part-time
classes.

Mr. PASTORE. I go along with that
suggestion. I hope I am not being placed
In the position of having to defend an
inadequate school system In any com-
munity. As a matter of fact, when I was
Governor of Rhode Island, It was my re-
sponsibility, in order to meet a teacher
situation which was quite serious, to take
the necessary steps. Therefore, when I
became Governor I Instituted the imposi-
tion of a sales tax, which was not a popu-
lar thing for a Democratic governor to
do.

I am quite willing to assume my re-
sponsibilities In this connection, too.
However, this item does not involve the
difference between having everything
and having nothing. There are more
than 4,000 schoolteachers in the District
of Columbia ; and the az^wer to the ques-
tion of whether the children of the Dis-
trict of Columbia will be educated or will
not be educated does not depend on the
69 teachers proposed to be eliminated.
Instead, the question is how many split
classes there will be.

I realize that Dr. Coming has said it
Is better to educate in that way, rather
than to have large classes. But the ques-
tion is, How large is "large"? I myself
would rather have 33 pupils under 1
teacher, all day long, although I would
not for a moment attempt to suggest
that I have the knowledge possessed by
Dr. Corning. But if 69 teachers are elim-
inated, and if 4,000 teachers remain.
such an elimination will make very little
difference, bls between large classes and
small ones — whether there will be 33
pupils or 32 pupils in a classroom.

On the other hand, the important
question is how to take care of the situa-

Cni 652

tion. and to do it gradually, progres^ve-
ly, and systematically, without running
into a case of indigestion. We believe
that the way to solve the problem is the
one we have indicated.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I should
like to say to the SenattM* from Ohio [Mr.
Lausche] that when I answered his ques-
tion I was speaking from reccrflection. I
now have before me the information on
the basis of u hich we acted in the Com-
mittee on the District of Columbia.

Mr. President, at this point I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the Record, in connection with my re-
marks, a table showing the enrollment
in elementary schools, junior high
schools, senior high schools, and voca-
tional schools in the District of Columbia
for October and March 1945-46 through
1956-57.

There being no objection, the table was
ordered to be printed in the Rccokd, as
follows:

Public schools of the District of Columbia —
EnroUment in the eletmntary, iunior high,
senior high, and vocational high schoola
for October and March, 194i-46 through
1956-57

Public achoels of the DUtrict of Coluinlria-~
Enrollment in the elementary, junior high,
senior high, and vocational high schools
for October and March, 1945-46 through
1956-57 — CcmUnued

School year

(1)

496J-5*— Ort. 23..

Mar. 4..
1954-55— Oit. 22..

Mar. 3..
1956-5C— Oct. 21

Mar. 1.
1956-57— Oct. 19

Mar. 7.

19.'.7-58i ,

195S-59' ,

195»-eo 1

19<i0-t.l 1 ,

1961-62' ,

Ele-
men-
tary

(2)

64.:

Jun-
ior
hicti

(3)

:::r=

7021
IW. 747
fC7. S45)

11,224

a. 74a

6,8;

79, 5fA'
82,26&(

«5,32i4

22,442

2lt,4t»l

22.447

2(». 912

21.594

21. low

20. 53(V

20.034^

19,491

19,(>3)v

20.907

21.340

22.438

8«a^

lor
high

(i)

Voea-

tional

(5)

12.196
12,l«ittf

12. 377)
11.9^
13,21tM

11, 96.'>|
13.1124
11.8.MI

13. ^.7*\

12. 8(*9|
11.9561
ll,23»k
11,127

Total
(6)

1; 0851 101, 530
2, 22tl 99, F,26
2,420'!02. y4«
I4(»>ll01.051

a. 31); 104. 968

2,e»7!102,716
2, 123' 10.^988
1,«5()J103, f.74
2.3'>^109.(m
2,)3ljl)(>. 835
2,01W]13, .'^4«

i.aaaiiir,. ?)o

1. 9254120. Cie

School year

a)

i»4,'v-4«— Oct. an

Mar. 14.

IM6-47— .Nov. 1.,

Mar. 13.
1947-4S— Oct. 31-.

Mar. 11 .
lMS-»-Ort.22..

Mar. 3..
IMO-SO— Oct. 21-.

Mar. 2..
NSO-Sl— Oet. 20. .

Mar. 1..
1951-52-Urt. 19 .

Mar.«..
Mtt2-63— On. 24..

Mar. 5..

Elc-

Jun-

&>D

nien-

ior

lor

ta:y

high

high

a)

(3)

(*)

fl.KS

19.901

M.Z-W

5].aK&

19.898

14.74fii

52.315

52. 375

19.623 14,9741
19.614 1.1.C/97i

.■a. 42.5

19.323

14. 766'

Voca-
' tional Total

(5)

;i

.S3. 63.'.

!54. 44S]
(54,967
{58, Uh9|

.w, mo I

58.M09I
.'«,11(>|

,00. 4ra

,'i8.724l
t62.43li
:62. 149 1

19.2881
lS.hl4'
1K.9TSI
19,()CU4
19.200;

19, .Wl
19,5WM

20, 412'
19.9131
22,267
20, 139i

14, hi I

IS.689f

13,5001

12,9654

12,944

12, MB^

12.19W

12,129

12,103

12. 30]

12.30Bi

1.363

1.3K7

1.655

1.89

1.947'

1,975

l.TTO

1.950

2,038

2,145

1.840

1.^911

l,720l

l.flOIi

1,736(

1.736)

(6)

87.246
87. 317
88,567
88.963
('9.461
89.709
8X.743
89.390
92.161
89.689
91.. 100
89.780
94,754
92. 541
98.7aS
96.332

' Estimated.

PreriHr»)d hy IVpA'In'x^t »f Owifral Hesearrh and
Statistics. Office of the Statistician. Ayr. 17. 1957.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, let me
say to the Senator from Ohio that the
last figure shown is for March 7 of this
year, and is 103.674 students. The table
is broken down among the various
schools. That figure compares with
87.246 students as of October 26. 1945.

I also ask unanimous consent to have
printed at this point in the Record the
latest figures we have obtained from the
District of Columbia officials on the sub-
ject "Number of classrooms available as
of September, for school years 1945-46.
through 1956-57," which shows that as
of September 1957 there were 3,959 class-
rooms, as coQU)ared with 3,274 classrooms
In 1945. which figures need to be read,
of course, in the light of the testimony
regarding the meaning of the statistics,
insofar as the operational work of the
officials is concerned.

There being no objection, the table
was ordered to be printed in the Recom),
as follows:

Public schoola of the District of Columbia — Kuwiber of classrooms available as of September

for school years 1945-46 through 1956-67

School y«w

1945-46.

1946-47

1847-48.

194H-49

1949-50

laa^si

1951.52

ias2-.'a

1953-54 —

1954-45

1955-56

lW6~i57. ...--

March 19.57

aeptembef 1957 «

Srptpmhrr 19.58 i....
September llt.59'....
Sei>lei&h«r UMU ■

Senior higb

Vocational

Junior high

Elementary

Total .

achoota

high schools

schools

schools

T»

181

657

1,710

3.274

Taa

181

657

1,710

3,27*

726

181

657

1,747

3.311

726

181

681

1,726

8.314

733

217

657

1,706

3,315

C8.5

217

700

1.797

3.459

I8»

221

775

1,813

3.494

752

221

809

1,847

3.629

752

221

&27

1.899

1699

752

221

845

1,934

3,752

7S2

321

845

1,981

3,7W

752

221

930

1,975

3,878

752

221

930

2.012

3.915

752

221

B30

2.056

3,950

755

221

034

2,064

3,974

7.V5

221

947

>2,240

4,172

803

331

047

* 2,240

4,219

I Increaces \MseA on oompM ion of projects Included in fiscal year 1956-58 budgets.
* Includes 16-room health school.

Prtpared In the Department of BuQdings and Orounds Apr. 19, 1957.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I also
ask un^uiimous consent to have printed
at this point in the Recoid a table abow-
in« the number of studoits per class-
room, t(x the school years 194&-46.
through 1956-57, In the various sdKwls,

and indicating for elementary schools
for the year 1956-57. the figure 35J,
which is rather close to the figure I
gave from recollection, namely. 36
students.

8770

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Jtine 11

It

There being no objection, the table was ordered to be printed In the Record, aa
follows:

Public srhoolg of th« Distrirt of Columbia — Sumbrr of students per clnsxrnnm for srhnol
years lH^o-^H throu<jh 1956-67 — Based on number of classrooms available tn September
and student enrollment m October of school years

School year

(1)

tary

CD

Junior
bign

(3)

pen jiir
I4i

Voratioaal

Total

1W.V-W

Ml •!

M «

.11 1

34.0
32.7
XI 4
33. S
M. 1
M 0
3L2

3.' <^
3H8
37 2
3rt •>
3« 7

30 3

•Si 1*
2<J^ 4
27 7
29 !•
2.' H
2». i
27 S
27 1
2f. •>
2.S fi
2-.' I

31 1)
2«i 4

21 1

22 5

20 3
-1' t

17 7

IS II
17 7
1 ■ i
Ih 2
I-. S
17 .i
17 4

IS 0

17 0

r. s

14. 1

7 S

M 1

111 s

\i y

W. 4

7 s
7 «
w ',

II It

III ,i
» «

10 0

w rt
tt 1

8.7

2rt.n

]I44I>_47

27 I

11M7-48

27.1)

iy4-^4S/

■.i\. »

Vm:>-m>...

27 S

1U50 5I „

2<'. S

lv">l-o2

27 1

iy6a-53...

27 2

1«.h}-,>I

I'irA-Mi

iw-s-vse

27 4
27 4
27 1

r.r,r,-,^7

27 1

lV.'i7 V8 1

27 3

l«.'Vi-/>« >

»0

lVA!*-tiOI

27 I

IWiO-oll

27 7

> Baded on e:>tunat«H.
Source; District of Columbia government Apr. 36. 19.^7.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, the
last figure stated is for what year?

Mr. MORSE. For the present year.
The figure for the junior high schools
Is 22.1; that for the senior high schools
Is 17.4; and that for the vocational
schools is 9.6. Of course, shop work is
taught in the vocational schools. The
total or average is 27.1. As I recall, the
Senator from Ohio said that places
Washington in 12th position among the
cities of comparable size In the United
States.

Mr. LAUSCHE. No; I was speaking
of the total expenditures for all pur-
poses.

Mr. MORSE. I beg my colleague's
pardon. I have placed the figures in
the Record because of a misapprehen-
sion on my part reeardin? •'he question
asked by the Senator from Ohio. Of
course. I do not have to tell him that
when we are engaged in debate as rapid
as that in which we have been engaijed
this morning, and when we deal first
with tax matters, and then with enroll-
ment matters, and then with the figures
for classrooms, we cannot always be
as accurate as we wish to be.

Recently, the testimony given to me,
as chairman of the subcommittee, was
that in the elementary schools in the
District of Columbia, the number of
students per class was approximately
36.

I also wish to have printed in the Ric-
ORD a letter written by General Lane,
one of the Commissioners of the Dis-
trict of Columbia, under whose .luris-
diction the school problems in the Dis-
trict of Columbia come in the first In-
stance.

Let me read from the letter:

The following; comnient Is based upon the
data presented In these tables and graphs:

They are the tables I have just placed
In the Record.

I read further:

1. Our elementary schools have regis-
tered steadily Increasing enrollment since
1945. The postwar construction prcgram
began to produce classrooms In 1949 when

the pupH-clasaroom ratio was 34 to 1. Prom
1949 to 1935 the construction was equal to
the Increased enrollnieni, but In 1956 It fell
further behind. We shall lo.se more ground
In 1957 and 1959, regain some In 1959 and

i9t:o.

That means that between 1957 and
1959, some ground will be lost, and then
ground will be regamed m 1959.

I read further from the letter:

These figures project a deficiency of 170
classrooms In 1960 based on a ratio of 34 to 1
or a deficiency of 493 claaaroums ou a ratio
of 30 to 1.

In Other words, the ratio of 30 to 1, as
the Senator from Ohio knows, is the
standard ratio, which educators seem to
be In remarkably uniform agreement in
advocating as the proper one.

So by 1960 there would be a projected
deficiency of 493 classrooms. That is
why the Senator from Pennsylvania and
I have t)een so Insistent in urgmg a
school-construction program, and have
also been so strongly in support of a bill,
which we shall get before the Senate
later, in favor of granting for the Dis-
trict of Columbia borrowing power for
school-construction purposes, whereas
the District of Columbia already has
borrowing power for sewer, highway, and
water purposes.

I read further from the letter from
Commissioner Lane:

2. Junior high schools have held a gener-
ally level enrollment since 1945. School con-
struction has red iced the student-classroom
ratio from 3U to : In 1945 to 22 to 1 in 1956.
This ratio will remain about the same
through 1960.

That Is a rather Interesting observa-
tion, although it is somewhat difficult for
me to understiind — namely, that with
the steady increase In enrollment in ele-
mentary schools, we should expect the
ratio in the case of the Junior high
schools to remain rather constant. How-
ever. I shall try to understand the basis
for that statement. I raise a question aa
to the soundness of that deduction by
the Commissioner. At any rate, that is
the information which he supplies.

I read further from the letter:

3. Senior high schools have registered a
decreasing eru-ollment from 1945 to 1956.
Some new construction has been added and
the new Congreoa Heights High School la In
the program for completion by 1960. The
etudent-clasarcK)m ratio has decreased from
20 to 1 In 1946 to 18 to 1 In 1956 and will
further decrease to 14 to 1 by 1960.

Let me say that when we speak of the
30-to-l ratio as the one generally ac-
cepted and advocated by educatoi-s, we
must not make the mistake of believing
that it is the ratio which should apply to
both the elementary schools, the Junior
high schools, and the .senior high schools.
The ratio for the elementary schools Ls
30-to-l; that for the Junior high schools
and the senior high schools, as used by
educators. Is considerably lower.

I read further from the letter:

4. Vocational high schools have registered
a generally steady enrollment and clasKroom
availability In the period. The student-
Classroom ratio averages about 9 to 1.

5. In the school year 1955-66 a little
ground was lost in the elementary and aenlor
high schools, but some ground was gained In
the other schools. There was an over-all re-
duction 0^0 3 pupil per room for the year.

6 In th^ school year 1956-57. there waa
further crowding In the elementary schools
but a corresponding Improvement in all other
schools. There was no change In the over-
all ratio of pupils per room.

7. For the school year 1957-66. Improve-
ments In the space situation may be expect-
ed to occur only In the Junior high schools,
with a slight space deterioration In all other
schools. The result would be a net Increase
of 0.4 pupil per room In the overall average.

8. The total program shows a generally
steady student-classroom ratio averaging
about 37 to 1 from 1945 to 1960.

It Is my understanding that the Improved
ratios In Junior and senior high schools In
this period reflect the deliberate policy of the
school authorities as well aa some reduction
In enrollment. This policy is apparent la
chart 3 In the diverging graphs for ele-
mentary schools and Junior high schools.

I understood him to mean that they
followed the stricter policy of excluding
some students. Mr. President, this is
not the time to debate that question,
but I hope at some time, on this we can
debate It. since we ought to consider it
unthinkable that t>ecause of tighter re-
quirements, and because we do not have
the facilities to keep him In school there
should be eliminated from a school a
single student who could go on a little
further.

In a democracy I believe such a fail-
ure Is exceedingly dangerous. I did not
mean to speak on this question, but it
is Involved in the debate. So far as I
am concerned, I want a boy or a girl
to go as far in school and to receive as
much training as his or her Intellectual
capacity will permit, because the coun-
try needs that kind of brainpower. I
can imagine nothing worse than a waste
of human resources in a democracy. In
view of the great struggle we shall have
In the century ahead with Russia, we
had better not be wasting any brain-
power.

If it be true, as this statement implies,
that we have in a way kept pace In
high schools because we have been fol-

i957 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE 8771

lowing a stricter elimination prcgram, recommendations. In contrast with ap- »• The total program abowa a generally

I raise the question, "Should that be propriation recommendations. steady student-ciasaroom ratio averaging

done if the space were avsiilable?" If The last point in the Lane letter reads- **«>"* 27 to i from 1945 to i960,

the answer is no. then I say it is a shock- The total program shows a generaUy stead^ " ** ^\ understanding that the Improved

mg program that is being followed, be- student-clasaroom ratio averaging about27 "V*" *? ^"^^ •"** •*'^' ^^^ •<^^°°»« ^

cause we are putting dollars ahead of to 1 from 1945 to i960 ^^ P*''*^** "^*^* "** deUberate policy of the

children. What we are doing. I may achool authorlUes as well as some reduction

also say, is putting dollars ahead of a ^^- President, I ask unanimous con- ^ enrollment. This poUcy la apparent in

strong democracy. I hold to the point «ent that the entire letter of Commis- S^'.el^^^anfiuJS^hS^JSi.T/'*"'"''

of view Mr President that we oueht to **°"^^ ^"^ addressed to the Senator **iJ schools and junior high schools.

enaV'boysaS g^V'to'g'oSig^ 'j^J^J'^J^^.^^^^^^^^'^'^^^r- o^^eT^^SLlS^^ ^^^'Si'':^.

school as far as their mental capacity Porated in the Ricord as a part of my ^trative or other purposes. nSTo/ the^SnSl

will take them. That is what the coun- remarks. ^Qg obsoleaoence of other schools currently in

try needs to do in the developing of There being no objection, the letter use. No projection has been made of plans

brainpower. ^*^ ordered to be printed in the Record, now under consideration by the school au-

I know my friend from Rhode Island as follows: thoriues to con vwt a high school to teachers'

and I do not differ on this question. I GovraprMENT or the ^^^^ use and convert the Wilson and Miner

had no idea. 5 minutes ago. that we Distbict of Columbia. ">!^]*" ^^ buUdlngs to elementary

would be debating this subject, but Com- _ „ Washington, D.C.Uay 6, 19S7. JJ^SonTf e^^w^hSJlf ,lf''°\'^ ^

missioner Lane's noint ruivK it with rp The Honorable Akthub V. Watkinb, t^ *. existing schools in relation to

missioner i^e s pomt raises it with re- umted states Senate populaUon needs are not analysed.

^^i?r pt^^iS'.nf L'i"?*^'- . H ..K wZTngton. D. C. , Although we have enrolhne^rojections
Mr. President, what we must do with deab Senator Watkins: I am writing in ^ ^»«2, we have limited our building pro-
cold statistics is to translate them into further response to your letter of April 11 as Jec^^^ons to the fiscal year 1968 budget pro-
the human values involved. Here is a promised in my acknowledgment of April 15. ^^™ ^°'^ before CtongJ^ss and schedtiled for
tremendous question of policy raised by statistical and graphical data have been accompUshment by calendar year 1960. Our
the cold statistics. If it means what I assembled by types of school for the period '^*rther construction progt&m is now under
think it means, I am not for it because 1945-60. Data for periods beyond the spring ^^^^ ^y * citizen advisory committee to the
I am not KOina to vote in the Spnat«» °' ^^^'^ *™ estimates based on the best Infor- Commissioners, and any predlcUon at this
of the United SUt^ at kny tim^^oJ T''^^" ^ir'l'i" "* '^^» "^'- '^' '°"°^- ^eTeiS" ""T^V""^-
elimmating from educational tra^mg^ *"« '" """^^^= wSS HoTe CoSereie^^SuS^io^K**^'
boy or a girl who could go on another Description: Tal>le GrapH T^^^rpS^1^::^t^n^^'i:'^
year or 2 years and get benefit from It. Number of classrooms avail- built in 1965^. The fi^e^T??or ele!

We need children with that kind of En*rnnmlnt t \ mentary schooU includes 36 rooms In tem-

^''^'^i"^ Ni^ber^f 6'tud"e'nts"D;r"'cU«: P°"^ additions to existing schools and 41

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, win roSn " ^ ^^^ c a P«"^°«t classrooms in buildings started

the Senator yieW of continued but not completed in that year.

Mr MORSF T vIpIH "^^ following comment Is based upon the The 39 Junior high school classrooms (Hart)

Mr' dagtvTdi? V u * * .- data presented In these tables and graphs: were under construction and completed for

mr. fAaiUKJi. l wish to say to the i. Our elementary schools have registered the next school year along with Woodson

distinguished Senator from Oregon I steadily increasing enrollment since 1945. Jvmlor High School which has 46 claasrooma.

could not agree with him more. I would The postwar constnictlon program began to The 8 senior high school clafisrooms are in

be very quick to resign from any com- produce classrooms m 1949 when the pupil- temporary additions to AnacosUa Senior

mittee that would adopt a policy which ^''"'■oo™ ra**o was 34 to l. Prom 1949 to High School. The graphs and tables en-

would encourage our youngsters to droo ^^^'^ **^® construction was equal to the in- closed herewith refer exclusively to perma-

OUt of school ■» *» i~ »*iwv creased enrollment, but in 1956 it fell fur- nent construction and do not count existing

ther behind. We shall lose more ground in temporary classrooms.

Looking at page 4 of the report of the 1957 and 1959. regain some in 1959 and 1960. Tables 1 and 8 of the committee i«port

committee, it will be seen that the com- These figures project a deficiency of 179 refer to needs based on detailed plans of

mittee goes a step further than the sug- classrooms in i960 based on a ratio of 34 school authorities. It is apparent that these

gestlon made by the distinguished Sen- to 1 or a deficiency of 493 classrooms on plans would require sharp further reduc-

ator from Oregon. I read from page 4: * ""f °' '° ,5? i" ,_ . ^ ^ .^ ^^^ °^ pupu-ciassrooma raUoa in aU

*^ *» 2. Junior high schools have held a gen- schools

The committee U likewise aware of the crmUy level enrolUncnt since 1946. School po- vour further lnform«fin« .«-i™i. «•

grave problem presented by older retarded consUuction ha. reduced the student-class- oJ^9^n6^h^l ^dS^ Sia^r^^

chUdren and children with «ivere behavior room ratio from 30 to 1 In 1945 to 22 to 1 J^iitSthat 52^rSm^ ^,^1 J,Z^^*f!^

problems In the regular classrooms. The in 1956. This ratio will remain about the «2S^^tou"lo^Tnd ^nSLSt^lS

school administration should consider serl- same throutth 1960 Bcnooi consiructJon and 48 p»cent was for

ously some means of providing «:hool space " S^X "high ^ools have registered . pSc«t"^ f*"J^^Sv ^^S^ 2

for thU group, with «.parate clas«-ooms for decreasing en^llment from 1946 to 1956. J^^J J^o^er^£^l^l^l^n^r

boys and girls, and with a program of in- Some new construction has been added and E^STt aft?? «,^^«^fi rJt J?t f^

structlon geared to their abilities. the new Congress HelghU High School is in S^tl^'^i^Jrand'^'eroenTf^Jthrr

I think we ought to encourage school- "»* P^Sram for completion by i960. The schools. This breakdown includes new capl-

ing. and Children remaining in'sc'ooron g,^?oTS;T^^?8^^S:,rin'^r9TSd'^'S ^J^'i^ '^Z.l^Lr^'^''''^ "^"

every possible level. I agree with the further decrease to 14 to 1 by i960. repair and improvemmt costs

Senator when he states that we ought to 4. Vocational high schools have registered . JJ J.T*3Jf ^^ ^i^ n7 r^.l,S^

utilize the Inherent talents of our young- a generally steady enroUment and clLsroom 2fiX^'«S^ h\.^t^hr^t^fT~r

sters. TTiat objective was uppermost in avallabUlty in the period^ The student- SJ^^uSJ^cr^sTtS'SS % yS."

the minds of all the members of the classroom ratio averages about 9 to 1. ^^^ ^^ j^^j,^ secondary achoolTat thi^

committee, and I do not think we faulted *• ^ *^ ■'^^oo^ y®" 1955-56 a lltUe ground r^^ae of elementary schools It has not

in that respect. '*" lost in the elementary and senior high p^vided the lowered pupll-classroom ratio.

Mr. MORSE. I appreciate that senti- o*^tSrsch^*is"^"AS:"w°i ^ o^ai? r^S! ^^r ^ ^^ 'fS JX°^r ' ,^...

ment very much. The matter is covered uon of 0.8 pupU per room for the year. ^* appears to be within the capacity of the

by my opening statement. When I say e. m the school year 1966-67. there was ^^^'^ °' Columbia Government to meet

that. I mean I appreciate the committee further crowding m the elementary schools *^® Increased enrollment projected for the

report so much that I am not happy in but a corresponding improvement in aU other ***** * y**"' ^^ concentration on elemen-

findlng myself In disagreement with any schools. There was no change in the overaU **^ school constrtjctlon it should be prac-

part of It ; but I have my responsibilities. "*i° «' P"P»^ P«' '■"o™- "**"* *2^*f*^i?I!? pupU-ciaasroom ratio

as I see them, as chairman of the Legis- "^^ ^°'' ^« «^°°^ y«" 1967-68. Improve- *own to 34 to 1 within normal budget plan-

lative SubcQmmitf>»«» nn niRtH<.t nt nn nients In the space slttiation may be expected wng-

lumbla AfS^ District of Co- ^ ^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ j^^^j^ hlghlShools. it »■ difficult for me to express a Judgment

umum All airs. with a slight space deterioration in aU other on the needs aUted by otir educators In th«

wnat we have here Is a difference in schools. The result would be a net Incraasa White House Oonferenee Report. Obviously

point of view In regard to legislative of 0.4 pupUs par room in the overall avwag*. they ar» beyoad tha capablUtiea oX current

8772

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8773

lii

budgetary programing. Since these requlre-
menta are not related to overall pupU-claaa-
room ratloe. it la not practicable to compare
even the stated requirements of the ceveral
States. My Inclination la to accept aa a
budgetary obligation the attainment of
pupil-classroom ratios being met by other
comparable cities and to leave to the edu-
cators the efficient utilization of the plant
provided. Unfortunately we do non now
have data on the pupil-classroom ratios of
other cities which would guide us In making
a comparison.

The Board of Education has submitted a
169 million capital outlay program to the
Board of Conunlssloners for completion
during the next 5 years. This was planned
as a borrowlns; program. But other capital
outlay projects are also urgently needed.
Currently the whole public works pr.igram
Is being reviewed by a committee oi out-
standing local businessmen. The commit-
tee la making every effort to exped.ie its
findings.

With kindest personal regards.

Sincerely yours,

T A. LAN*.

Bngadier General, United States
Army, Engineer Commissioner.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I beg
the cooperation of my colleagues for a
few minutes, while I finish my summary
remarks on this subject.

Going bac^c to the issue before the
Senate, the question is. "Should we in-
crease the Federal contribution to the
District from $20,500,000 to $23 million?"
Those of us on the District of Columbia
Committee who are sponsonns the
amendment say '"Yes." and for the rea-
sons I shall state. The Senator from
Rhode Island commented on the fact
that, aa chairman of the District of Co-
lumbia Committee, he has to take Into
account the temper of the Congress. I
understand that. He points out that the
Appropriations Committee has increased
the House allowance by $500,000.

I may say. good naturedly, that some
charge me with being a horse trader. I
am a horse trader when it comes to
horses, and enjoy it as a hobby. I will
do a certain amount of horse trading,
within the framework of principle, in the
legislative process. I think what Is now
proposed Is within the framework of
principle. I say to the Senator from
Rhode Island that if he recommends
$20,500,000 and takes it to conference, I
think he is very optimistic if he thinks
he will get $20,500,000.

Mr. PASTORE. I am most optimistic,
and I hope the amount will be sustained,
because I think It Is based on logic.

Mr. MORSE. I wish conference com-
mittees would act in accordance with
the principles of logic, but I have been
In too many of them to hope that in this
case the conference committee will act
to sustain the fine Ideal expressed by the
Senator from Rhode Island. When I
speak about the compromise principle In
this matter, we have to face up to the
fact that conference committees at least
frequently compromise as between
amounts. I would feel much more com-
fortable if the Senate conferees went
into conference with a $23 million fig-
ure as against the House $20 million
figure. I have some reason to believe
that we would come somewhere near

getting a figure of $21,500,000. That
would about split the difference, al-
though, who can tell? I do not predict.
I only express my belief that is atwut
what would happen, based upon con-
ference practice.

I wanted to mention that I think we
ought to go into conference with a $23
million figure because I believe the facta
warrant it.

The first main argument I make in
support of the $23 million figure is to
be found in the Appropriation Commit-
tees hearings, on page 22. where Com-
missioner McLaughlin. President of the
District Commissioners, is reported as
testifying about the justification I shall
read from page 22. I think this is the
best summary of the justification for the
$23 million.

The Organic Act of June 11. 1878. con-
tained the first legislative provision definitely
rei-ognl/.ing the obll.atlons of the Federal
Government to share In the cost and de-
development of the District. It provided. In
part, that —

"To the extent to which Congress Bhall
approve of said estimates. Congress shall ap-
prnpruite the amount of 50 percent thereof;
and the remaining 50 perrent ot such ap-
proved estimates shall be levied and as-
sessed upon the taxable property and privi-
leges In said District other than the prop-
erty of the United States and of the District
of Columbia: • • • "

rrom 1878 until around 1910 the financial
scene was comparatively peaceful In the Dis-
trict of Columbia Estimates of appropria-
tions and revenues were submitted to the
Treasury and transmitted to Congress.
Funds were appropriated and spent. The
50-50 distribution was approximately com-
piled with. Between 19ui and 1910, when
the District had livsufflclent funds to meet
Its ofcU^atlnns. the Secretary of the Treasury
was authorized to advance funds. The act
of March 3. 1909, prjvlded that the expenses
of all d-partmenta charged against the reve-
nues of the District of Columbia were to be
Included In the estimates. The relations i>e-
tween the District of Columhia and the Fed-
eral O ivemment were very amicable.

However, shortly after 1910 the District be-
gan to accumulate a revenue surplus —

It sounds as If the reference Is to the
present, does it not, when we hear the
argument about a revenue surplus of
some $4 million? Let us go back to the
history 1

However, shortly after 1910 the District be-
gan to accumulate a revenue surplus, and
the efforts to reduce the ratio began. The
debates upon the question were persistent
ar.d vigorous even thou-;h no national issues
were Involved, and a Joint Select Committee
of 3 Senators and 3 Congressmen was ap-
pointed In 1915. which delivered majority
and minority rep«.>rt3. But no reduction was
made until 1921, when the ratio changed to
60 percent payment by the District of Co-
Itimbla and 40 percent Federal.

The payment was reduced to 10 per-
cent in 1921.

This did not expressly repeal the 50-50
provision of the organic act. but provided for
60-40 for I year. The 60-40 method was
made permanent In the appropriation act
for 1923 and continued until 1925. Begin-
ning with the fiscal year 1925. Congress be-
gan ignoring Its definite obligation under
the organic act. and Its own substantive law,
and commenced appropriating the Federal
share In a lump rum each year to and includ-

ing the fiscal year 1939. These lump-rum
appropriations varied from •9.600.U00 down
to $5 million. The lump-sum Idea was made
permanent In the District of Columbia Reve-
nue Act of 1930. and beginning wttb that
year an annual payment of 96 million was
authorized. For the fiscal year 1947. the
payment was increased from $6 million to
ta million Under the District of Columbia
Revenue Act of 1947. the authorized annual
payment was set at 912 million, of which 111
million was for the gentral fund and $1 mil-
lion for the water fund

On Uarch 6. 1946, Senate Document No,
303 was approved It was entitled, "Fiscal
Relations ""efween the Government of the
United States and the District of Columbia,
Report of the Subcommittee on the District
of Columbia of the Committee on Appropria-
tions aa Approved by Said Committee on Ap-
propriations " It Is a very Illuminating re-
port It gives a history of the relattonrhlp
between the District and Federal Oovern-
ments and Indicates how those investigators
felt this matter should be handled.

Under the head of "Suggestod Recum-
mendatlorw." the report stated

"It Is believed that It is the di^stre of the
Federal Government to assume Its proper
share of the expenses for the upkeep and op-
eration of the National Captul This flnd-
ingls based upon the following facts:

"1. The District of Columbia Is the seat of
the Federal Government eet aside for Federal
purposes, with full legislative powers re-
tained by the Congress.

"2 The area nf the District of Columbia la
fixed It cannot expand Therefore, when
the Federal Government purchases property
the tax revenue previously received on such
property Is lost to the Dl.«trlct and cannot
be replaced The residents of the District
In fairness should not be expected to make
up such loss In revenues by increased taxes.

"3 The enormous Increase In the expenses
of the District of Columbia during the past
10 yeur has t)een occasioned by the tremen-
dous expansion of the Federal Government,
with no commen.'urate Increase In the pay-
ment by the Federal Government. Ehirlng
the past 6 years there has been no change In
the amount of the annual payment

"4 The residents of the District througb
Increased taxes have adequately, fairly, and
cheerfully provided their share of the cost of
operation and upkeep of the National
Capital."

Mr Chairman. In our thinking this city
Is 8<:)methlng far beyond the concern of the
people of the District of Columbia because
It Is a Federal city established by the Con-
stitution as such and as the seat of the Fed-
eral Government. The Senate has alwaya
recognized the oblls^atlon of the Federal
Government toward the District and we re-
spectfully request that this $3 million be
restored.

I wish to have printed In the Record
at this point a table which is to be found
on page 81 of the hearings of the joint
subcommittees on fiscal affairs of the
House and Senate for 1956. previously
referred to. which sets forth the Federal
Government contribution from 1924 to
1957. I wish to read a ratio or two.

In 1924 the payment was 39.49 percent.
In 1938 it had dropped to 12.21. By 1945
It had dropped to 9.58. In 1946 it was
9.27. In 1952 it was 8.58. In 1954 It was
8.52. which was the lowest. It Is now,
for 1956, back to 14 43.

I ask unanimous consent that the table
be printed In the Record at this point.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
Frkas In the chair) . Is there objection?

There being no objection, the table was
ordered to be printed in the Record, as
follows:

District of Columbia apropriations payable
from the general revenues of the District
of Columbia for the fiscal years 1924-57,
exclusive in each case of appropriations
payable from the highway fund, the water
fund, the sanitary sewage works fund, the
motor vehicle parking fund, and trust
fund!>, and the apportionment of appropri-
ations between the District of Columbia
and the United States

P(>rcent.

Tolsl up. Pi^trlrt

T"nlt(vl

a,".f of

T'-^rHl

proiTiit- j of Cdlurii-

t^Iiit'fi

T'rilltNl

>i-ar

tlutLS

blji share

sliure

8t;it<'8
shure

I.'.'4

$23.»13, TM tM. 4rj.33n

W, 440, 42.'.

« 39 49

\V2:,

31, i:.'i, fiTJ 22. (1*1, 317

K, 14,'.,3.".

29 :«

IVW

3i.i:«. 7:*) w. i:w.Ra'«

(*. coil, 1*2

a IKI

1«27

33.'J.'il,47>» ■2i.^»H\.<Jh-

y, (Km. 45*1

2ft .M

lya*

34. HV4,M^ ■i.\K^2.^i.•^
3.': 9.'i7. \)7\) an. g.17, 7.V1

«,(KJi. 7y«i

y.llfKI, 217

2.S 79

V.N

2.1. (13

iy:<ii

♦ I. fiW.3(») SI.WM. »»i

U, (1(111,(11)0

22 12

rai

A:,.t<i.\-2Sh 3li.liS. 2.V2

9. ."iO 1.(134

2(1 K2

l'.^:i-'

4.1. >«♦ 1.1 122 34, :W, «11

c. .vm, 111

21 f.7

lM;t«

.*(, taft, WWK 31,H.'.1,M7

7,77,^ l.M

19 t.2

1'j.M

2W, 7(«i, 7:«7i 24, («lll. 7(»s

.^ 7(1(1. w.j

19 19

JWCi

34, fi2il,(i(>4 3(1. (INI. 71 1«

4. .'*(, 29.'.

13 11

VXV,

3h. 29.\. «12' 32. Mh.. 424

."i. 7ri7. ,129

14 9(1

1W7

4tl, IVJ, 7r*i iS. 177, 7W

.1, (Nk'i.ddl

12. 4»i

lM.i><

41. 143. his SUIS. 7y2

,'., (riS. (i2t.

12. 21

Vufi

4<l, 4<»4, 4M .TS. 4^*4. 4.".1

.1. (KKV (¥111

12 3.1

1'>4<I

41,777, HK*! 3,'i, 777. 7HS

fi. (Km, 117

14.36

l-^l

♦3. 13»i, W)V 37, 13»i. Wiy

fi. (Km. ((HI

13.91

1'4J

47. 4<il,2fil> 41.4<ll,2fi«

ft, IKai. IKMI

12 tW

]:>*3

4«. 422.U321 4;i. 422.M32

ft. (Kill. Il()(l

12 14

1W4

M.fi42. 247 4H. (>4i247

(i,i»»i. (Km

10. UK

li-*'j...

62,5«y, 12."i U\.!VJ.)V.

fi, OUi, (Mm

U. ,1K

JiMrt

M. 7*. 423 .SK. 72S. 42:*

r.. mill, oil

9 27

IMT

72, .-iM, 3141 ft4,,V4.3l4

K. mill, (im

11 (r2

I'.HH

M.744, iwfi 7(1, 744.(»«.

11, OKI, (Kid

13 4«5

li*4'.l

><«. 017. WC 7.V()I7. MK".

ll.iKm. (Kwi

12 79

lil.V)

Vi^. ;«1.27,') h7.331,27.'.

iLom, iK«i

11.19

IWl

lll3.V24.h22 1*4. !24,h22

V, Mm, (oi

9 43

l'.t.'.2

121.2»">.^, M7'« nil. Wv',.y7K

111, «m. (Km

K rn

W3

1 13. .W). 327 1(13, .WU, 327

1(1, OKI, (Kl(l

8 Ml

WA

I2W, 111,3»4 UH, lll.3»4

ii.UKi, om

h .'.2

l-'.'.i

I.W, 'Th. 7('in I \St. ,'.7>. 'li) 211. OiXl. (KiO

14 33

lv,w«

143. »>.V »* 12.V »«. V* IS. (Ill, (VKI

12 ,V.

ll#67>

152, 47,'., 3«1 130. 475, 3«1 22, (MJII, UJU

14. i3

' Prior t" 1923 tho itprct-ulage ol the Lulled SLau;s
ih.iii- »;iS M't III .Vl [xTC^Tit.

' K<rinialr5 Il«'m.<i (or 1917 Include estimat»>«< of
ll3.21.i,,^Ki proixisffl (or later lnuisml.s.siiin and u proposed
llu-riu«- m 1 ejiiul paj lUfUl of »2.L1U0.1.«JU.

NiiTK.— Tlx' rfstonitinn of the $2,n(m,(XK> rpdiiftir.n In
r.i!.:.il puyiiiiTit, ni!t-lr In 19V'.. will Infrtast' Iht pi't-
ciiii»(j«- (or tise&l year 1956 to 13.95 j)froi'nt.

Mr. MORSE. What deduction am I to
gather from this? Before I make my
deduction, I wish to quote from Com-
missioner McLaughlin, whose testimony
appears on page 24 of the hearings. He
quotes the law of March 31. 1956. The
Senate will recall that was based upon
an amendment offered in the Senate,
which proposed the Federal contribution
be raised to $24 million. It went to con-
ference, I may say, and came back $23
million, which was pretty good, for we
lost only $1 million in 1956. But that
is where the $23 million was born. I
desire to put some clothing on the baby
today, because I think we ought to dress
it reasonably well.

Mr. McLaughlin pointed out In his
testimony what Congress said In the
law:

There are authorized to be appropriated
as annual payment* by the United States
toward defraying the expenses of the govern-
ment of the District of Ckjlumbla. the sum
of «20 minion for each of the fiscal years
19.55 and 1956, and the sum of *23 million
for the fiscal year 1957, and for each fiscal
year thereafter: Prorided, That so much of
the aggregate annual payments by the United
States appropriated to the credit ol the gen-

eral fund as Is in exceEs of $13 million for
each of the fiscal years 1955 and 1956. and
$16 million for the fiscal year 1957 and sub-
sequent fiscal years, shall be available for
capital outlay only, and then on a cumtilatlve
total basis only to the extent of not more
than 60 percent of the cumulative total of
capital outlay appropriations payable from
such general fund which becomes available
for expenditure on and after July 1, 1964.
If In any fiscal year or years a deficiency
exists between the amount appropriated and
the amount authorized to be appropriated,
additional appropriations are authorized for
subsequent fiscal years to pay such deficiency
or deficiencies.

I ask unanimous consent. Mr. Presi-
dent, that the several paragraphs in
which Commissioner McLaughlin testi-
fied In regard to the justification of the
$23 million be printed in the Record at
this point in my remarks.

There being no objection, the para-
graphs were ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

Statement of Commissionzr Robebt E.
McLaughlin on Federal Payment

Mr. Chairman, we are requesting the res-
toration of $3 million In the Federal pay-
ment to bring It up to the $2'3 million
amount authorized by the Revenue Act of
1956 (Public Law 460).

The year 1946 seems to be the starting
point for District of Columbia large-scale
budget difficulties. It was the beginning of
Infiatlon as far as the District was concerned,
and necessitated 15 days of hearings before
the Joint Subcommittee on Fiscal Affairs
during the Ist session of the 80th Congress,
on methods of acquiring additional revenue
through taxes and other means.

Out of this hearing came amendments to
the Revenue Act of 1939 which Imposed ap-
proximately $9'/i million in Increased taxes
(general fund) upon our residents.

In that year (1947) the Federal Govern-
ment was paying $8 million as its share
toward the expenses of the District of Co-
lumbia government. Up to 1947 the water
fund received no portion of the annual pay-
ments made by the Federal Government.

The Congress, having considered all the
facts. In the Revenue Act approved July 16,
1947, provided in article VI as follows:

"For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1948,
and for each fiscal year thereafter, there is
hereby authorized to be appropriated, as
the annual payment by the United States
toward defraying the expenses of the govern-
ment of the District of Columbia, the sum of
$12 million, of which $11 million shall be
credited to the general fund of the District
of Columbia and $1 million shall be credited
to the water fund of the District of
Columbia."

This relief carried us into the fifties. Then
came the District of Columbia Public Works
Act of May 18. 1954, amending the Revenue
Act of 1947.

It was estimated that by this act our resi-
dents would pay $14.5 million per annum
(all funds) additional taxes each year. As
Its part toward this great program. Congress
provided as follows:

"Sbc. 2. (a) For the fiscal year ending June
30, 1955, and for each fiscal year thereafter.
there Is hereby authorized to be appro-
priated, in addition to the sums appropriated
under section 1 of this article, an annual
payment by the United States toward de-
fraying the expenses of the government of
the District of Columbia In the stun of $9
million: Provided, That so much of the ag-
gregate annual payments by the United
States appropriated under this article to the
credit of the general fund as is in excess
of $13 million shall be available for capital

outlay only, and then on a cumulative total
basis only to the extent of not more than
50 percent of the cumulative total of capital
outlay appropriations payable from such
general fund which becomes available for
expenditure on or after July 1. 1964.

"(b) If in any fiscal year or years, a de-
ficiency exists between the amount appro-
priated and the amount of $20 million
authorized by this article to be appropriated,
additional appropriations are hereby author-
ized for subsequent fiscal years to pay such
deficiency or deficiencies."

Our burdens being greater than we could
bear compelled us to return to the Joint
Fiscal Committee for additional taxes. Aa
a result Public Law 460, District of Colimibla
Revenue Act of 1956, was passed. By It,
the income tax and other taxes were raised
to produce approximately $8 million (gen-
eral fund) in 1958 and each year thereafter.
As a result of the understanding with Con-
gress, the Commissioners raised the real-
estate taxes approximately $2 million a year.
The Congress having again considered all
the facts, amended section 2 of article VI of
the Revenue Act of 1947 by Increasing its
authorization of Federal pasrment $3 million
so that the total is now $23 million. Section
2 now reads as follows:

"There are hereby authorized to be ap-
propriated, in addition to the stuns appro-
priated under section 1 of this article, as
annual payments by the United States to-
ward defraying the expenses of the govern-
ment of the District of Columbia, the sum
of $9 million for each of the fiscal years 1955
and 1956. and the sum of $12 million for
each fiscal year thereafter: Provided, That so
much of the aggregate annual payments by
the United States appropriated under this
article to the credit of the general fund
as is in excess of $13 million for each of the
fiscal years 1955 and 1956, and $16 million
for the fiscal year 1957 and subsequent fiscal
years shall be available f(Jr capital outlay
only, and then on a cumulative total basis
only to the extent of not more than 50
percent of the cumulative total of capital
outlay appropriations payable from such
general fund which becomes available for
expenditure on and after July 1, 1954."

The taxpayers as the committee can well
understand had no way of escape and have
been compelled to meet these very heavy In-
creases in taxes.

The Federal Government on the other
hand has failed to meet its obligation.

Because the Increase in the Federal pay-
ment was a part of the program of Increased
taxes on District of Columbia residents, the
Commissioners feel that the Congress has
a moral obligation to pay the full $23 million
and meet Its part of this Increased tax
program.

In 1956 It appropriated $18 million In lieu
of the authorized $20 million.

In 1957 it appropriated $20 million in lieu
of the authorized $23 million.

As to this $5 million the Commissioners
are content to withhold claim therefore un-
til Its new capital program Is ready for
submission.

As to the $3 million withheld by the House,
the Commissioners most earnestly request
full restoration.

On July 5, we appeared before the Senate
Appropriations Committee on the supple-
mental appropriation bill for 1957 and pre-
sented considerable historical data in
reference to the Federal payment. At this
time, we merely wish to refresh your recol-
lection with a brief r6stim£ of the Federal
payment history up to and including 1947.

The Organic Act of June 11, 1878. con-
tained the first legislative provision defi-
nitely recognizing the obligations of the
Federal Government to share In the cost and
development of the District. It provided in
part, that—

I

i I

1

t

s.

M -

8774 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE , June 11

-To the extent to which Congress shall "3. The enormous Increase tn the expenses represents the Increased fund requlrementa

approve of said estimates, Congress shall of the District of Columbia during the past of M. 284.420 proposed In the Senate bill

appropriate the amount of 60 percent 10 years has been occasioned by the tre- (»3, 284, 420 for cost of amendments, proposed

thereof; and the remaining 50 percent mendous expansion of the Federal OoTcm- and «1 million reserved for supplementals)

of such approved eetlmates shall be levied ment, with no commensurate Increase In the minus the $6,510,000 Increased revenue avall-

and assessed upon the Uxable property and payment by the Federal Government Our- ability (f5.50O,0OO above the revenue estl-

prlvllegee In said District other than the Ing the past « years there has been no change mates of April 11. 1957. $.500,000 Increased

property of the United States and of the In the amount of the annual payment. Federal payment, and $510,000 In additional

District of Columbia; • • •." "4. The residents of the District through loan authorization to the highway fund).

Prom 1878 until around 1910 the financial Increased taxes have adequately, fairly, and The surpluses are distributed by funds as

scene was comparatively peaceful in the cheerfully provided their share of the cost of follows:

District of Columbia. Estimates of appro- operation and upkeep of the National Capl- General fund — - $2,350,702

prlatlons and n-venues were submitted to tal." Highway fund 28.335

the Treasury and transmitted to Congress. Mr Chairman, In our thinking this city la vv'aier fund 335.778

Funds were appropriated and spent. The fomethlng far beyond the concern of the sanitary sewage works fund 311.043

60-50 distribution was approximately com- p€> pie of the District of Ct>Uimbl.'\ because It jj^tor \-ehicle parking func 1.374.839

piled with. Between 1903 and 1910. when Is a Federal city established by the C^n-

the District had Insufficient funds to meet stltutu^n as such and as the sent of the Fed- I appreciate the help of the Senator

Its obligations, the Secretary of the Treasury ervl Government The Senate has always from Rhode Island. I Should like tO ask

was authorized to advance funds. The act recognized the obUcatlon of the Federal Gov- ^^^ ^ question, because I wi5h tO be ab-

of March 3. 1909, provided that the expenses ernment t>/ward the DlsUict and we respect- 5Qi„(^iy accurate

of all departments charged against the rev- fully request that this $3 million be restored. ^^^^ ^^ ^ ^^^^^ j^ understand-

rnTLi^fn^^re'.isrnr^rtC ,,'^'}''?'^i'r''T\v^.'T'- '^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ^•^'^'^,' ^°— -t"

between the District of Columbia and the tion Of the obligation which I think we cannot spend any surplus revenue unless
Federal Government were very amicably. owe the District. I have been very much It is appropriated? The Public Works
However, shortly after 1910 the District be- interested in the comments of my very Review Committee Is now revicwinf? the
gan to accummuiate a revenue surplus, and dear friend from Illinois ! Mr. Douglas 1. entire public-works program authorized
the efforts to reduce the ratio bo?an The We said in the 1956 a^t that the amount by the 83d Congress. I assume that
debates up-^n the question were persisttnt ^j ^he Federal contribution should be some of the final recommendations will
and vigorous even though no nattonaa $23 million. I think we made a pledge, be implemented through surplus funds.
-^ :n SeStrs :nd' l Sretme^w^'al! I think we ought to keep it. I think we After the Review Committee has made
pointed In 1915, which delivered mavrtty and snould make available the $23 million. Its report to the Commissioners, Lhey ex-
minonty reports. But no reduction was Suppose we should do SO. Would any pect to make recommendations to the
made until 1921. when the ratio chan^^ed to of It be wasted? Let me say to my Congress for appropriations for the ex-
ec percent payment by the District of c-^- friend from Illinois that the report on penditure of these funds. However,
lumbia and 40 percent Federal This did not hungry children will be printed as a Sen- many of these funds are earmarked
expressly repeal the 50-50 PJ^vision of the ^te document. Senators were to have funds, so to speak, and will be used for
?;\^'^6^"m^"h'od° wi^'rde%1rmrne\.\^rn received copies of it today, but it will be the various clSsiflcations listed on pa«e
the Appropriation Act f^.r 1923 and con- reprinted tonight, bccause there are 3 of the report.

tmued until 1925. B.^ijinnin^ with the ft.<cai some errors in it. which are not the fault ^r PASTORE. Let me answrr the

year 1925. Congress began Ignoring its deti- of the printer. Certain material was que-^tlon in this fashion: Speaking, now.

nite obligation under the organic act. and Its omitted which should have been in- »ith respect to the five funds to which

own substantive law, and commenced appro- eluded. We have already made arrange- reference has been made namely the

L'!.h'vL^^^?rT^L1!!HlL^'Jht S v'J^ ments to have it reprinted tonight. general fund, the highway fund, the

IS. ''S^sriump-^ural^p^.^il^tron^U^red ^' recommendation of the subcom- water fund, the sanitary sewage works

from $9,500 000 down to $5 mJllion. The ^ittee of the Di;strict of Columbia Com- fund, and the motor vehicle parking

lump-sum Idea was made permanent In the mittee entails an amount of $2,800,000 fund, the District Commissioners could

District of Columbia Revenue Act of 1939. and over and above the amount included for no more spend this money without direct

beginning with that year an annual payment welfare in the pending bill. appropriation by Congress than they

of $8 million was authorized. F cr the fiscal Mr DOUGLAS. Could that not be could spend the $2>''2 million we would

irmminn t '^^^^nT^rn'^f Tn^Pr ^-.Tn/Zrw ^"^ ^^ reducing the surplus- be adding it we adopted the Senators

$6 million to $8 million. Under the District »»_ i>«/-^do'c> t ^^^ ^r^r^it^r, f« fv^* jir^i* ,. j»*»-

Of Columbia Revenue Act of 1947, the author- ^J ^^°^^!^ } *"" ''''^'^f i° ^^^^- amendment. So if we were to adopt the

ized annual payment was set at $12 million. ^^ "^riow that we cannot do every- Senator's amendment today, unless we

Of which $11 million was for the general fund thing thiji year. We do not expect to do are contemplating the appropriation of

ond $1 million for the water fund. everything this year. However, we more money for other purposes, the ad-

on March 5. 1946. Senate Document No. thought we owed it to the Senate to set ditional sum would go Into the funds

203 was approved. It was entitled. "Fiscal forth what we think we should do with we are talking about, and the $4,400,000

Relations Between the Government of the regard to the welfare program. If we would become $6 900 000 but that money

United States and the District of Columbia, ^arry out the recommendations of the would have to be appropriated at a later

S-TninmM^nr thP*^^^,im'.P^'^. *f,n^ subcommittce report-a subcommittee date.

of Columbia of the Committee on .\pproprla- i_- i. ,. 1. ._ j 1 .- ^^^-^. • ~ -^

tions as Approved by Said Committee on Ap- ^^''^^ ^pent weeks in very hard work on Mr. DOUGLAS. Or today.

propriations ■■ It Is a very uiuminating re- the Study of the welfare problems in the Mr. MORSE. We must do It In an-

port. It gives a history of the relationship District of Columbia — we shall need other bill.

hetween the District and Federal Govern- $2,800,000 over and above the amount Mr. PASTORE. It Is not proposed tO

ments and Indicates how those InvesUgatora allocated by the Appropriations Com- do It today.

felt this matter should be handled. mittee. We are not proposing any Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, win

Under the head of "Suggested Recom- waste. the Senator yield'

mendatlons." the report stated: ^^ ^ow come to the question of the Mr. MORSE. I yield.

ipjpj? ^ .r,^ Jpn'^t' t\ J,^LT!r ° o surplus, some $4 million plus. First, let Mr. DOUGLAS. Do not the Senator

Federal Government to assume Its proper ,. » »i_ ,. »i. »-.•*. ■ ,. ^ ■ m ^ j^.../-.....

share of the expense, for the upkeep and ^^ P°^^^ °"' ^^^^ ^^ District Commis- from Oregon and the Senator from

operation of the National Capital. This And- sioners cannot spend that surplus unless Pennsylvania [Mr. Clark 1 Intend, at a

in^ Is based upon the following facts: It is appropriated. I think it should be later time today during the considera-

•1. The District of Columbia Is the seat appropriated. I am in favor of doing SO. tlon of the pending bill, to propose In-

of the Federal Government set aside for Fed- However, as the Senator from Rhode creases In the appropriations for welfare,

erai purposes, with full legislative powers re- Island [Mr. Pastori] has pointed out, the appropriations for hospitals, and the

tained by the Congress. ^Y\e amount Is broken up. I read from appropriations for education?

"2. The area of the District of Columbia is the committee report, beginning at the Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, if the

T.l%J:^roT."^n^pJ^:^;-J^^-; to^ot^.!. Seaator from Or«on ^U yield to m.,

the tax revenue previously received on such Rivriru». OsLiOATioirs, and 8xTtn.xJt *■ Should like tO answer the question.

property u lost to the District and cannot b« In the bill recommended to the Senate th» ^r. MORSE. I am happy to yield.

rep a-ed. The residents of the DUtrlct In estimated surplus as of June 30. 1958. Is Mr. CLARK. I thank the Senator

falrnes!! should not be expected to m.ake up $4 448.747 an compared to $2,223 167 under from Oregon for yielding tO me. I hope

such loss In revenues by increased taxes. the House bill. The difference of $2,225,580 the Senator from Rhode Island will pay

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8775

close attention to what I am about to
say.

To answer the question of the Sen-
ator from Illinois, it is my understand-
ing that, after the pending amendment
is voted upon, amendments will be
offered, which would restore to the
budget the original recommendations of
President Eisenhower with respect to
appropriations which went to the House,
were cut out by the House, and were not
restored by the Senate.

Under the rules of the Senate we are
not entitled to propose today any higher
appropriations than those requested by
the Bureau of the Budget, or recom-
mended by a standing committee of the
Senate. Therefore, a point of order
would properly be raised If we were to
attempt today to do more than restore
the El.'^nhower budget figures.

However, it has been my thought — and
I believe also the thought of the Senator
from Oregon — that if we could get the
Federal payment increased, the District
Committee would urge — and I thirUt with
some success — upon the Commissioners
that they come forward with a deficiency
appropriation bill to put this money to
use. to meet the great need which has
been outlined by the Senator from Ore-
gon.

Mr. MORSE. Let me say to my friend
from Illinois that in the opinion of those
of us on the District of Columbia Com-
mittee who are urging the increase, the
first thins we should do is to reaffirm the
act of 1956 by a $23 million contribu-
tion by the Federal Government. That
is what my amendment would do. What
we say — with all due respect to the Ap-
propriations Committee — is that we
think Congress should live up to the $23
million commitment. Second, as the
Senator from Pennsylvania has pointed
out. a point of order could be raised if
we were to offer an amendment with re-
spect to any item which would go above
the budret estimate. We have no doubt
that a point of order would be raised.
There Is no doubt that we would fall to
obtain unanimous consent.

So we say. "Put it in the surplus ac-
count today, and give us an opportunity
to go after it with some very much needed
authorization legislation and appropria-
tion legislation for the very type of hu-
manitarian causes about which the Sen-
ator from Illinois has spoken."

I cannot speak for the Commissioners,
but let me tell the Senate what I think
they would do. If we were to increase
the Federal contribution to $23 million,
the District Commissioners would not be
slow in coming forward with requests for
the expenditure of the money in such a
manner as to meet the approval of both
the District of Columbia Committee and
the Appropriations Committee after they
had the opportunity to review the re-
quests. We would have an opportimity
to review them. I do not have any
doubt. I may say, Mr. President, that the
District Commissioners would proceed at
once to recommend a wise expenditure of
any increase in the surplus we could add
today.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, wiU
the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I have almost completed
my argument. I have only one little

clincher to add ; then I shall yield to the
Senator from Illinois. I am convinced
that if the $23 million Federal contribu-
tion should be appropriated today, a
great many Senators in future months
will say to us, "We are extremely glad
that you made the fight for the $23 mil-
lion, because it was sorely needed." I
may say that it is sorely needed for the
very causes the Senator from Illinois
speaks of.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President. wlU
the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield first to the Sena-
tor from niijiols. Then I shall yield to
the Senator from Rhode Island.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I should like to call
attention to page 9 of the report of the
committee. It is an item-by-item com-
parison of the budget estimates and the
amounts recommended by the Commit-
tee on Appropriations. I should like to
invite the attention of the Senator from
Oregon to the item of public schools.

In next to the last column the Senate
figure is shown as $543,150 below the
budget estimate. Therefore, if an
amendment is adopted —

Mr. MORSE. That is the amendment
of the Senator from Pennsylvania, which
can be agreed to today.

Mr. DOUGLAS. That can be adopted
today. Even without an increase in the
Federal contribution, that will compel
the District Commissioners to reduce
their surplus and add to what is spent on
public schools about half a million
dollars.

Mr. MORSE. I believe the Senator
from Rhode Island should answer that,
in order to preserve the continuity of the
debate.

Mr. PASTORE. If we appropriated
any amount of money that had not been
recommended by the Senate committee,
without adopting the t2\^ million
amendment suggested by the Senator
from Oregon, the money would have to
come from the $4,400,000 which Is in the
surplus.

Mr. DOUGLAS. That does not worry
me at all. I think it is much better to
take care of the schools than to accumu-
late an idle surplus.

Mr. PASTORE. We do not have to do
it, because, as I said before, we have
taken care of all the requests in a very
logical, sensible, and rational way.

As I have already explained, I am
pretty well convinced that, with the 143
additional teachers allowed by the
House, we have a situation where this
increase can be properly absorbed. I am
afraid that if we did add the amount,
we might cause a lopsidedness which
would deter an extension of school fa-
cilities.

Mr. DOUGLAS. All I am trying to
argue — and I think the point is clear —
is that we could appropriate today at a
later point in this appropriation bill
$543,150 more for the public schools and
still keep within the President's budget
estimate, and therefore no point of order
could be legitimately raised against it.

Mr. PASTORE. The Senator is cor-
rect.

Mr. DOUGLAS. That is alll am try-
ing to say. Similarly, if the Senator
will look at the item of Department of
Public Health, the fourth item from the

bottom of page 9, he will note that the
Senate bill calls for $481,400 lesss than
the budget estimate. Therefore we
could appropriate $481,400 more at a
later point in the consideration of the
appropriation bill, and no point of order
could be legitimately raised against that.

The pinch seems to come on the De-
partment of Public Welfare, which con-
cerns me the most.

Mr. MORSE. That concerns me the
most, too.

Mr. DOUGLAS. The President asked
for $13,136,000. The House-passed bill
contains the sum of $12,450,000. which
was a reduction of $686,000. The Sen-
ate Committee on Appropriations has
very properly raised this amoimt back
to the President's budget estimate. So
that if the Senator from Pennsylvania
is correct, and if an additional appro-
priation were made for the welfare
grants, a point of order could be made.

I hope very much that ^ point of
order would not be made, ^i)ecause I
affirm again that my wife and I know
from personal experience that there are
many children in the EHstrlct of Colum-
bia who are half starved. As I have
said, my wife is interested in a Boys'
Club. In going to that Boys' Club she
has foimd children grossly underweight,
and who. when they are offered food,
seize the food like animals.

That is a disgraceful situation. That
Is perhaps the strongest argument that
has been produced in favor of increas-
ing the amount of the Federal grant.
If increasing the amount of the Federal
grant is the only way of saving these
semlstarved children from starvation,
I think the increase should be made.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield on that point?

Mr. MORSE. I shall be happy to
yield to the Senator in a moment.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I hope no point of
order will be raised if we move to In-
crease the Senate appropriation above
the President's budget at a later point
in the debate, because I think the evi-
dence is fairly clear that if we could get
an overall adjustment of the District
budget, we would not have to increase
the Federal contribution, and that then
the District of Columbia would have
adequate funds with which to provide
Improved schools and improved hospital
care and improved assistance to the
needy. If because a parliamentary
situation or because of the pressures of
local business Interests It Is impossible
to get enough funds with which to do
this, it is a very sad state Indeed.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield at that point?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. PASTORE. I think the record
should be corrected. Of the problem
mentioned by the distinguished Senator
from Illinois, which problem has been
exhaustively and penetratingly investi-
gated and surveyed by the distinguished
Senator from Oregon, the District Com-
missioners are very conscious.

They have put into efifect an emer-
goicy program, and they have now come
forward with a permanent program.
They admit that further study needs to
be conducted with relation to some of
the points raised by the report which

f

i

itr

i

8776

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

was submitted by the distinguished
Senator from Oregon.

Contained in the bill is a supplemental
amount, which was not conaidered by
the House, namely, $6d€.000. to meet the
very situation of which the Senator from
Illinois speaks. We have added the
amount for the very reasons which have
been recited by the distinguished Sena-
tor from Illinois. That matter came be-
fore the subcommittee and we thor-
oughly considered it. There are to be
set up five new centers where food will
be distributed, and the cases of which
the Senator speaks will be taJcen care of.

The Commissioners know they con-
front a problem, and they have sug-
gested a solution. They will be pre-
pared to take care of it under this
budget.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I may say that the
Commissioners have been very remiss in
their duty in not recognizing the problem
before this. The dominant groups in the
city of Washington have been callous to
what has been going on right before their
eyes.

Mr. PASTORE. Be that as it may. my
concern is with what is happening and
what is in the bill I am managing on the
floor. Insofar as the pending bill is con-
cerned, that problem is being taken care
of.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent to have reprinted as
a star print Senate Document No. 43, the
report of the Subcommittee on the Prob-
lems of Hungry Children in the District
of Columbia, in order to correct some
mistakes which were made.

As I understand the parliamentary
situation, all we have to do is get con-
sent to have the document reprinted.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the Senate document will be
reprinted as a star print.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I close
with these three points very quickly
made:

First, I do not beUeve that in the year
1957 we should lower the Federal con-
tribution to the District of Columbia,
which we had approved to the amount
of $23 million in 195€, for the reason
that, in my opinion, there l< no justifica-
tion for lowering the amount; to the
contrary, a strong case can be made for
increasing the amount. At least, we
ought to hold to the $23 million.

Second. I point out that if we approve
the $23 miUion. any of the so-called
surplus money, because of the parlia-
mentary situation which prevails, could
forthwith be authorized and appropri-
ated by proposed legislation involving
the pending recommendations, so that
the money would be spent for the bene-
fit of the District of Columbia.

Third, it is just and fair to the people
of the District of Columbia that Con-
gress maintain at least the $23 million
contribution to the District of Colxmibia.
particularly in view of the record which
has been made here this morning as to
contributions in the past, and as to the
original intent of Congress concerning
the part it ought to pay for District of
Columbia operations.

I appreciate very much the objectivity
of the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr.
PastorsI during the entire debate. He

has been very helpful in clarifying the
Issues.

To the Senator from Illinois [Mr.
DocGLiUS 1 . I may say that I recognize we
have a tax problem; but what he must
not overlook Ls that even if there were
the ideal tax program about which he
has spoken, there are still so many needs
In the District of Columbia to make
Washington a model city — and it ought
to be a model city — that it would be nec-
essary to appropriate many, many mil-
lions of dollars more than the $23 mil-
lion for which »•« are pleading in order
to do the thmgs in the District of Colum-
bia which ought to be done.

As I said on the floor of the Senate the
other day, I do not care where this prob-
lem is pricked, there oozes out of it, in
my opmion, a derehction in the carrymg
out of obligations on the part of all con-
cerned— the board of trade, the taxpay-
ers, the churches Yes, let me say very
re-spectfully, I wish we had more support
from the ministerial groups in Uie Dis-
trict of Columbia in regard to these
great humanitarian problems. I say
thi.s as a churchgoer.

But I think the problem of welfare In
the District of Columbia is so serious
that we should not be hagglmg here to-
day over whether we ought to appro-
priate as the Federal contribution the
amount which was provided in 1956.
What we ought to be thinking about is
tlie increases which we should be votmg
in order to eliminate the social -welfare
problems in this city, which can be elim-
inated by adequate appropriations.

I rest my case on the basis of the rec-
ord we have made.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, a parliamentary inquiry.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator will state it.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Is my un-
derstanding correct that an amendment
offered by the Senator from Oregon is
pending?

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
Senator from Texas is correct.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Does the
Senator from Oregon desire the yeas and
nays on his amendment?

Mr. MORSE. Yes; I do.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask for the yeas and nays on the
amendment offered by the Senator from
Oree;on.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, if no other Senators desire to ad-
dress themselves to the amendment of-
fered by the Senator from Oregon

Mr. DIRKSEN. I do.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Then I shall
suggest the absence of a quorum. I hope
that we may have a vote on the amend-
ment shortly afterward, because it is now
the noon hour, and many of our col-
leagues will miss an opportunity to vote
unless we vote early.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
clerk will call the rolL

The legislative clerk called the roll,
and the following Senators answered to
their names:

CarUon

Carroll

Ca.s«. N J.

Caae, 3. D&k.

Cbavem

Church

Clark

Cotton

Cuni*

Oirlucn

Douglas

I>»-orahak

Baatland

Ell«nder

Errln

Flanders

Frear

Uoidwaur

Gore

Orern

Harden

Hfnnings

HicfcenlL>oper

H'll

HollazMl

Himtptirey

IVMt

Jitckaoa

JavlU

J«iioer

JohnaoD, Tei

John«ton. 8. C

Kefauver

Krnn«d7

Kerr

Knowl&nd

Kurh«>l

Lauacbs

Long

MRKnusoa

MannflHd

Martin. low*

Martin. Pa.

McNamara

MoTjroney

MOTM

Mortoa

Muriay

Neuberf^r

June 11

O MAhooey

Paator*

Payns

Potter

Purt«U

BiTvercomb

Robrrijwn

RuM«U

BAltoiuteU

ficlioe(>(Ml

Scott

Bfnatbm^

BtnlLh. Mains

Smith. M.J.

S[>arlLmaa

Biennis

Srniincton

Talmad^e

TTiurmond

Th>-e

Wiley

WUlianM

Tar borough

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8777

f

Aiken

BeaU

Buah

Allott

Bermett

BuUef

Anderson

Bible

Byrd

Barrett

Brlcker

Capehart

The PRESIDINa OFFICER. A quo-
rum IS present.

Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, the Sen-
ate is about to vote, I hope, on an amend-
ment to the District of Columbia Ap-
propriation bill. The amendment was
submitted by the Senator from Oregon
[Mr. MoRsx], on behalf of himself, the
chairman of the Committee on the Dis-
trict of Columbia [Mr. NiblvI. the rank-
ing minority member of the committee
[Mr. BcALL], the Senator from Nevada
[ Mr. BxBLK ] . and myself.

The purpose of the amendment la to
add to the bill the sum of $2,500,000. so
the payment to be made by the Go- tti-
ment of the United States to finance
the District of Columbia will be restored
to |23 million, the sum at which the
Federal contribution was fixed by the
District of Columbia Revenue Act of
1956.

Mr. President. It is rare, indeed. I
think, when a political issue so clearly
raises a question of ethics and morals
as does the pendmg amendment. In
making that statement I wish to assure
my good friend, the distinguished junior
Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Pas-
tors], that I have the greatest of sym-
pathy for the position which he. as
chairman of the appropriations sub-
committee, has taken m this regard. I
also wish to say that I have read with
interest the hearings. In which he stated
to the witnesses his deep concern that
the Government of the United States
keep its pledged word.

The simple question before us la
whether the Consrress is to keep Its word.
There is no need to discuss at this time
the long and. in my judgment, discredit-
able record of promises to the District of
Columbia broken in the past by the
Federal Government. This particular
broken promise goes back only 2 years.
In 1956, as a condition to the Imposition
of new taxation on the people of the
District of Colimabia — ^namely, heavier
income taxes and heavier real estate
taxes — the Congress authorized an an-
nual Federal payment of |23 million.
The citizens of the District of Columbia
have kept their part of the bargain, but
now It Is proposed that the Congress
break Its part. In fact, the Congress was
not long in breaking its commitment;
It broke It very soon after It was made.
In 1956, there was a failure to appro-
priate $2 million; In 1957. there was a
failure to appropriate $3 miUion. At

the present time, It is proposed that
the appropriation be $3 million less than
It should be.

Mr. President, what moral Justifica-
tion can there be for failing to live up to
the open covenant with the citizens of
the District of Columbia, as a result of
which the Income taxes and real estate
taxes In the District of Columbia were
raised. In order to comply with its part
of the bargain made in that connection,
the contribution made by the Federal
Government should be fixed at $23 mil-
lion.

It will be recalled that if the pending
amendment is agreed to and is enacted
Into law, the Congress will be appropriat-
ing approximately 12 percent of the total
fiscal requirements of the District of Co-
lumbia, whereas in earlier days the Con-
gress paid for as much as 50 percent of
the cost of operating the District of Co-
lumbia.

If I were to stop here, I imagine no
Member of the Senate would object to
adoption of the amendment.

However, what are the arguments
which are made in opposition to the
amendment? It is said that the tax col-
lections in the District of Columbia are
between $5 million and $5,500,000 greater
than had earlier been anticipated. That
Is correct. But does that excuse a de-
fault on this obligation, particularly
when, as a result of action taken by the
Congress, the citizens of the District of
Columbia have been committed to make
annual principal and interest payments
on a pubhc-works program authorized by
the Congress on the assurance that this
money would be available, in order to
meet those interest and principal pay-
ments?

It will be said that without the Federal
payment now proposed, there will be an
estimated surplus, under the Senate ver-
sion of the pending bill, of approximately
$4,448,000 in the District of Columbia,
as of June 30. 1958. That, too, is true.

It will also be said that taxes in the
District of Columbia are lower than
those in other cities; and perhaps that is
true, although in my experience with
municipal finance, one finds himself in
a mire of quicksand when he tries to de-
termine the comparative tax rates for
various cities, in the light of the statistics
presently available.

Those are the arguments in opposition
to the amendment. But it cannot be de-
nied that the schools in the District of
Columbia are inadequate in respect to
the space needed for the schoolchildren.
Indeed, under the pending bill it Is pro-
posed that the construction of one school
be abandoned, because the funds re-
quired for constructing it have been said
not to be available.

It cannot be said that there are not
hungry children in the District of Co-
lumbia: neither can It be said that the
public-works program or the urban rede-
velopment program in the District of Co-
lumbia are adequate. Sufllcient funds
for all those purposes must be provided,
if the District of Columbia is to be a
modern American city. For that pur-
pose, not only are the funds proposed in
the pending amendment needed; but, in
addition, many additional millions of
dollars are needed.

It will also be said, and cannot be de-
nied, that if the Congress is to break its
word, the citizens of the District of Co-
lumbia have a right to be released from
the^bllgations imposed upon them by
the Congress; and It will be said that if
Congress is to make a cut in this pay-
ment, taxes in the District of Columbia
should be reduced.

Mr. President, I close with this
thought. What we are asking be done —
and I say this particularly to my col-
leagues on the other side of the aisle —
is to restore the recommendations of the
President of the United States. Tlie full
$23 million program was recommended
to the Congress by the President of tlje
United States. Thus, the President has
kept his word, and I ask, rhetorically,
whether in the end the Congress will
break its word. I hope the amendment
will be adopted.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, before
I address myself to the amendment, I
wish to say a word about the devotion
and zeal of the chairman of the sub-
committee in the preparation of the bill
providing appropriations for the District
of Columbia. The distinguished Sena-
tor from Rhode Island [Mr. Pastore]
has brought to this undertaking unsel-
fishness, and a zeal and a devotion that
are most commendable. I recognize that
it is a labor of love. It is something
that does not translate itself into gen-
eral interest. There are no votes in-
volved back home in doing a job of this
kind, and one who assumes this task in
the interest of the Nation's Capital cer-
tainly deserves the thanks of his col-
leagues. So I salute the Senator from
Rhode Island for an exceedingly fine
performance and for work well done.

The question pending before the Sen-
ate is an amendment offered by the dis-
tinguished Senator from Oregon [Mr.
MorseI to increase the lump sum pay-
ment from the Federal Treasmr to the
District of Columbia by $2,500,000. It
is true the budget estimate was $23 mil-
lion. The House scaled the figure down
to $20 million. The Senate Committee
on the District of Columbia, of which
I am a member, has restored one-half
million dollars. So the distinguished
Senator from Oregon would add the
other $2'/2 million, although there Is
presently no suggestion as to how the
money shall be spent.

There was a larger return from in-
come taxes in the District of Columbia
than was anticipated, and as a result
there exists a rather comfortable unex-
pended balance of $4,500,000. If the
jjending amendment shall prevail, un-
less other amendments are offered di-
recting how the money shall be ex-
pended, it will mean that the balance In
the District treasury will be increased
from $4,400,000 to roughly $6,700,000.

I think the amendment is xmnecessary.
I believe the District can get along on
$20,500,000. Moreover, I doubt whether
there is an obligation upon the Senate
to appropriate the entire amoimt. To
be sure, in the act of 1956 it was pro-
vided that for 1955-56 there should be
an appropriation of $20 million, and that
for 1957 and subsequent years there
should be a limip-sum payment of $23
million. That, however, in my judg-

ment. Is a ceiling. There may be leaner
years for the District of Columbia than
this year, and if there are, more money
will be necessary. The authorizing
power will exist. The legislative ruthor-
ity will be available in order to make
the payment of more money possible.

So, as I look at the budget in the large,
as I lo<* at the appropriation bill that
is presently before the Senate. I believe
the subcommittee has done well in tak-
ing care of all the needs of the EHstrict
of Columbia. There was some action on
supplemental items which were not even
presented to the House of Representa-
tives.

I hope the amendment will not pre-
vail. I think we have done very well*
for the District. I can remember other
years when I lifted my voice for more
money in the lump-sum fund for the
District of Columbia. But in propor-
tion as we are requesting the rest of the
coimtry and the other agencies of Gov-
ernment to make sacrifices, so it is not
too much to ask that, in relation to the
funds taken out of the Federal Treasury
for payment to the District, there be
some sacrifice in fiscal 1958.

In the present session the very first
appropriation bill which came to the
fioor was at the House figure, and repre-
sented a cut of $80 million in the budget
estimate. Four appropriation bills for
the regular agencies of Government
which have been passed by the Senate
contained amoimts imder the House fig-
ures. In some cases the conference fig-
ure was below the House figure, which
represented a very substantial reduction
in the budget estimate. So it is not too
much to ask that this year, instead of
making a Federal contribution to the
District of $23 million, we provide $20,-
500,000. That is half a million dollars
above the House figure. The committee
added $500,000 in order to provide for
certain items in the bill, such as the in-
crease in per diem allowance in hospi-
tals for indigent patients.

All in all. I think the bill is weU
roimded. I think it will meet all the
needs of the District of Columbia. I
urge the Senate not to adopt the pending
amendment.

I add one other thought. I think it
Is healthy for us to spend a good many
hours on the District of Colimibla appro-
priation bill. I have seen the time when
the bill has gone through the Senate in
15 or 20 minutes. However, this is the
Nation's Capital, which belongs to all
the people of the coimtry. They are en-
titled to know that, because we have
arrogated to ourselves total jurisdiction
over its affairs, we give some time to
those affairs.

I served for 16 uninterrupted years on
the District of Columbia Committee of
the House of Representatives. I did not
ask for the assignment on the commit-
tee, which, in part, handles appropria-
tions for the District of Columbia, but I
willingly accepted that responsibility.
In this instance the committee have
sought to discharge their responsibility
as best they know how. We believe we
have reported to the Senate a solid bill.
We commend it to the Senate. When
the final roll is called on the bill, we hope
it will be passed by an overwhelming

i

8778

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

I'

majority, without the pending amend-
ment to raise the lump sum payment.
There will be a record vote on the
amendment, and I sincerely hope it will
be voted down.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, does my friend the Senator from
Rhode Island desire any time?

I wish to suggest the absence of a
quorum before the Senate votes. If
there is to be any further discussion, I
shall withhold the suggestion. If there
are no Senators who desire to address
themselves to the amendment. I suggest
the absence of a quorum, and express the
hope that we may have a vote as soon
as a quorum is present.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I do not
think that is fair to the Senator from
Rhode Island. I think he should speak
before or after a quorum call. I do not
believe the Senator from Rhode Island
understood what the Senator from Texas
said. He does expect to speak about 10
minutes.

Mr. PASTORE. No. I do not expect
to talk for 10 minutes; I expect to talk
for only 2 minutes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that the
order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESEDINQ OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I understand
the Senator from Rhode Island desires
to address himself to the pending amend-
ment.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, first
I desire to thank the distinguished Sen-
ator from Illinois for his complimentary
remarks, and to tell him I enjoyed very
much workmg with him on this very
important appropriation bill.

I merely desire to make two or three
points, Mr. President. Rrst of all. we
must bear in mind that if the pending
amendment should be adopted — and I
recommend that it not be adopted — it
would increase the surplus of the District
from $4,400,000 to about $6,900,000.

It would not affect the operating func-
tions of the District government. At this
time, in view of the fact that the House
had already appropriated $20 million as
the Federal contribution before it was
learned that the tax yield from the Dis-
trict of Columbia income-tax increase
was $5*2 million more than the estimate.
I think it would be very unwise to disturb
this appropriation bill, which is the prod-
uct of long, tedious hours of thorough
and penetrating study. We feel we have
come before the Senate with a well-
rounded bill which will provide adequate
service for the people of this community,
and will be accepted by the Commission-
ers, by the school department, by the
Health Department, and by all depart-
ments of the District government. It is
a good bill, and I recommend at this time
that the amendment of tiie Senator from
Oregon fMr. Morse 1 be rejected.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, a parliamentary inquiry.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator will state it.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Have the
yeas and nays been ordered on the
amendment?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas
and nays have been ordered.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, a par-
liamentary inquiry.

The PRESIDING OFFICER The Sen-
ator will state it.

Mr. DIRKSEN. This record vote Is on
the Morse amendment to Increase the
lump-sum payment by $2 4 million, is it?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator is correct.

The question is on agreeing to the
amendment of the Senator from Oregon
[Mr. Morse] to the committee amend-
ment. On this question the yeas and
nays have been ordered, and the clerk
will call the roll.

The Chief Clerk called the roll.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I announce that
the Senator from Arkansas I Mr. Ful-
BRiGHTl is absent on official business.

The Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Mc-
Clellan i is absent by leave of the Senate
on ofiQcial business.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I announce that the
Senator from Nebraska I Mr. Hruska],
the Senator from Nevada (Mr. MaloneI,
and the Senator from North Dakota (Mr.
Young) are abvsent on official business.

The Senator from New Hampshire
[Mr. Bridges I, the Senator from North
Dakota I Mr. LangerI, and the Senator
from Utah (Mr. WatkinsI are absent
because of Illness.

The Senator from Kentucky [Mr.
Cooper] and the Senator from South
Dakota [Mr. Mundt] are detained on
official business.

If present and voting, the Senator
from Nebraska (Mr. Hruska] and the
Senator from South Dakota I Mr.
MtJNDTJ would each vote "nay."

The result was announced — yeas 23.
nays 62, as follows:

YEAS— 23

Beau

Humphrey

Murray

B ble

Javlis

Nee.y

Butler

Johnston. S C

Neuberger

Carroll

Kefauver

O Mahoney

Ca.se. N J

KeriueUy

Payne

fiise. S Dak

Loni<

Scott

C^llrch

McNamara

Symington

Clark

Morse

NAYS — 63

.Mlcen

Goli! water

Morton

AUott

Oo r»

Pa.Ktore

Anderson

Green

Potter

Barrett

Haylen

Purtell

rpnnett

H.MinlnKS

R«'vprcomb

Bnclcer

Hiekeulooper

Robertson

Bush

HlU

Russell

Eyrd

Holland

Saltonfttall

C.ipehftrt

IveM

Schoeppei

Carl.'ion

Jackson

Sma'hera

Chavez

Jenner

Smith. Maine

Cot to a

Johnson. Tex.

Smith, N J.

Curtis

Kerr

Sparkm&a

Dirk-^en

Knowlnnd

StennlB

I>iugla8

Kuchel

Talmadge

Dwui-shak

Ltiuache

Thurmond

E-istland

.Vlaijnuson

Thye

Fi'ender

Man.sfleld

Wiley

Ervln

Martin. Iowa

WiUiams

Flanders

Martin. Pa.

Yarborough

Frear

Mourout-y

NOT vorma-

-10

Brldgea

Langer

Watklns

Couper

Malone

Young

Fiilbright
Hruska

MrCleilan
Mundt

So Mr. Morse's amendment to the
committee amendment was rejected.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question recurs on agreeing to the com-
mittee amendment on page 2, line 1.

The amendment was agreed to.

COMMITTEE MEETING DURING
SENATE SESSION

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President. I
ask unanimous consent that the Anti-
monopoly Subcommittee of the Commit-
tee on the Judiciary be permitted to meet
during the session of the Senate today.

The PRESIDING OFFICER Is there
objection?

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I
should be extremely reluctant to object.
However, the fact is that I am a member
of that subcommittee. Tlie agricul-
tural appropriation bill will ht before the
Senate shortly, and I feel compelled, as
a member of the subcommittee dealing
with that bill, to be present. I think
the request should be withdrawn. I
should dislike to object, but I think I am
entitled to attend one of those sessions.

Mr. MANSFIELD. L*t me say to the
acting minority leader that this request
was cleared with the minority leader
[Mr. Knowlavd).

Mr DIRKSEN I am sure he did not
understand my situation. I am present-
ing it on a personal basis. I would
have to IntertKjse an objection.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President. I
withdraw the request.

I ask that the Committee on Agricul-
ture and Forestry be permitted to meet
during the session of the Senate today.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO-
PRIATIONS. 1958

The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill <H. R. 6500 1 making appro-
priations for the government of the Dis-
trict of Columbia and other activities
chargeable in whole or in part against
the revenues of said District for the fis-
cal year ending June 30. 1958, and for
other purpases.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, on behalf
of the Senator from We.st Virginia [Mr.
Neely]. the Senator from Maryland
( Mr. Beall I . the Senator from Pennsyl-
vania (Mr. Clark (. and myself, I send
to the desk an amendment to the com-
mittee amendment on page 7. line 21.
and I ask for the yeas and nays on this
amendment. It is the so-called teach-
ers' amendment.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, may
the amendment first be stated?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment to the amendment will be
stated.

The Chief Clerk. On page 7, line
21. after the word "vehicles " it Is pro-
posed to strike out "$37,246,050 " and In-
sert "$37,686,300.'

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I ask
for the yeas and nays on my amend-
ment.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the
Senator from Oregon Indulge the Chair

1057 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE 8779

in order that the committee amendment a total cost of $440^50. The expendi- tional teachers are sorely needed for the

on page 4 line 3 may be disposed of? ture would be broken up as foUows: children of the District. There is no true

The amendment will be stated 69 elementary teachers $341,550 economy In economizing at the expense

^ne CHiCT CXERK. on page 4. line 3. 8 spcdai elementary teachers. — 39,600 of adequate educational facilities and

after investigations It is proposed to 8 pBychoiogtstB 2«,ooo services for our children The exuerts

'.l';;*^f °"^ "^^^2.500- and insert "$369,- 3 superviaor directom 20,400 whom we have hired to tiie^cXnaS

^^S^v, A ^ .. _4_cieriui.. _ - "■'^00 field teU US that they ought to have these

The amendment was agreed to. ^ additional teachers. We beUeve there is

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I should -t^.*^ no waste in their recommendaUons I

like to have the attention of the Senator Assurances have been received from have the highest regard for Dr. Coming

from Rhode Island [Mr. Pastore], He the Board of Education that classroom I have worked closely with Mm and I

made the request that all the committee space is available on the basis that for have always found him truthful 'and on

amendments be considered en bloc, save the first and second grade only 308 the conservative side when It comes to

and except the three amendments which classes will be on a part-time basis. The financial recommendations,

we are in the process of considering. I Board of Education assured us that part- My good friend from Rhode Island

wonder if we can consider the remaining time classes are least damaging at this has referred to the surplus of some $4

committee amendments, and then come grade level and that part-time classes are million or more that is available First

to those three amendments. preferable to crowded classrooms for this I wish to say that there is great need

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The age group. for the surplus. There is great need for

Chair was attempting to take up the The 5 psychologists are necessary to the full amoimt asked for in the previous

amendments In order. make an inroad on the backlog on some amendment. However, that question

The clerk will state the next commit- ^,000 achievement tests that were imable has been settled for this year,

tee amendment passed over. to be processed this year. Provision of "Hie situation is that the additional

The next committee amendment ^^'^ professional category will permit teachers can be hired within the stirplus,

passed over was. on page 7, line 21, after ^^^ greater service to the pupil in perma- What that amounts to in effect is saying

"vehicles' to strike out "$37,160,000 " and "^^t administration of the achievement to the District officials, "You have the

Infert "$37,246,050." test, thus permitting the teacher to have surplus. We want $440,000 of It, In

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The * Psychological tool for them in their round numbers, used for the teachers
clerk will now state the amendment pro- remedial work with the children. I who the experts In the educational field
posed by the Senator from Oregon I Mr ^^^^ ^ <^*^^ ^ *^^ attention of the Sen- say are needed, in order to give the serv-
MoRSE I for himself, the Senator from ^^ ^^^ the school board relinquished Ice to the boys and girls of the District
West Virginia fMr. Neely], the Senator ^^02,900 from their earlier estimate they ought to have for the next school
from Maryland (Mr. Beall] and the through the elimination of the new year." That is my case, and I rest on it.
Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr Clark] ^^^Ith school and the expansion of the Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President. I rec-
to the committee amendment transportation unit attached to It, for ommend to the Senate that the amend-

The Chid- Clerk On page 7 line 21 ^^^ reason that the health school will ment be rejected. This is an Item which

It is proposed to strike out the coinmittee ^°\^ completed untU the fall, and esti- was of great concern to the members of

figure ••$37 246 050" and Insert "$37 - °^t*s for this will be included in next the committee. Natiu-ally so. for It in-

686.300" ' ' year's budget. volves schools and children in the

"Thp PRFs^TDTNri cw^rtrvxi TV.. ^^''^ regard to the recruitment of schools. It refers also to the quality and

question ifoS^reelMwih? amend! t^^hers, the Board ol EducaUon has the quantity of the teachers In the Dis-

nrZS,n'or"hT,;^«'aro?hl; oTSne"ir.Srnd°Sr^lpS^fa1 hS'dr^r^ ""'"''^ *" '"'™"'' "-

on page 7 line 21 »"iciiuiiiciit yg^j. jg^ additional teachers were au- schoolteachers. In the various cate-

Mr MORSE Mr President T A<k for ^^rlzed. The Board of Education feels gories. The House aUowed 175 new

thfyeasandLysonmTimenkLe?t «iat if this amount Is included in the teachers; 264 had been asked for. Only

T^l PRESIDING oSiCERTs^h^^ ^""^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^°^^' recruitment for this this morning we received from the budg-

a sufficienfsecond? °^^^^- ^ '^^" year will be equally successful. et officer of the District of Columbia

Mr MORSF Mr Pr*.«rtpnf T chnnirt ^ ^^ Submitting the amendment on Committee a breakdown of the teacher-

liiro to K?,^f K .r President I should behalf of the Senator from Pennsylvania pupil ratio. We find that in the ele-

^Lrit?TeL?r'aid^rh^\^crL^^^ IMr^CLARKl. In the District of Colum- mentaiy schools at the preset tSe ^e

\^Ix^Lr^^i^r^*^y.^?}^A^ ^^ Committee, we divided up our work, ratio is 1 teacher to 34.7 pupils.

iSuit ?or tSiTe^ knd^avs ^ ^^ *^ °^^^ "^^ amendment the Senate In reaching our conclusion'. Mr. Presl-

^»rV kVc J^*l „ ; . * has just voted on. which would have re- dent, we did not do so lightly; we gave

op^ation S^tiSS tSe Slfr^t o°f cT ^^^^ ^ ^°^^^'^^' continuing the Fed- this subject very serious attention. We

lumhia ?nmmTtf^ „nH Phi 1 n„rnr,So ' ^""^ Contribution to the District at $23 listened very attentively to what Dr.

J^^r^^ii w K Appropria- nunion, which we felt the Government Corning had to say. At the present time.

u?t^ SSS ^^- . f ^""^^ differences ^ad committed itself to pay in 1956. in the first and second grades, thereTre

TtiSs mS members of Xe^SrS ™«/°^e"dment is offered by the Sena- what may be called pSt-tiiiie cla^s

nf rni.,^^ o«™«f.f^ A °^*"^ tor from Pennsylvania, and he is joined or split classes; there are classes in the

mucS t^hlve a veTa^ nav vote'^on ^ °^^^^^ "' ^^ ^^ ^^^^^ *^^^ '^' ^^ "^°^^^ "^^ ^^^^ ^ ^^ aftemoTr!

^mP itPms^iPtinrr^ ™,^^>t n5^r^« ^^^^^ ^^ ^^ Senator from West Vir- There are 48 such classes. Under the

f^Siaa?lirT r^^re^Xitiiati einia [Mr. Neely], and the Senator from amount allowed by the House, there

m?y have ie vel? ,S na^^ Maryland [Mr. Beall]. would be 175 such classes. The amount

SJpndmpnt ^ ^ "^^ Senator from Pennsylvania has which is sought by the amendment would

Mr PA^^^rMsir X* T> -^ * «i ^*^ ^° ^e^^e ^^^ Chamber for the time allow 300 such classes,

the SenatoJ v,>S" in nrripr ^h„f t ^ ^"^^ °'' * ^^^ important matter, and Fundamentally, the very serious situ-

reaufst Si^ v2 lr^ni?s? ^ ^ ^"^ presenting his amendment. I told ation in the District is the lack of school

^r x>rrIo«^ T ?^ ^™ ^ ^'°"^^ ^ ''ery happy to present It facilities. There Is a changing popula-

Mr" P?iSS,r. ^i^ o .^ . T V ^°^ ^^- *^°^' °^ «^*>^^' ^''^ that situation im-

Mr PASTORE. Mr. President, I ask My argument In behalf of the amend- proves from year to year

for the yeas and nays on the amend- ment is simply this. I believe in foUow- We have gone Into this subject very

ment of the Senator from Oregon. mg the experts. We in the Senate are carefully. We believe that the amount

The yeas and nays were ordered. not educational experts. The educa- allowed by the House wlU enable the

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I shall tional experts have testified before our schools to do a satisfactory job. We be-

be very brief on this amendment. It committee. I mean by that, the school lieve they can absorb the woi*. While

calls for the restoration of 89 teaching administrators of the District of Colum- It might not be Utopia, we feel that we

positions in the public-school system, at bia. They convinced us that the addi- are meeting the problem adequately as

'

4

■ I

I

if!

8780

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8781

of the time, and believe that the au-
thorities will be able to get along with
the amount appropriated without any
sacrifices in the quality of education.
For that reason. I ask that the amend-
ment be rejected.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. PASTORE. I yield.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Is the Senator able
to state whether or not the ratio of
teachers to pupils in the senior classes is
below or above the average in the
country?

Mr. PASTORE. I vould not wish to
say whether it was below or above. I
say that it compares very favorably. I
might give the ratio. The ratio in the
Junior high schools Is 23 pupils to 1
teacher, which compares very favorably
with other cities. With relation to the
senior high schools, the ratio is 28 to 1.
With relation to vocational high schools.
It is 24 to 1. Those figures compare very
favorably with those for most other com-
munities. As a matter of fact, the Dis-
trict of Columbia stands 12th among
cities of comparable size so far as the
teacher-pupil ratio is concerned.

Mr. LAUSCHE. It is 12th in the coun-
try?

Mr. PASTORE. That is correct.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Am I correct in stat-
ing that on the basis of 100.000 pupils,
there are 4.050 teachers available in the
District, and. therefore, to strike an aver-
age, it means that in the several classes
there are 25 pupils for each teacher?

Mr. PASTORE. That is true in some
classes, yes. There may be other classes
where there are more than 34. As Dr.
Coining has explained. "They do not
send us pupils in blocks of 32 or 34."
The situation in some classes depends on
geographical location and type of popu-
lation. There may be 24 in some classes
and in other classes there may be 30 or
29. depending upon the location.

This ratio Is an academic figure at
best. It does not spread itself uniformly.
It merely stands for a situation the school
authorities would like to accomplish. It
is very commendatory and laudatory.
However, the allowances made by the
House, we believe, will provide a very
satisfactory level.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield further?

Mr. PASTORE. I yield.

Mr. LAUSCHE. If the allowance In
the House bill is approved, what will be
the ratio with reference to the elemen-
tary schools?

Mr. PASTORE. It will be a little
more than 33 to 1. The reason I say
that is the presentation made to our
committee was predicated upon the pres-
ent ratio of 36 to 1. The last statistics
we received, today, show that it is 34.7
to 1. I do not say this in any criticism
of anyone who presented the figures.
Those were the figures the authorities
had as of the time.

Mr. MORSE. My reply to the Senator
from Rhode Island will be very brief.

First, I point out that of the 89 teach-
ers provided for in the appropriation, 69
will be elem'"ntar7 schoolteachers. It is
In the elementary schools of the District
where the serious problem exists.

In addition to the 69. there would be
8 special elementary teachers needed
to work in the elementary schools with
problem children who need assistance.

We would add five psychologists. Let
me tell Senators that if they had worked
with us on the Committee on the District
of Columbia in the matter of educational
affairs they would know how sorely need-
ed are the psychologists.

There would be also 3 supervisory di-
rectors and 4 clerks.

Tlie major problem in the District of
Columbia school system is In the ele-
mentary schools. The figures I placed
In the Record this morning show that
the present ratio of pupils to teachers
in the elementary schools is 35.6 to 1.

It is true that in the junior and senior
high schools the ratio is more compara-
ble with the ratio across the country.
But. as I said ai3o earlier in the debate
today, educators are remarkably uni-
form in their point of view that in th"
elementary schools the ratio should not
be higher than 30 to 1. The bill re-
ported by the Committee on Appropria-
tions would reduce the present ratio,
as the Senator from Rhode Inland says,
to 33 to 1. The amendment which the
Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Clark]
has offered, and which I am sponsoring
in his behalf, would bring the ratio down
to 32 to 1.

The next point I hojjc Senators will
keep in mind is that there are addi-
tional teacher problems in the District
of Columbia from the standpoint of the
school buildings. That is what I meant
when earlier today I pointed out the
testimony of Dr. Coming and others to
the effect that if something Ls not done
about a school con.struction program in
the District of Columbia by the year
1960. there will be a fearful crisis, so
far as physical facilities are concerned.

The teaching burdens of the teachers
In the elementary .schools of the District
of Columbia are greatly increa5ed, be-
cause of the obsolete facilities in many,
many schools. The testimony Is that
clas.ses are being held in the ends of
corridors; and that large linen closets,
with a little remodeling, have been
turned into classroom facilities. E^very
available .square inch in old, old build-
Insrs is being used to accommodate the
children.

I rtre.ss these things because we do not
tell the complete story when we make
the point that the ratio at present is
35.6 to 1. The burden Is really much
greater, becau.se if the 35.6 to 1 ratio
for elementary children were in effect
in a modern school building, the teach-
ing problem would not be so serious as
It is at the present time.

Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield''

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. KUCHEL. Will the Senator from
Oregon state again the amount which
his amendment, or the amendment of
the Senator from Pennsylvania, would
increase this budgetary proposal?

Mr. MORSE. The total amount Is
$440,250. For the 69 elementary school
teachers, the amount would be $341,050.
For the eight special elementary school-
teachers, it would be $39,600.

But mark thia. I s»y to the Senator
from California: We have heard much
justification today for not increasing the
Federal contribution to the District to
$23 million, the amount to which Con-
gress increased it in 1956, because there
Is a surplus of a little more than $4 mil-
hon. Here Is $440,000 which can be
taken from the $4 million surplus. I
think the Senate ought to go on record
today as saying to the District of Co-
lumbia Commissioners, in effect. "Take
that amount out of the surplus and use
it to provide a better education for the
children of the District of Columbia."

If that be done, a blow will be struck
for a stronger democracy ; because as we
strike a blow for better education, we
strengthen democracy, too.

Mr. KUCHEL. I may say to the Sen-
ator from Oregon that I have more than
a passing Interest in the school system
In the District of Columbia. Our daugh-
ter attends a public school in the District
of Columbia, and I am prepared on any
occasion to assist in the proper recogni-
tion by Congress of the needs of the
school system in the District, as I think
the Senator from Oregon well knows.

But I am a little perplexed and con-
fused when the opposition to the amend-
ment offered by the Senator from Ore-
gon is in the hands of my able friend,
the Senator from Rhode Island I Mr.
PastoreI, in whom I have a great
amount of faith. Some of us are a little
distraught in wondering whether the
Subcommittee on the District of Colum-
bia Appropriations has adequately con-
sidered the problem. I do not want to
sit here and vote willy nilly for increases
or decreases; In any event, I believe, and
so does the Senate, that we must give
the District of Columbia schools what la
needed to educate the children who at-
tend our District schools.

Mr PASTORE. Mr. President will the
Senator from Oregon yield at that point?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. PASTORE. So that the matter
will be understood, and understood prop-
erly, the junior Senator from Rhode
Island loves children as much as does
anyone else and he is just as much inter-
ested in the school problem as Ls anyone
else.

Mr. KUCHEL. I am certain of that.

Mr. PASTORE. As a matter of fact,
when I was the Governor of my State, I
sponsored the institution of a sales tax,
which was a rather strange thing for a
Democratic governor to do, in order to
make our schools better and to pay our
teachers higher salaries

The committee has analyzed every
single item in this budcet with the most
minute care. We have reviewed and re-
revlewed the action which was taken by
the House. We started with the Idea
that in the District there are approxi-
mately 4,490 schoolteachers. It is true
that the school authorities asked for 212
additional teachers, and received from
the House 175, in various categories.

They explained to us that they have at
present 48 of the so-called split classes:
that is. afternoon classes and morning
classes. The House bill limited them to
an Increase which would provide for 175
such classes. The school authorities

feel It Is desirable to have 300 such
classes. But this does not mean the dif-
ference between a loaded classroom and
one which has the 30-to-l or 31-to-l
ratio.

A very peculiar situation exists In this
community. If the pending amendment
were agreed to, it would not guarantee
that there would be 32 pupils in every
classroom. The size of the class would
vary throughout the District of Colum-
bia. The teachers are used In every part
of the District, provided they are engaged
in elementary school teaching.

The committee has reviewed all the
testimony, and hM found that the school
system can well absorb the amount which
was granted by the House. It is true
that the system has asked for the extra
89 teachers, but the committee felt, after
reviewing the matter very carefully, that
what is most needed in the community
are more school facilities.

The practice of having one school-
teacher instruct her class in the morning
until noontime, and having another
teacher come in the afternoon to teach
another class in the same schoolroom,
is bad, to my way of thinking. It may
be a little better than having over-
crowded classes; but. after all. the dif-
ference should not be between having
split cla.sses and large classes. It should
be the difference between 32 pupils to 1
teacher and 33 to 1.

Naturally, we must look at the budget
with relation to the entire panorama
which was presented to the committee.
We have looked at It very carefully. I
think we have been human enough in
what we have done. I believe the budget
to be a good one. I do not think that
the question whether the children of the
District are taught properly depends on
the adoption of the amendment. All
that could happen from Its adoption
would be that possibly there might not
be so many split classes as the school
authorities would like to have.

The important consideration, which I
think must be emphasized, is that the
teaching persormel is predicated upon
the peak pupil population. Naturally
there are not so many schoolteachers as
are authorized. But I think the school
authorities can live with this condition
and get along with It. I dare say that
the school situation in the District of
Columbia, while it is not, possibly, what
we would like to have it. at the optimum,
compares well with school systems in
other cities of the country in the same
population group. The District of Co-
lumbia stands 12th in comparison with
comparable cities.

I a-ssure the distinguished junior Sen-
ator from California, who 7 know is very
much Interested in the subject, that we
are not doing an injustice to the District
of Columbia schools. We are not giving
them everything they want, but we are
giving them pretty nearly everything
they have requested. They can live with
the amount provided and perform rea-
sonably well in the community, so far
as education is concerned.

Mr. MORSE. I shall reply very briefly
to the Senator from Rhode Island. First,
I think we have to make a decision as to
whose advice we shall follow. Shall we

follow the advice of the District of Co-
lumbia Subcommittee on Apprc^rla-
tlons — and I have great respect for each
member of that subcommittee — in re-
gard to the educational needs of the Dis-
trict of Columbia? Or shall we follow
the strong case which was made by the
educators of the District of Columbia as
to what the children of the District need
by way of teacher faciUties during the
next year? I wish to say to the Senator
from Rhode Island that he is not a
stronger supporter of the proposal for
more school buildings in the District of
Columbia than I am. The provision of
additional school buildings is a part of
the program of the District of Columbia
Committee. But additional school build-
ings will not be provided next year.
However, in my judgment an adequate
niunber of teachers must be appropriated
for. I think that is perfectly clear when
the educators themselves say, "This is
what we need." Inasmuch as no Sena-
tor has placed in the Record information
to show that the demands of the edu-
cators are in any way unreasonable, I
believe the Senate should follow the rec-
ommendation of the experts.

Mr. PASTORE. Of course we should
consider the experts' recommendation.
But does the Senator from Oregon mean
to say that a Member of the Senate can-
not disagree with the Secretary of State
or with the President of the United
States?

Mr. MORSE. Of course not, and I
have done so on more than one occasion.

Mr. PASTORE. Of course. In this
case we are disagreeing with the recom-
mendation of the educators. We do not
have to accept as factual all the presen-
tations which are made to us.

Mr. MORSE. That is quite true.

Mr. PASTORE. I do not mean to say
that the witnesses before our committee
endeavored to deceive us. However,
after all, I have been connected with
government for a long time, and I know
that every so often we have to allow less
than is requested. Certainly we must
study and scrutinize the requests. After
we did that in the present case, we
reached the conclusion I have stated.

I repeat that the requested teacher-
student ratio is predicated upon the peak
student population.

Our committee has recommended a
reasonable amount, in view of the
amount requested. I repeat, that I think
a rational, reasonable, and wise job has
been done by the committee.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I reply
by stating that, of course, it is proper for
us to disagree to requests which are
made of us, if we have a sound basis for
such a disagreement. But in the present
case, I think there is no factual basis for
disagreeing to the requested 30 to 1
ratio.

Mr. President, I come now to a most
delicate point in connection with the
pending debate ; and in connection with
this point. I speak with the utmost re-
spect for the Appropriations Committee.
My point is that in this case there is a
conflict between the judgment of the
legislative committee and that of the Ap-
propriations Committee, and in part

there Is a question as to whether the Ap-
propriations Committee of the Senate is
to be substituted for the legl^tive com-
mittee.

At this time let me say — ^In the pres-
ence of the great Senator from West Vir-
ginia [Mr. Nkely] — that on matters of
education, I know of no legislative com-
mittee of the Senate which goes into the
details of the legislative problems more
thoroughly than the Senate Committee
on the District of Colimibia has done.
Furthermore, I know of no other com-
mittee— and I am sure it is not the Ap-
propriations Commiti«e — which has de- ,
voted to the educational problems of the ^
District of Columbia the time, research,
and analysis that the District of Colimi-
bia Conmiittee of the Senate has devoted.

The time has come for some Member
of the Senate to point out, on the floor
of the Senate, that great weight should
be given to the recommendations of a
legislative committee which has made
such a thorough study of educational
problems in the District of Colmnbia as
the Committee on the District of Co-
limibia has made.

The Committee on the District of Co-
lumbia informs the Senate today that
the addition of the proposed 89 teachers
should be made in the interest of educa-
tion in the District of Columbia. In
makmg that statement, I have complete
respect for the Appropriations Commit-
tee. But I do not fear successful con-
tradiction when I say that the Appro-
priations Committee has not made the
study the District of Columbia Commit-
tee has made regarding educational
problems in the District of Columbia.

I have great respect for the Appropria-
tions Committee. However, when the
educators make this request, and when
the legislative committee also makes the
request, then, xmless the Appropriations
Committee can present more evidence
than it has presented thus far, I think
the Senate should vote against the cut
proposed by the Appropriations Commit-
tee, and should vote in favor of sufficient
appropriations for the necessary nimiber
of teachers; and the Senate should re-
solve the doubts in favor of the children
of the District of Columbia. That is my

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Oregon yield to me?

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Yar-
BOROUGH in the chair). Does the Sena-
tor from Oregon yield to the Senator
from Rhode Island?

Mr. MORSE. I am happy to yield to
the Senator from Rhode Island.

Mr. PASTORE. Is the Senator from
Oregon taking the position that if his
amendment is rejected the Senate will
have violated a fiat issued by the District
of Columbia Committee?

Mr. MORSE. No; not at all. I am
saying that the Appropriations Commit-
tee does not have the information the
District of Columbia Committe has re-
garding the educational problems in the
District of Columbia, and the Appropria-
tions Committee could not be expected
to. In my judgment, when a legislative
committee makes a recommendation to
the Appropriations Committee, in con-
nection with a matter such as this, the

\

8782

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Jiine 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8783

hi

,

presumption li in favor of tbe recom-
mendation made by the legislative com-
mittee, and the Appropriations Commit-
tee should have good cause for sayinc
that It will overrule the recommendation
of the legislative committee. Otherwise,
the Appropriations Committee would
soon be the superlegislative committee
of the Senate. That is my position.

Mr. PASTORE. What does the Sena-
tor from Oregon mean by the statement
about overruling a decision made by the
legislative committee?

Mr. MORSE. I say that because the
District of Coliunbia Committee has rec-
ommended that tills additional number
of teachers should be provided.

Mr. PASTORE. Did the Committee
on the District of Columbia hold a hear-
ing on that item?

Mr. MORSE. We had a long hearing
on the educational system of the District
of Columbia.

Mr. PASTORE. Am I to understand
that the District of Columbia Committee
held a hearing on this particular item
while the Appropriations Committee was
also considering it?

Mr. MORSE. Not in the case of the
89 teachers.

Mr. PASTORE. Of course not.

Mr. MORSE. But we made a survey
of the entire matter.

Mr. PASTORE. But the whole sur-
vey Ls a platitude and a generalization.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, why does
the Senator from Rhode Island say the
whole survey is a platitude and a gen-
eralization? The survey is based upon
detailed evidence on issue after issue,
as the evidence was presented before
the committee.

So far as the District of Columbia
Committee is concerned, it has a thor-
ough understanding of the educational
needs of the District of Columbia; and I
do not intend to have the judgment of
the Appropriations Committee substi-
tuted for that of any legislative com-
mittee of the Senate. I think it is about
time that we make clear to the Appro-
priations Committee that, after all, the
presumptions are in favor of the position
taken by the legislative committees.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Oregon yield further
to me?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. PASTORE. I do not Imagine for
a moment that that is what the Appro-
priations Committee did. The bill came
to the Senate from the House of Repre-
sentatives. The House had already
acted on the bill. Educational ofBcials
of the District of Columbia and repre-
sentatives of the school system and the
Commissioners testified before our com-
mittee. We went over the matter very
carefully.

It is entirely proper for the Senator
from Oregon to disagree with me; that
is his privilege. But a recommendation
for 89 additional teachers was never in-
cluded in a report written by the District
of Columbia Committee. I realize that
the District of Columbia Committee
made an overall sxirvey of the school
Situation in the District of Columbia,
with which I heartily agree. I am as
much interested in the educational

standards of the District of Colimibia as
is any other Member of the Senate.
But. after all, I have the responsibility
of going Into the case in detail, and of
considering the testimony of all the
witnesses, not merely that of the head of
the department, who may have been the
one who made the request. The House
had voted an appropriation sufficient for
175 additional teachers, whereas funds
sufficient for a larger number of addi-
tional teachers had been requested.

This morning we were confronted with
a new statistical report from the Com-
missioners; and from that report we
learn that the situation Is even better
than the committee had been told It was.

I believe that the program under the
recommendation of the Appropriations
Committee will be a well-rounded one,
and I do not believe that either the teach-
ers or the students in the District of
Columbia will be penalized as a result.
I think the program recommended by
the Appropriations Committee is a gen-
erous and reasonable one which will do
much good to educational life in the Dis-
trict of Columbia.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I shaU
close by saying that I have the utmost
respect for the Senator from Rhode
Island and for the sincerity with which
he arrives at his judgment. However. I
completely disagree with his conclusions.

In my judgment, the recommendations
of the Appropriations Committee regard-
ing this teacher item will, if followed by
the Congress, cause great injustice to be
done to the boys and girls of the District
of Columbia. In my judgment, the Sen-
ate this afternoon cannot justify econ-
omizing at the expense of the services
which the educators have said will be
needed by these boys and girls next year.
I believe that the doubts should be re-
solved in favor of the boys and girls.

Furthermore, in order to make my po-
sition perfectly clear. I wish to state that
when a legislative committee makes a
study similar to the one the District of
Columbia Committee has made regard-
ing the educational problems in the Dis-
trict of Columbia, the presumption is in
favor of the judgment of the legislative
committee.

Mr. KNO\^XAND. Mr. President. I
suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
will caU the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll, and
the following Senators answered to their
names:

Kuchel

Lauschfl

Long

Maguusoa

Man.<<fleld

Martin. Iowa

Martin, Pa.

McNamara

Monroney

Mone

Morton

Mundt

Murray

Neuberger

O Mahoney

Pa.storo

Payne

Potter

Puriell

Revercomb

Robertson

Rasaell

SaltonstaU

Schoeppel

WUey

WllUAms

TarboroDgh

Aiken

Ea.«-tland

Allott

El lender

Andpraon

Ervln

Barrett

Flanders

Beall

Ft ear

Bennett

Gold water

Bible

Gors

Bricker

Green

Bush

Hayden

Butler

Henninifa

Byrd

Hickenlooper

Capehart

H:U

Carlson

Holland

Carroll

Humphrey

Caae, N. J.

Ives

Case. s. DaJc.

Jacksoa

Chavez

Javlts

Church

Jenner

Cooper

Johnson, Tex.

Cotton

Johnston. S. C

Curtis

Kefauver

Dirltsen

Kennedy

Douglaa

Kerr

Dworshak

Know land

Scott Stcnnia

Smatbers BymlngtOB

Smith. Maine Tahnadge

Smith. N J. Thunnoad

Sparkman Thy*

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. A quo-
rum is present.

The question is on agreeing to the
amendment offered by the Senator from
Oregon [Mr. Moast] for himself and
other Senators to the committee amend-
ment on page 7. line 21. On this ques-
tion the yeas and nays have been or-
dered, and the clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll,

Mr. MANSFIELD. I announce that
the Senator from Pennsylvania I Mr.
Clark), the Senator from Arkansas [Mr.
PtTLBRicHTl, and the Senator from West
Virginia [Mr. Neelt] are absent on offi-
cial business.

The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Mc-
Clellan] is absent by leave of the Senate
on official biisiness.

I further announce that If present and
voting, the Senator from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Clark] and the Senator from West
Virginia [Mr. NitlyJ would each vote
"yea."

Mr. DIRKSEN. I announce that the
Senator from Nebraska [Mr. HruskaI,
the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Malonx]
and the Senator from North Dakota [Mr.
YotJNCi are absent on official business.

The Senator from New Hampshire
[Mr. Bridges), the Senator from North
Dakota [Mr. Lancer] and the Senator
from Utah [Mr. Watkins] are absent
because of Illness.

If present and voting, the Senator
from Nebraska [Mr. Hkcska] would vote
"nay."

The result was announced — sreas 27,
nays 57, as follows:

HEAS— 27

Beall

Bible

Carroll

Case. N J.

Church

Cooper

Douglas

Henninfta

Humphrey

Aiken

Allott

Anderson

Barrett

Bennett

Brlclcer

Bush

Butler

Byrd

Capehart

Carlson

Case, s Dak.

Chavea

Cotton

Curtis

Dlrksen

Dworshak

Eastland

£llender

Bridges
Clark
Pul bright
Hmska

JacJcson

McNamara

Javlts

Monroney

Johnston. 8. C

Morse

Kefauver

Morton

Kennedy

Murray

Kuchel

Neuberger

Long

Payne

Magnusoa

Bymlngton

Mansneld

Yar borough

NATS— 57

Errin

OMaho&ey

Flanders

Pastors

Frear

Potter

Goldwater

Purtell

Gore

Revercomb

Green

Robertson

Hayden

Russell

Hickenlooper

Sal tons tall

Hill

Schoeppel

Holland

Bmathers

Ives

Smllh. Maine

Jenner

Smith. N. J.

Johnson. Tex.

Spark man

Kerr

Stennis

Knowland

Talmadge

Liiusrhe

Thurmond

Martin, Iowa

Thye

Martin. P».

WUey

Mundt

WUilams

OT VOTINO— 11

Langer

Scott

Malone

Watkins

MrClellan

Young

Neely

the

So Mr. Morse's amendment to
committee amendment was rejected.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, The
question is on agreeing to the commit-
tee amendment on page 7. line 21.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I should
like to explain very briefly the parlia-
mentary situation, on the basis of which

I shall make a parliamentary request.
The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr.
Clark], as I stated previously, has been
called from the floor on a matter that
requires his absence from the floor of
the Senate.

I desire to have the Senate consider
an amendment on page 4. line 3. of the
District of Columbia appropriation bilL

We have already adopted that amend-
ment in the consideration of the bill. I
have taken up the matter with the chair-
man of the subcommittee, and he is per-
fectly willing that the vote whereby the
amendment was agreed to be reconsid-
ered, and that action be taken on the
Clark amendment, on which there will
be no yea and nay vote.

Therefore, I move to reconsider the
vote whereby the Senate adopted the
committee amendment on page 4, line 3.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, re-
serving the right to object, I wonder
whether the Senator could indicate to
the Senate what the amendment to the
amendment would do.

Mr. MORSE. The amendment would
change the figure $369,770 to $387,400.
It involves $8,430 for the Office of Urban
Renewal and $9,200 for the Planning Ad-
visory Council. The Senator from Rhode
Island and I intend to make a brief legis-
lative record on this matter, and pos-
sibly enter into an understanding, if the
consent of the Senate is given to recon-
sider the vote on the amendment.

Mr. KNOWLAND. I have no objec-
tion to reconsideration for the purpose
of permitting an explanation.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Yar-
BOROUGH in the chair) . Will the Senator
from Oregon withhold his request until
the vote has laeen taken on the com-
mittee amendment on page 7, line 21,
which is to strike out "$37,160,000" and
to insert in lieu thereof "$37,246,050"?

Mr. MORSE. I withhold my request.

The PRESIDING OFFICE31. The
question recurs on agreeing to the com-
mittee amendment on page 7, line 21.

The amendment was agreed to.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the request of the Senator
from Oregon? The Chair hears none.

Mr. MORSE. The Justification for
the amendment I propose is to be found
on page 37 of the hearings. It reads:

This amount is requested to carry out a
program to stimulate further, and to co-
ordinate the already awakened Interest of
Individuals and organized neighborhood
groups in activities for combating neighbor-
hood blight, and for clearing up existing
slum areas by rehabilitation, conservation,
cleanup and maintenance; linking these ac-
tivities with governmental work in order to
obtain the maximum advantage of such com-
bined efforts to prevent further deterioration
of areas of the city.

The amount requested for that ac-
tivity Is $8,430.

The amoimt requested for the Plan-
ning Advisory Council is $13,600. The
statement which appears on page 37 of
the hearings reads :

This amount is requested to provide a
working staff for the Commissioners' Plan-
ning Advisory Council.

I now yield to the Senator from Rhode
Island.

Mr. PASTORE. The Senate went
along with the House in deleting from
the appropriation bill the item for the
additional employee for the urban re-
newal activity. The request was for 1
additional member for a 5-member staff.
As I understand, the purpose was to en-
gage an employee who would promote,
with civic groups through the mailing of
written paraphernalia, an interest in the
removal of blight and in urban renewal
activity.

In view of the interest being demon-
strated by the Committee on the District
of Columbia, I am perfectly willing to
take the amendment to conference to :>ee
what can be agreed upon.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the request of the Senator
from Oregon to reconsider the vote by
which the committee amendment on
page 4, line 3, was agreed to? The Chair
hears none, and it is so ordered.

Mr. MORSE. I now offer my amend-
ment, on page 4, line 3. to strike out
"$369,770." and insert in lieu thereof
"$387,400."

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment offered by the Senator from Oregon
to the committee amendment on page
4, Une 3.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I told the
Senator from Rhode Island, earlier, that
I believe in compromising.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield at that point?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. PASTORE. I notice, in reading
the explanation of the plan

Mr. MORSE. We are going to reduce
the amount. The plan is included in the
amendment. I was about to say that it
will be necessary to modify the amend-
ment.

I told the Senator from Rhode Island
earlier in the debate today that I recog-
nize, in the matter of disagreements on
appropriation bills, that it is sometimes
necessary to engage In the procedure of
compromise. I am very happy to accept
a compromise. I would prefer the larger
amount, but it will be necessary to modify
the figure in the amendment, so as to add
only $8,430 to the committee figure on
line 3, page 4. Add $8,430 to the $369,-
770, and take the amendment to con-
ference.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated for the in-
formation of the Senate.

The Legislative Clerk. On page 4,
line 3. It is proposed to strike out "$362.-
500" and insert in lieu thereof "$387,400."

Mr. MORSE. No; that is not correct.
I said I wished to modify the amend-
ment by adding to the flgure "$369,770"
"$8,430." which makes a total of $378,200,
to cover the Office of Urban Renewal.

Mr. PASTORE. That would make the
total $378,200.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the amendment offered by the
Senator from Oregon to the committee
amendment is agreed to.

Without objection, the committee
amendment as eunended Is agreed to.

The bill is open to further amendment.

Mr, MORSE. Mr. President, I offer
my last amendment, again ottering it on
behalf of the Senator from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. Clark], for myself, the Sena-
tor from West Virginia [Mr. Neelt], and
the Senator from Maryland i'Mi. Beall 1.
I ask that the amendment be read.

The PRESIDING OFFICER The
amendment will be read for the infor-
mation of the Senate.

The Legislative Clerk. On page 18.
line 18. it is proposed to strike out
"$1,840,000" and insert in lieu thereof
"$1,885,700."

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, In expla-
nation of the amendment. I read from
page 157 of the committee hearings:

The cuts in funds made by the House on
this vital link In the housing and slum pre-
vention program will have the efiect of de-
laying effective enforcement of the apart-
ment house chapter after its adoption by
the Conunlssloners. Such enforcement effort
as could be devoted to the apartment house
inspection, over and above that of one new
inspector allowed by the House, would nec-
essarily be diverted from the area enforce-
ment or block and complaint work. This Is
a very undesirable alternative in that It
would critically reduce, if not practically
eliminate. Housing Code enforcement in all
but the licensed multiple housing categories.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. PASTORE. I am willing to take
this amendment to conference. The
background and history of the matter is
as follows: The amount as presented in
the budget estimate to the House was
rejected by the House, primarily for the
reason that the code had not been com-
pleted. It was expected by the Commis-
sioners that the code would be in opera-
tion by July 1 of this year. But at the
time the District officials appeared be-
fore the House committee, it was uncer-
tain whether that mark could be
reached.

Since then, we have been notifled that
the code has been completed, and there
Is every prospect that the additional per-
sonnel can be profitably employed.
Ten additional inspectors would be re-
quired, together with the related expense
for the enforcement of the apartment
house chapter of the housing regulations.

I am perfectly willing to take the
amendment to conference.

Mr. MORSE. I appreciate the Sen-
ator's statement. The Senator from
Rhode Island is completely correct when
he says that the reason why the House
rejected the request was that the hous-
ing code had not been completed by the
District government. It has now been
completed. I ask unanimous consent
that the text of It be printed at this
point in my remarks.

There being objection, the text was
ordered to be printed in the Record, as
follows:

lO. F. 47-2328. Order Mo. 67-1023]

OOVKENMBTT OF THK

DlSTKICT or COLXTiniA,

WashiTigton. D. C, June 8. 1957.
Subject: District of Columbia Hotislng Regu-
lations, Amended. Department of Li-
censes and Inspections.
Ordered, lliat the District of Columbia
Housing Regulations. 1955 e<lition, as amend-
ed, are hereby further amended by adding

11

? t

n

8784

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

I

11

E

tb« foUowlng proTtalona to be dralgnatod m
cluipt«r 6:

"CHAfTBI •. ASnCLS «10, SPKXAL UCSMSXJIO

Eaom^noirs BOjiTma to APABTunrr am»

APASTMBfT BOnnS

"Sac 6101. Incorporation of chMpten U X
•ml 3 by reference

"Chsptere 1. 2, and 3 of tbeae housing reg-
ulations of tbe District of Ck}luinbla are In-
corporated In this chapter 0 by reference and
made a part hereof, and the provisions con-
tained In said chapters 1. 3, and 3, together
with the proTlaloDs contained In this chapter
6, shall be applicable to premises used or held
out fur use as an apartment or apartment
house: Provuied, That whenever any provi-
sion contained In this chapter 6 shall con-
flict with or supersede a provision contained
In chapters 1. 2. or 3. the provision contained
In this chapter shall be applicable.

"Src. 6102. Scope.

"This chapter 6 of the housing regrilatlons
of the District of Columbia shall be appU-
cable to every building or part thereof occu-
pied or used or held out fur use as an apart-
ment or apartment house, whether tenant or
owner occupied.

"Sec. 6103. License.

"6103.1. No license to operate an apart-
ment house business shall be Issued to a per-
son not a resident of the District of Colum-
bia, unless such nonresident, as a condition
of such license, maintains an office In the
District of Columbia, appoints or employs
and maintains an attorney-m-fact, general
agent or manager who Is a resident of the
District of Columbia, or maintains an office
in said District, and notifies the Superin-
tendent of Licenses and Permits of such
appointment or employment. Such licensee
shall likewise notify the Superintendent
of Licenses and Permits, within 5 busi-
ness days, of any change In the appoint-
ment or employment of such attorney-in-
fact, general agent or manager. In all cases
of a nonresident licensee, notice of any ac-
tion to be taiten with respect to the license
Issued to such licensee may be served upon
the attorney-in-fact, genersd agent or man-
ager appointed or employed by such non-
resident licensee.

"6103 2. Upon certification to the Superin-
tendent of Licenses and Permits by an office
of the District of Columbia required to serve
notices in connection with the operation of
an apartment-house business, that a licensee,
or the attorney-in-fact, general agent or man-
ager of such licensee, cannot be found after
reasonable search, proceedings against the
licensee may be Instituted by serving notice,
in the manner prescribed In section 2701.5
of these regulations, upon either the llcensre
or any person who has been designated by
the licensee as his attorney-in-fact, general
agent or manager, and whose deslgnatlnn h.vs
not been rescinded by such licensee In a
written notice of reclsslon sent to the Super-
intendent of Licenses and Permits.

"Sec. 6104. Registration of tenants.

"The license shall establish and maintain,
within 5 business days after the opening of
said business, a book, books, record or rec-
ords In which shall be written In English
the name of each tenant of every apartment
in the apartment house together with the
number of the apartment In which such
tenant is residing. The said book, books.
record or records shall be kept current and
in good repair at all times within the District
of Ci/.umbla. and shall be open for Inspection
by the departments of the government of
the District of Columbia responsible for en-
forcement of District of Columbia laws and
regulations.

"Sec. 6105. Posting of information regarding
building management.
"The licensee shall provide Information
regarding the building management in a no-

tice framed under clear glasi or pt«stie and
shAll post such notice or cause the same to
be posted in a conspicuous place in the apart-
ment building to which such notice applies.
Tbe notice shall contain the name, address,
and telephone number of a responsible rep-
reaantatlve of the building management who
may be reached in the event of complaint*
or emergency situations. Tbe notice shall
also contain information regarding the man-
ner in which such representative or his alter-
nate may be reached after normal working
hours and on Sundays and holidays.

"Sec. 6106. Designation of apartments.

"Each apartment entrance door shall be
distinctively numbered or lettered and all
other rooms In the apartment buildings,
other than rooms in individual apartments,
shall be distinctively identified."

By order of the Board of Commissioners,
Dlsulct of Columbia.

AJ»N GHOaHETT.

Secretary to the Board.

Mr. MORSE. I appreciate the coop-
eration of the chairman of the com-
mittee in acrreeing to take the amend-
ment to conference.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the amendment offered by the
Senator from Oregon (Mr. MorskI, for
himself and other Senators, Is agreed to.

Without objection the committee
amendment, as amended. Is agreed to.

The bill is open to further amend-
ment. If there be no further amendment
to be proposed, the question Is on the
engrossment of the amendments and
third reading of the bill.

The amendments were ordered to be
engrossed, and the bill to be read a third
time.

The bill was read the third time.

Mr. KNOWLAND. I suggest the ab-
sence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.

The legi.slcitive clerk called the roll,
and the following Senators answered to
their names:

Aiken

Allott

Anderson

Barrett

Beall

Bennett

Bible

Bricker

Bush

ButUT

Byrd

Capehart

Carlson

Car rail

Case. N J.

Case. S Dak.

Ch;ivez

Church

Cooper

Cotton

Curtis

Dlrksen

Douglas

Dworsl.ak

Bft.stland

Elender

Krvln

rianders

Frear
Gold water
Oore
Green

Hennlngs

H'.citenlooper

HUl

HcUland

Humphrey

Ive«

Jackson

Javlu

Jenni'r

Johnson. Te«

Morse

Morton

Mundt

Murray

Neuberger

O Mahoney

Pastors

Payns

Potter

Purtell

Revercomb

Robertaon

Fu-seU

SaUon«tall

Johaaton. S. C. Schoeppel

Kefauver

Kennedy

Kerr

Knowland

Kuchel

Lausche

Long

Magnuson

Mar.stield

Martin, Iowa

Martin, Pa.

McNamars

Monroney

Scott

Sma tilers

Smith, Maine

Smith. N. J.

Sparkman

Stonnls

Symington

Talmadge

ThurmoQd

Thye

Wiley

Williams

Tarborough

The PRESIDING OFFfCER (Mr.
Scott in the chair>. A quorum la
present.

House bill 6500. the District of Colum-
bia appropriation bill, has been read the
third time. The question now Is, Shall
the bill pass?

On this question the yeaa and nays
have previously been ordered, and the
clerk will call the roll.

The leflslAtlv« ckiic proceeded to eaU
tbe roll.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I announoe that
tbe Senator from PennsyiTania [Mr.
Clabjc], tbe Senator from Arkanaas
[Mr. FuLBUGHTl, the Setuitor from
Arizona [Mr. Hatdek], and the Senator
from West Virginia [Mr. NexltI are
absent on official biuiness. The Senator
from Arkansas [Mr. McClkllahI Is ab-
sent by leave of the Senate on official
business.

I further announce that if present
and voting, the Senator from Pennsyl-
vania (Mr. CI.ARK], the Senators from
Arkansas [Mr. Fulbright and Mr. Mc-
Clcllaiv], the Senator from Arizona
[Mr. Hayden], and the Senator from
West Virginia [Mr. Nkely] would each
vote "yea."

Mr. DIRKSEN. I announce that the
Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Hruska],
the Senator from Nevada I Mr. MaloncI,
and the Senator from North Dakota
(Mr. Young] are absent on official
business.

The Senator from New Hampshire
[Mr. Bridges), the Senator from North
I>akota [Mr. Lancer], and the Senator
from Utah [Mr. WatkinsI are absent
because of illness.

If present and voting, the Senator
from Nebraska I Mr. Hruska] and the
Senator from Nevada [Mr. MaloniI
would each vote "yea."

The result was announced — yeaa 83,
nays 1. as follows:

YEAS— 83

Aiken

Allott

Anderson

Barrett

B«ali

Bennett

Bible

Brtcker

Bush

But.er

Byrd

Capehart

Carlson

Carroll

Ca,-*. N J.

Case. S. Dak.

Chaves

Church

Cooper

Cotton

Curtis

Dlrksen

Dousias

Dworshak

Eastland

Ellender

Ervin

Flanders

Bridges
Clark
Pulbnght
Hayden

Ft ear

Gold water

Oore

Green

Hennlngs

Hlcken;vjoper

HUl

Holland

Humphrey

I veil

Jackson

Javlts

Jenner

Johnson. Tex.

Johnston. 8 C

Kefauver

Kennedy

Kerr

Knowland

Kuchel

Lausche

Long

Magnuson

Mansfield

Martin, Iowa

Martin. Pa.

McNamarm

Monroney

NATS— 1

Morse
NOT VOTINO— 11

Morton

Mundt

Murray

Neuberger

O Mahoney

Pastore

Payne

Potter

Purtell

Revercomb

RobertKon

Russell

Baltooiitall

Schoeppel

Scott

Snuithers

Smith. Maine

Smith. N J.

Sparkman

StennU

Symington

Talmadge

Thunnoad

Thye

Wiley

Wintams

Tarborough

Hruska
Langer
Malona

McClellan

Neely

Watklns

Tounc

So the bill (H. R. 8500) was passed.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President. I move
that the Senate insLst upon its amend-
ments, request a conference with the
House of Representatives thereon, and
that the Chair appoint the conferees on
the part of the Senate.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Presiding Officer appointed Mr. Pastors,
Mr. McClillan, Mr. Johnsoh of Texas,
Mr. Bible. Mr. Fhiar, Mr. Dirksen, Mr.
Ives, and Mr. Beall conferees on the
part of the Senate.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8785

RETURN TO THB FLOOR OF
SENATOR PAYNE

Mrs. SMITH of Maine. Mr. Presi-
dent, the Senfite has heard the response
to the call of the roll by one of our dis-
tinguished eoUeagnes. the Junior Senator
from Maine, and welcomes his return to
the Senate. His colleagues are happy to
see him loack from his absence which
was forced by illness. It is gratifying
to see him return, looking so much like
himself. This could not be if he had not
exerted every effort to get well.

We who have seen the Junior Senator
from Maine in his faithful and constant
attendance in the Senate since he first
joined it in 1953 knew that he would do
this very thing; knew that he would rec-
ognize the value of obeying his doctor
and his wife in his effort to recover.

Mr. President, the Senate, I am sure,
joins me in welcoming the junior Senator
from Maine back, with the hope that it
will not be long before he will be back in
his Senate seat all the time.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President. I
wish to Join with the distinguished
senior Senator from Maine [Mrs. Smith]
in the remarks she has made regarding
the return of the junior Senator from
Maine [Mr. Payne]. There is certainly
no more valued Member of this txxly
than the distinguished Junior Senator
from Maine, who has been absent be-
cause of Illness, and I know that all
Senators on both sides of the aisle were
very much pleased and relieved to see
him back in the Chamber again, for
during the years he has been a Member
of the Senate, he has made a valuable
contribution to the Senate's legislative
work and to the great decisions which
this body must make.

THE PUBLIC DEBT REDUCTION ACT
OP 1957
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the Senate
Finance Committee had a most construc-
tive and interesting session this morn-
ing in the consideration of S. 1738. in-
troduced by the Senator from Massachu-
setts [Mr. Saltonstall].

The purpose of this bill is to bring
about reductions in the public debt and
thp l^Ral ceiling on the authority of the
Federal Government to borrow.

The Senator from Massachusetts made
a very able presentation, as did the Sen-
ator from Colorado [Mr. Allott].

As there is much valuable informa-
tion contained In their remarks as to
our fiscal situation. I ask unanimous con-
sent that these two presentations before
the Finance Committee be printed in the
body of the Record.

There being no objection, the state-
ments wore ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

The Public Debt Redttction Act or 1957
(Statement by Senator LiVEarrr Salton-
stall, of Massachusetts, before Senate
Finance Committee, hearings on S. 1738,
June 11, 1957)

I very much appreciate this opportunity
to appear before your committee and pre-
sent to you my thoughts in connection with
the Public Debt ReducUon Act of 1957, S.
1738. I am very pleased that your commit-
tee has decided to consider this bill; I think
that discussion of the enormous problenxs

of managing the Vsderal debt and Indeed
of eongrswlontl responslblltty for mieb man-
•geoMnt Is certainly welooma and may help
us to produo* UMftil Ideas In this important
and oomplleated field. There are undoubt-
•dly many Improvementa which tha com-
mlttaa may wish to add to the bUl, and I
will certainly welooma any discussion of
these.

Problems of Federal debt management
and of using the national debt as an Instru-
ment of sound economic policy are probably
as pressing today as ever before in our his-
tory. Five times during the history of our
Nation the expenditures of war have created
heavy public debts. Each time many In-
formed people felt that our debts were so
large we could never recover from them.
Following four of these wars these predic-
tions were proved wrong; our Nation re-
stored its credit and reduced or eliminated
the debts it had incurred. We are now car-
rying the burden of the largest debt of oiir
history caused by the Second World War.
In the 11 years following the war, we have
not as yet devised a systematic and orderly
system of debt reduction. It is directed to
this problem that I have drafted this bill
and invited the attention and thoughtful
consideration of my colleagues here in the
Congress.

In our discussions of the problems of re-
ducing the national debt we must recognize
in the first instance the lessons of history.
Following each of the five debt-producing
wars which I have mentioned a moment ago.
we have had a serious inflation of commodity
prices. It has ttecome a well recognized po-
litical and economic maxim that the pain-
ful experience of inflation and the painftil
experience of the deflation which inevitably
follows each inflation is an unfortunate af-
termath of deflcit finance. It is equally well
recognized that the sooner these problems
are met and positive steps taken to restore
governmental credit, the less hazardotis is
the aftermath of war.

In 1790. public debt was $72.4 million, or
119 per capita. Through the efforts of Alex-
ander Hamilton as Secretary of the Treasury
the Government indebtedness was gradually
reduced. It rose again following the War of
1812. Following the Civil War the debt was
$2.6 bUllon or slightly over 50 percent of our
national income. In the years following the
Civil War the debt was reduced by almost
two-thirds. After the First World War our
debt was appreciably reduced by sinking fund
legislation. Coincident with the evolution
of a wax finance phUosophy throughout our
history has been the development of a char-
acteristically American tradition, that is the
paying off of the debts we incur. Not only
is such a piiilosophy consistent with a free
democratic government, but it has paid divi-
dends in the strength which it has given to
us — confidence in our credit and steadily in-
creasing national wealth. Fiscal integrity —
whether individual or national — has l>een a
symbol of good, typically American common-
sense.

Early In 1946 the Committee on Public
Debt PoUcy. which I sliali speak more about
later, was formed under the auspices of the
Falk Foundation. In one of their first re-
ports that best summed up the lessons of
history about national debt, the Committee
pointed to the necessity for financing wars
and of Inflation and deflation following these
wars. They pointed to the tremendous dan-
fi^rs of the inflationary forces created by
World War II and of the unprecedented na-
tional debt. They pointed to the serious eco-
nomic implications of billions of dollars an-
nually expended for debt Interest and serv-
ice. They spoke of the "national tradition"
to "pay down otir war debts promptly" and
they said very aptly, "throughout our his-
tory, the greatest obstacles to national
strength and the most acute dangers of fiscal
collapse have been weak financial policies.

but never Inadequate or falling resomves.
During the 1S7 years from 1793 through IMS.
ws hars had 06 years of net surplus in our
national budget and ea yaars of net deficit.
That record is good enough to encourage us—
and poor enough to put tu on guard."

TO bring this record up to date since IMS,
we have had 6 deflcit years and 3 years of
budget surpluses (including fiscal year 1957) .

As we reflect on the problems of otxr Na-
tion's debt, it Is well to remember the great
wisdom of the words of Oeorge Washington in
his Farewell Address September of 1796:

"As a very Important source of strength
and security, cherish public credit. One
method of preserving it is to use it as spar-
ingly as possible: avoiding occasions of ex-
pense by cultivating peace, but remembering
also that timely disbursements to prepare for
danger frequently prevent much greater dis-
bursements to repel it; avoiding lii^ewise the
accumulation of debt, not only by shunning
occasions of expense, but by vigorous exer-
tions in time of peace to discharge the debts
which unavoidable wars may have occa-
sioned, not ungenerously throwing upon pos-
terity the burdens which we ourselves ought
to bear."

Economists generally regard the relation-
ship of the debt to our national income as
the best indicator of the debt's burden on
our economy. Our national debt today rep-
resents 82 percent of otir national income.
Today we realize, as we perhaps could not
foresee a few years ago. that our role of lead-
ership in world affairs and in times of criti-
cal and uncertain peace have made greater
demands upon our economic resources than
during any comparable peacetime period in
our history. In my Judgment it is more nec-
essary than ever to be coldly calculating
about our ability to sustain our debt and
to maintain vigorous national credit and fi-
nancial resources.

Before discussing the purposes of the leg-
islation which I have proposed I should like
for a few moments to describe the bill and
Its operation.

S. 1738 proposes to make tise of a very
simple device to effect by legislation a syste-
matic and orderly process for reducing the
national debt and controlling the expendi-
tures of the Federal Government. The bill
amends the Second Liberty Bond Act which
has established a maximum ceiling on the
size of the national debt. The debt limit
wliich now is established at $275 billion
merely provides that the debts of the United
States, regardless of appropriations or ex-
penditures, can. at no time, exceed the ceil-
ing. Reduced to simplest terms, S. 1738
merely says that each year automatically
this ceiling, which has been in recent years
such an effective brake on Federal expendi-
tures, will be gradually lowered. In each
year a small percentage of the preceding
year's Federal net revenue is subtracted from
the maximum debt ceiling. In other words,
the amount of money established as a maxi-
mum which at any one time can I>e out-
standing in debt obligations is gradually
diminished in each year by a percentage of
Federal receipts.

Once enacted, in the first year of opera-
tion the biU proposes that the ceUing on
the national debt be lowered by 2 percent
of the net tax revenue of the United States
for the fiscal year ending 12 months prior
to the first scheduled debt reduction. Ac-
cording to the dates now provided in the
bill, this means that at the beginning of the
following fiscal year an amount equal to 3
percent of the net revenue for fiscal year
1958 is used and so on xintU July 1, 19€1.
and each year thereafter when an amount
equivalent to 5 percent of the net revenue
of the United States for the fiscal year pre-
ceding will be set aside for the automatic
reduction of the ceiling on the national
debt. These figures have been selected be-
cause they are gradual and moderate; yet

m

CUI-

-553

8786

CONGRISSIONAL RICORD — SENATE

June 11

1037

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8787

I f'

If adopted would be effective in achieving
the alms and purposes of the bill. The flu;-
tires are moderate in that existing programs
need not be disrupted. The figures, I be-
lieve, are realistic because they can be ap-
plied within the present framework of Fed-
eral rtveiiue and the reductions which thev
would cause would not. m my Judgment, b«
In any way disruptive of our great pros-
perity or weaken our national defense. I
believe that these percentages would pro-
duce the control over our expenditure levels
which the bill seeks while at the same time
gradually reducing the size of our debt I
certainly hope to have the advice and coun-
sel of this learned committee upmn the
proper percentage levels for the reduction
proposed.

In summary, these provisions of S. IT'^a
ooerate as a control on the national debt
ce.Ung and not an actual reduction of t.ie
debt Itself. Should the bill be enacted, a
fixed sum, depending on the reliition of the
actu.vl debt to the ceilmg, would have to be
appropriated automatically, much as debt
Interest is automatically appropriated n(5w.
to keep the outstanding obligations within
the reduced statutory ceiling. A proposed
change to this bill would require such hu
Uem to be Included In the budget.

In principle, this proposal utilizes the cell-
ing on the national debt as a brake on
Federal spending. This same device h.is
been very effectively employed by this con\-
mittee in recent years to prevent further
Increases In our debt and to control t!,e
level of national sp«"nding. The bill alters
the status quo very little At the present
time, the actual public debt is very clo.s»» i i
the prescribed debt celling A de'lclt butl^f t
at the present 'tme would mean that author-
ized expenditures could not be fuIfUled with-
out exceeding the statvitnrv ceiUnir The
existing requlremei'.t la '■hat the Treasury
Department incur no further debts !n exi-f'ss
of the celling This bill merely adds the
requirement that the debts we have alreHdy
Incurred be reduced very gradually t.) stay
Within a celling prescribed by Congress

Gradually decrea."Ung ceilings would Im-
pliedly require surplus budgets by reqiilrin.<
that expenditures be kept a fixed pen-enrage
below revenues At the present time we have
mandatory expenditure in ei^h budget— in-
terest on the public debt This is the largf'st
single Item In the budget, approximately
•7'^ billion I know of no valid reason,
should Congress determine that national pol-
icy dictate a reduction in the debt, why an
additiiuial fixed ch-irge f tr di»bt rerirernent
along With debt service should n.-.t be re-
quired The bill. In other words. Is ni more
of a restriction upon the ability of the Fed-
eral Oovernment to meet its obligations and
commitments than is the current rigid debt
celling

In summary, the essence of this bill and the
only way in which it can be truly di.stm-
guished from our existing f1.sc.-il debt control
Is that this bill imposes the necessity for
budifetary surpluses to stay within a grad-
ually declining debt ceiling.

Three suspension provisions have been
written into this bil! One of these Is for
use In time ot war when we realize a neces-
sity for deficit spending to maintain our se-
curity. Section 3 D ili and (2i. describe
the conditions luider which the bill would
be s\isp>'nded In time of war. A second pro-
vision now states th.^t the President m;<y
recommend the .suspension of this bill be-
cause of economic conditions existing or
threatening and if the Congress concurs by
a concurrent re.solu'lon the aut<imatic reduc-
tion of the debt celling will be suspend'^d for
that fiscal year I shall refer to this provision
later In mv discu.ssion. A third provision of
the bill merits explanation. The ami>unt of
reduction of the public debt celling which Is
effected by this bill each year will be reduced
by AW amount equal to the loss of revenue
resulting from any tax reduction enacted by

Congress during that fiscal year If. and only
If. Congress so provides. Congress may pro-
vide for the suspension of the operation of
this bill to the extent of the Iocs of revenue
caused by tax reductions. The purp^ose of
the third provision which has effect for two
fiscal years (1 year following the tax reduc-
tion! Is to give greater tlexibiUty to the pro-
visions of this bill and to permit the tem-
porary su.spenslon of this bill In any years
when the budgetary surplus referred to above
Is used for a tax reduction Py Including
such a pro\ ision. we do not foreclose the pos-
sibilities of general tax reduction, but ratht-r
we encourage a nenernl tax reduction since
the lowering of the debt ceiling makes man-
datory budget surpluse.s, to be used in the
first In.stance f or debt reduction or alterna-
tively, if C>)ngress desires, to permit a loss of
t.HX receipts without creating a deficit budget.
The purpose of this provision Is n )t, to dis-
regarvl the intent and aim of reducing the na-
ti'.nal debt: it l.s to create the flexibility
which Is necessary for any such far-reac!;-
Ir.g prop.isal to h.ive lasting effectiveness.
We simply say in eifect. that we will have
budgetary surplu.ses and we will use these
to reduce our national debt, but if Congress
feels that our tax rate should be lowered In
the national Interest, this samp device can b«
used as the means tor achieving It.

No leizlslative proposal can be successful
which attempts to impose upon future Con-
gresses the Jud.:ment of the Coni^ress pass-
ing the legislation Should this bill be en-
acted we would be providing merely th«
mechanism by which each succeeding Coa-
gresa could exercise Its own Judgment.

I a.sked the Comptr^iller General to pro-
vide statistical material which I felt might
be helpful to the c^ mmlttee In pr i{)erly
an.ilvzing =»nd interpreting the effects of this
proposed legislation Upon the inclusion
if my remarks. I shall ask the Comptniller
Oenerals representative to discu.sa very
briefly for you the projected, predictable re-
s'llts of this bill Because I feel it helps
c riruit our discussion in the first Instance.
I should like ti"> mention one very revealing
statistic Had this bill been enacted In 1951.
and a.ssumiUkt the bills <;peratlon was not
su-spended during the past 6 year* the pub-
lic d'bt would not t(Xlav be $-7,5 billion It
W'luld be 1260 6 billion, and in these very few
years we would ha%e made a significant start
toward the repnvment of our public debt
The Interest on the debt would not be 17 4
billion but would be slightly under %"< hil-
lion; In other words, rtlmist one-h.'»lf bil-
lion d"l!ars wi^uld be available f.)r pr'>duc-
tive ex{M»nditures. which is now used for
debt ser'. Ice I believe the Comptroller Oen-
erals representative will substantiate these
figures

When I first began to discuss this Idea In
January. I solicited the comments and ad-
vice of m.my econom.lsts and ottiers with
vast experience In the fi.scal affairs of our
Government The response has t)een gen-
erally very favor.'ible and I have received
many helpful and constructive criticisms,
a few (.r which I feel it would be in order to
mention briefly at this time

The most comm(~>n objection to the en-
actment of this legi.slatlon that I have been
able to ascertain is that the bill Is a strait-
Jacket type of prop.j)sal My an.swer to
this Is simply that as di.scussed earlier the
bill is extremely flexible It merely lowers
the ceiling annually in our debt which
requires somewhat reduced expenditure
ra'es. as related to Federal Income, to stay
within the celling. This I believe is no
more Inflexible than the existing debt cell-
ing I recognize the problems which the bill
presents In estimating Federal receipts so
as to kn^w the preci.se amount by which
the celling Is decreased each year It Is
not necessary, however, to establish the re-
duced celling figure until very shortly be-
fore the close of each fiscal year, at which
time It IS my understanding that the Treas-

ury can predict with great accuracy the level
of Federal receipts to which the percentage
of reduction Is to be applied. One criticism
which I have heard Is perhaps valid at the
present time, but I hope wli; soon be over-
come by other changes which have been pro-
posed In our appropriations system. In or-
der for this bill to operate properly, certain
information may be necessary which is not
now readily available. A greater relation-
ship between flpprf>prlations and expendi-
tures Is necessary S 434. commonly known
as the accrued expenditures bill, would, in
my opinion, provide the necessary Informa-
tion and control by which the provisions of
this bill could operate. This bill wuuld also
virtually require the establishment of a
■Ingle-btidget-blU system which has been
advocated hy your riisringuished chalrmnn.
Both of these bills would provide the mech-
anism for inlorming both the administration
and the Congress of the expenditure limits
within which the bill I have Introduced
Would operate If S 17:i8 were enacted, a
single-budget bill would follow as a nat-
ural consequences as would greater atten-
tion to the expenditure levels of the Gov-
ernment

A consti'utlonal amendment requiring In
each year balanced budgets Is of cour.se the
most effective meatus to prevent deficit ft-
naiKink; I am \ery Interested In the com-
mendable propo.sal which ycir distinguished
chairman, among others, has made and
which Is embiKlied In ."Senate Joint Resolu-
tion 36 Should such a Constitutional
amendment be offered, we would certainly be
assured of much greater fiscal stability. I
believe that the pr.fn.sal in .s 17,J8 is a very
appropriate leglpUtive c^ mpanlon to such a
constitutional amendment

The purpi.ses behind this propo»«<I legis-
lation are properly oriented by feferencc to
the nature . f the debt which w..s very well
expre.ssed by your distinguished chairman
In a recent address betore the United Slates
Chamber of Commerce:

• Terrible debt is another evil resulting
from the ft.scal record the past 25 years The
direc debt if the Federal O.vernment has
Increased from tlH billion In 19.ia to the
present debt of »275 bliiion That Is 1 600
percent Interest In 19T2 cost taxpayers
l.'SS'J miill.m Now It Is |7 billion yearly, or
10 jiercent if Federal revenue Higher ctwts
are in prospect, interest rates on Federal
b«)ndi. have been Increased If all the Fed-
eral debt were refinanced on the basis of the
higher ra'e n.w being paid, interest ci>Bts
would lncrea.»e to appr' ximately $9 billion

•Public debt Is not like private debt If
private debt Is not paid off It can be ended
by bankruptcy, hurting relatively few peo-
ple. But If the public debt Is not paid off
with taxes, the end Is disastrous Inflation
or repudiation Either would destroy our
form of government.

■In add.rion to the $275 billion direct Fed-
eral debt, the Federal Government has ac-
cumulated contingent liabilities of at lea.st
•2.S0 billions The.se are obligations the Fed-
eral Government has guaranteed and In-
sured, such as 940 billion in Federal huusm,;
programs

• Tlie direct Federal debt Is equivalent to
the full a.sse.sf,ed value of all the land, all the
buildings, machinery. livestcK^k and every-
thing of tangible value In the United States /•

As we analyze the public debt. Its Implica-
tions and Its economic gravity, we realize
the unique character of the debt financing
capability of our own Federal Oovernment.
State constitutions and local charters are
replete with limitations lmp<wed on officials
In Incurring public debts. Forty State con-
stitutions require either constitutional
amendments or a public mandate to au-
thorize debts beyond certain specified limits.
In the Federal Oovernment our only means
of control la a statutory ceiling on the pub-
lic debt, the celling which this bill seeks to
amend. The reasoning behind a limitation

upon the ability of a government to borrow
money Is best summed up by the late Prof.
H. C. Adams In hla well known treatise on
public debts:

"As self-government was sectu-ed through
a struggle for mastery over the public purse,
su must It be maintained through the ezer-
i\AC by the people of con^plete control over
public expenditures • • • any method of
procedure, therefore, by which a public
bervaut can veil the true meaning of his acts,
or which allows the Government to enter
upon aiiy great enterprise without bringing
the fact fairly to the knowledge of the pub-
lic, must work against the realization of the
constitutional Idea. This is exactly the
state of affairs Introduced by a free use of
public credit. Under ordinary circum-
stances, popular attention cannot be drawn
to public acts, except they touch the pocket
of tlie voters through an Increase of taxes;
and It follows that a government whose ex-
penditures are met by resort to loan£ may,
for a time, administer aCalrs Independently
of those who must finally settle the account."

Few governmenta relate expenditures to
revenues in as limited a degree as we do In
the Federal Government. This was very
ably pointed out by a Joint committee of the
Congress In 1346 convened to recommend ln>-
provcments in operations to enable Congrcsa
t.) better meet its constitutional responsi-
bilities. We need only look to the British
Evstem of fiscal control for an excellent Illus-
tration Under the E.igllsh system, no ex-
penditure measure can be enacted without
a corresponding revenue provision. I hope
that t!ie bill which I have Introduced will
be a means by which Congress can exercise
a more re.sponslble political control over Its
greater t constitutional power — the power to
tax and to spend.

1 hf.ve described the purposes of this bill
as fivefold ■

First, to reduce the enormous national debt
which computed on a per capita t>asls Is
• 1.613 38

The second Is to reduce the amount of
money w.hich must annually be appropriated
fur the payment of interest.

The th'rd Is to combat the ever-present
dangers of Inflation which are as grave today
as they have been in recent years.

The fourth objective Is to rebuild eco-
nomic reserves and to promote greater finan-
cial stability so that our country may have
the economic means to battle the true dan-
gers of Communist military and economic
aggression.

Finally, the bill Is designed to provide a
means for controlling the expenditure levels
of the Federal Government while surpluses
are being accumulated for debt reduction
and or tax reduction.

My discussion earlier touched upon the
necessity for debt reduction. Certainly otir
Government has no more vigorous and ef-
fective advocates of fiscal Integrity and debt
reduction than the esteemed chairman and
distinguished members of this committee.
Many other thoughtful persons and groups
have urged upon us the necessity for such
debt reduction. In 1953 the Committee en
the Federal Debt printed Its recommenda-
tions In a book published by Prof. Charles
Abbot of Harvard. The committee had
been established as a 20th century fund
study. The committee was chalrmaned by
Arthur Upgren. professor of economics at the
University of Minnesota. The analysis mads
by Professor Abbot Is a very comprehensive
examination of the economic effects of our
national debt. Among the committee's con-
clusions was a very positive recommendation
for reduction of the national debt:

"Must the debt remain outstanding In such
large amounts? Would It not be better to
keep our National Government, on which our
safety as a people depends, unencumbered
so that It may be able to borrow again In
large amotmts with great ease at any emer-

gency? Even though the oommlttee recog-
nlzss the Impossibility of complete debt re-
tirement within generations. It does argue
for whitUlng down the debt whenever pos-
aible.

"This committee proposes that a program
be developed for the retirement of the Oov-
ernment debt. Such a program must be
flexible, and the committee recognizes that
It must be Improvised to mesh with the
economic conditiona of the times. Never-
theless, a fairly specific objective or formula
U needed if consistent progress Is to be made
toward the goal of retirement. • • •

"The committee maintains that any debt,
public or private, is a drag on the economy
unless it Increases the productive abilities
of the Nation. A productive asset Is the
source of new goods and new Income that
flow out to the community. The Income
generated by the productive asset pays In-
terect charges and amc»i;lzes the principal of
the debt. Contrariwise, a debt arising from
a nonproductive expenditure can be serviced
as to Interest charges and repayments only
by garnering and diverting Income from some
pixxluctlve resource elsewhere."

A few years ago a committee on public
debt policy was established as I mentioned
earlier by the Falk Foundation. The chair-
man of the distinguished committee was our
piesent Under Secretary of the Treasury, W.
Randolph Burgess. The committee Included
such familiar names as Bherwln Badger,
Marlon Ftolsom. H. B. Wells, George W. Smith.
Charles Abbot, to name Just a few. The
reports of the committee contained very
powerful conclusions of the necessity for
debt reduction:

"It Is therefore plain that the American
people should be seriously concerned about
their Nation's debt. The problem Is how to
make that concern effective, how we can live
safely with this gigantic obligation, with a
minimum of hardship and the least drain on
the vitality of our economy. We must be
realistic enough to face our fears, size up our
dangers, and decide what can be done to
avert them.

"And so, sudden catastrophe Is not the
real danger surrounding our national debt.
The biggest perils are more subtle, and they
are four: (1) The dilution of the dollar; (2)
the risk of boom and bust, (3) the smother-
ing of enterprise, (4) the loss of human free-
doms.

"To avert the four dangers Just discussed,
this country must have a clear-cut policy for
debt management. The program should
have two objects, either of which Is tiseless
unless the other Is realized. One Is expert
handling of the financial phases of the debt;
the other Is nourishment of a dynamic,
stable national economy. Even If we are
technically perfect In handling the debt, the
achievement Is futile unless the country is
financially strong, with a national Income
callable of the burden of debt service."

"Political pressure for spending and tax
reduction Is so great that much can be said
for setting up a fixed statutory requirement
for debt retirement. As pointed out in chap-
ter 2. the amount of debt retirement should
be related to the prosperity of the country,
and In a good year we ought to retire more
debt than In a bad one. Heavy retirement of
debt In prosperous times would be a check
to overexpanslon and Inflationary tendencies.
Contrariwise, a smaller retirement, or even a
temporary suspension of retirement. In times
of adversity would relieve some of the burden
of taxation and would help the processes of
recovery.

"Under any standards we ought to make
a gtxxl beginning at debt retirement in times
of boom prosperity."

An audit report to the Congress of July
1956 by the Comptroller General recom-
mended a review by Congress to consider
"the desirability of revising the machinery

for debt retirement on a more realistic b*-
8ls.-»

The Tax Foundation has made several

Tery enlightening studies of the problems of
debt retirement and among its distinguished
board are some of our Nation's leading ex-
perU in this field:

"There is evidence that there is more un-
derstanding and concern among citizens over
our Federal debt trends. • • •

"They know that Individual Integrity is
the cornerstone of individual credit, "fhey
are firm in their belief tliat national integ-
rity is likewise basic. Citizens tmquestion-
ably support the need for a reappraisal of
otir debt policy and the adoption of definite
plans for debt retirement.

"The time has arrived when a definite
though flexible debt-retirement policy should
be devised and followed. But it may be »
win-o'-the-wlap If not related to expendi-
ture control."

These citations represent but a few of the
many learned studies and recommendations
which have been made In recent years. By
far the best statement which has yet been
offered was made by our President Just a
year ago when he said:

"By no means do I believe they should cut
ttuces until we have made some little start
on reducing the enormous national debt.
There is such a thing as fiscal Integrity; I
don't care whether It is an Individual or a
nation."

And again in his economic report to the
Congress :

"In times like these we should bend our
thoughts to the desirability of debt reduc-
tion. Once a budgetary surplus comes defi-
nitely Into sight and economic conditions
continue to be favorable, vro should begin
reducing our huge public debt. Such an act
of fiscal integrity would signify with un-
mistakable clarity that our democracy is ca-
pable of self-dlsclpllne. It would add to the
confidence that people need to have in the
Government, If they are to plan boldly for
their own and their children's economic fu-
ture."

These are wise words.

I am confident that this proposal would.
If enacted, help to control the level of Fed-
eral erpendltures. Until we begin to make
a concerted and self-disciplined effort to
reduce systematically Federal expenses, not
only in this year's budget, but in each suc-
ceeding year's budget, we are only creating
an Illusion for our people when we speak of
tax reduction, economic stability, or reduced
public indebtedness.

Certainly the awareness on the part of the
American people for economy and efficiency
In the operations of their Government has
never been more clearly demonstrated than
in this session of Congress. I think we all
realize the necessity for achieving in each
year's budget review the greatest degree of
control possible over Federal spending.
There have been many worthwhile proposals
in this session to achieve this end. Here in
the Senate, we have already passed legisla-
tion for a special budget review committee.
We are actively seeking passage of legislation
for presenting budget estimates on an ac-
crued expenditure basis. In this connection,
and certainly very clearly related to these
proposals. It would seem that we would also
want to Institute a legislative mechanism
by which we could guarantee a relationship
between expenditures and revenue in each
year's budget. To the extent that this pro-
posal gives Congress greater control over the
distribution of Federal revenue, I believe
that it Is particularly timely not only as a
plan for debt reduction, but as a plan for

Cll

* Audit Report to the Congress of tlie
United States — Bevlew of use of cumulative
sinking fund for retirement of public obli-
gations fiscal years 1021 through 1955.

8788

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8789

ll

*

effective expenditure control. We have cer-
tainly recognized both the dangers and the
unpopularity of uncontrolled Federal spend-
ing.

Probably the moet imj>ortant criterion for
fiscal policy in Inflationary periods is a
budgetary surplus and an expenditure con-
trol. The public debt and budget deficits
add tremendously to the strain on our eco-
nomic resources when our economy Is being
pressured by a demand for goods and serv-
ices. These are economic facts which I need
not discuss In detail: they have been ably
demonstrated by the economists whom I
have earlier cited. I do wish to emphasize,
however, the necessity of directing our most
thoughtful efforts to the very real dangers
of Inflation. Those of us who recall the ter-
rible Inflations In Europe following the First
World War are keenly aware of the economic
hazards and the potential dl.tasters which
these phenomena represent. To the extent
that this proposal would control governmen-
tal expenditures and would begin to reduce
an enormous national debt, both of which
are powerful inflationary forces, we would b«
talcing a very slgnlflcant step forward In the
direction of protecting savings, preserving
the value of the dollar, and guarding against
the ultimate hazards of national bankruptcy.
The one thing which our Nation must
guard most carefully against Is certainly well
known to all of us In this room. The dan-
gers of communism do not come exclusively
from the posslbilltlea of military or armed
attack.

I should also like to ask the committee
then we are fully conscious of the real dan-
gers which we face in an economic struggle
with communism. For the security of our
Nation, it Is as necessary to be prepsu'ed with
national economic stability as It Is with
Intercontinental weapons. Economic stabil-
ity assures us that we can maintain our high
level of production, our high standard of
living, and our present Industrial potential.
Our economy Is presently as strong as It has
ever been; we must keep It this way and
strengthen It In every way possible. A policy
which Is designed to combat Inflation Is es-
sential for the economic welfare of our coun-
try, and. correspondingly. Is a weapon In our
hands against the economic penetration of
communism and Marxism

If we were to t)e thrust Into another major
war In the Immediate future, it goes without
saying that we would need to expend great
sums of money and undoubtedly to finance
our military effort with a deficit budget.
My concern Is that there would be an ade-
quate financial and productive reserve avail-
able to fight such a war. One way to be
sure that there will be is to begin nnw to
reduce systematically the debt which we
Incurred in the last war. I am not an econ-
omist, but It would certainly seeni that
there Is st)me maximum to the debt which
any nation can sustain Keeping In mind
our present high debt level, it Is a matter
of some concern as to how high we couM
Increase this debt if we necessarily had to
fight in another war. To reduce It now In
times of prosperity and time of great na-
tional productivity will help us to prepare
a reserve for the p<is.slbillty It again may b«
needed to protect the security of our Nation.
Just as expending money f'lr military pre-
paredness is essential for national defense.
s<) l.s conserving our economic resources
essential to ovir natlunal security.

I trust that this discussion has acquainted
Tou with the provisions of this blU. I trust
further that we have been able to convey to
you some of the motivations and purposes
which caused me to offer this legislation.
Bv no means do I contend that any single
propt)sal is an answer to all of our fiscal
problems. I do ask that this proposal be
considered as I believe It h.is considerable
merit. Is timely and Important. I am sure
there are many changes and additions which

those of you who have great experience In
this field can make to Improve the bill. I
believe that It la workable.

The legislative counsel who drafted thla
bin for me has studied It again and has
made a number of minor clerical revisions
which I would very much appreciate your
committee consider during your discussion
on this bill.

One objection which has been raised con-
cerning the operations of S. 1738 may have
considerable merit. It has been said with
reference to subsection (ei |3) of section 21.
which provides f(jr the suspension of this
bill when economic conditions threaten,
that the invocation of this provision could
have possible repercussions on the business
and financial world Inasmuch as such a
recommendation by the President might In-
dicate an approaching recession In business
activity. In view of this objection. I should
like to ask the committee to consider one
deletion of the word "necessary" on line 3.
of page 7 and in substitution thereof the
Inclusion of the word desirable"; and on
lines 4 and 5 ol page 7 the deletion oi tne
words "because of economic conditions ex-
isting or threatening." I think that such
a change might also be helpful In view of
the possible urgency of a war -preparedness
period during which It would be necessary
in the national interest to expend sums of
money for national defense, probably with
deficit financing. This provision thus
amended would cover a wide range of situa-
tions, not only economic but when military
preparedness is essential in contemplatloa
of open hostilities.

I should also like to ask the committee
to consider the inclusion of the addition of
a section at the end of this bill which
would amend the Budget and Accounting
Act to provide that the President Include
In each year's budget an Item of a sufficient
surplus of funds to cover the debt reduction
or tax reduction which would be brought
about by the reduced debt ceilings under
the terms of the act. This additional pro-
vision would insure that the budget sub-
mitted by the Executive in each year would
contain an item speclflcary reserved for debt
reduction so that the needed surplus to
effectively reduce the ceiling would be thus
appropriated.

I have put dates In the bill to give it sub-
stance, naturally these ds'es should be
made to conform with the schedule for the
bills consideration

I should like at this time to a.sk the com-
mlttees consent to read a few statements
In connection with this bill which I have
received from pers«)ns whose business it Is
to consider fiscal policies and money mat-
ters. I should also like the committees
consent to insert in the Record a selection
of editorials and commentaries which have
been published about S. 1738.

SYSTEM.^Tir RrofcTiov or Ptbiic Debt, S.

1738. SCN.\TOR SALTONST.^LI.

(Statement of Senator Allott before the
Senate Committee on Finance, June 11,
19571

Mr Chairman, everyone worries about the
national debt. S 1738 does something abr>ut
It — something constructive in terms of re-
ducing it I want to state my unequivocal
support of It. If I read my mall correctly.
I have s«)me solid backing In Colorado,

My very distinguished colleague from Mas-
sachusetts, in intnxluclng this bill made
very accurate observations in Justification of
this bill. He stated that controlled reduc-
tion of the national debt is essential to ( 1 )
reduce the tremendous sum required annu-
ally for payment of the Interest charges.
(2) to control Federal spending. (3) to pre-
pare for tax relief, (4) to combat Inflation,
and (5> to make us stronger for the eco-
nomic struggle in our fight to meet the

threat of communism. His analysis is so
obviously sound and complete that he leaves
little to b« said, but I want to add a few
thoughts atx}ut the disaster which I believe
lies St the end of the fiscal road we are now
traveling.

First I want to say that I am neither an
economist nor an expert on public finance.
And I do not know that Senator Balton-
STALL's bill Is the best one that can be de-
vised to deal with this problem. It may well
be that what Is needed Is a constitutional
rather than a statutory limitation. It may
also be that the timing and amount of debt
reduction should be altered. I only know
that the future of the Republic requires a
realistic lcx)k at the alarming delinquency
of present procedures for developing Congres-
sional flscal policy, with particular empha-
sis on control of spending and reduction of
debt. A 1955 report to Congress by the
Comptroller General (Audit Report to the
Congress of the United States. Review of Use
of Cumulative Sinking Fund for retirement
of Public Obligations. 1921-25) clearly states
the need for revising the machinery for
debt retirement on a more realistic basts.
That report goes on to note that Federal
debt policy has become increasingly impor-
tant In the trend of Government spending,
stability of the dollar's purchasing power,
and the general economic level.

A recent Independent committee study
pointed to 4 real perils surrounding our na-
tions! debt (1) The dilution of the dollar.
(2) the risk of boom and bust. (3) the
smothering of enterprise, and (4) the loss
of human freedom.

But our people have not needed a Govern-
ment agency to point out the hazards of
iRnor'.ng the »275 billion debt In hopes It
would go away. They know it won't. They
know that Interest pa>-ments on It account
for about one-tenth of our budget expendi-
tures They know that Individual Intefrlty
Is the basis for Individual credit and recog-
nize that national fiscal Integrity Is Just as
Important

Herbert Miller, who Is an expert on these
problems, stated the problem quite accurately
when he .said

"There Is evidence that there is more un-
derstanding and concern among citizens over
our Federal debt trends than U reflected by
Congressional action.^ Thla concern stems
from a basic understanding of human nature
born of intimate and close experience and
observation. Most Americans know that hu-
man needs and wants are practically un-
limited while resources to satisfy them are
relatively limited. When Oovernnient as-
sumes a role of providing for those unlimited
needs and wants, and competitive p>olltlcal
ambitions contend in outbidding and out-
promising each other to supply those wants,
they know the aggregate of Individual and
. proup wanu Is UKely to be more than avail-
able resources can meet prudently. If the
Immediate cost of supplying such wanU can
be deferred and dlffu-sed by using debt to
flnance them, prudent citizens know that
some harness Is needed In the Incurrence of
debt and some definite retirement policy
must invoke the flscal discipline of paying
our debts."

The debt which until recently had been
mounting steadily must be brought under ef-
fective control. In 1914 the debt was less
than tl billion. In 1940 only 949 billion, and
5 years later It had risen to t269 billion.
With great effort it has been contained at
ab<iut 8275 billion and even reduced slightly
during the past few years. This amount Is
far beyond what many economic thinkers
consider our peril point, that Is, the point
where the public's confidence In the Gov-
ernments ability to pay Its debts begins to
deteriorate. So the problem really Is one of
national secxirlty.

I think it is Interesting to note that only
five of these United States do not have con-

stitutional controls on deficit financing. In
1954 the average per capita debt of those
Btates which require constitutional amend-
menU was #43. The average per capita debt
for the 20 States which require a vote of the
people was MS. In contrast, for those eight
States which have no constitutional restric-
tions or minor ones, the average per capita
debt was $77. That there Is a need for con-
trol of public debt is evidenced by the num-
ber of States with such controls. And the
effectiveness of such controls Is nicely at-
tested by the comparative debt figures men-
tioned.

The extraordinary thing Is that there Is no
comparable constitutional control at the
Federal level. Perhaps our Founding Fathers
thought the operations of the Federal Gov-
ernment were so circumscribed that this
type control was unnecessary. But at this
point, it appears obvious that some control
is vital, and S. 1738 strikes me as an approach
to the problem that will do the job. at least
until someone suggests something better.

Mr. Chairman. I am concerned about the
fnct that we as Individual Members of Con-
gress do not really have an opportunity to
shoulder the responsibility for our flscal
operation. In this regard I am very much
interested in a proposal recently Introduced
by Senator Wn.«T and cosponsored by many
of my colleagues, providing for a Joint budget
committee and a legislative budget. I make
this point only to emphasize the obvious
fact that S 1738 does not solve, nor attempt
to solve all our fiscal problems. And It is not
clear how much progress we can make toward
H really sound fiscal operation until expendi-
ture control Is effectuated. But we must take
these problems one at a time, and I person-
hlly entertain no doubts that S. 1738 is es-
sential legislation, and strongly urge Its
favorable consideration by this committee.
We need flscal procedures which make the
Incurrence of debt an issue in each flscal
year and relate that issue to expenditures and
Income.

Without It our ship of state has too much
sail and too little anchor. T^e time has
arrived to adopt the flexible debt retirement
jxjlicy devised by my good friend from Mas-
sachusetts, with of course, such improve-
ments as I feel certain this committee can
develop.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
AND FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRA-
TION APPROPRIATION BILL. 1958

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I move that the Senate proceed to
the consideration of Calendar No. 422,
H. R. 7441. the agriculture appropriation
bill

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
rlerk will state the bill by title, for in-
formation.

The Chief Clerk. A bill (H. R. 7441)
making appropriations for the Depart-
ment of Agriculture and Farm Credit
Administration for the fiscal year ending
June 30. 1958, and for other purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion of
the Senator from Texas.

The motion was agreed to: and the
Senate proceeded to consider the bill,
which had been reported from the Com-
mittee on Appropriations with amend-
ments.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I should like to inform the Senate
that our present plan, when we complete
action on the Agriculture appropriation
bill, is to proceed to the consideration of
the independent-offices appropriation
bill. As all Senators know, we have a

convening hour set for tomorrow. 9:30
a. m., and the Senate will remain in ses-
sion late this evening, in order to get as
far along as possible.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, In the
consideration of the agricultural appro-
priation bill, I ask unanimous consent
that the committee amendments be
agreed to en bloc, that the bill as thus
amended be considered as original text
for the purpose of amendment, and that
no points of order be waived.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
it is so ordered.

The amendments agreed to en bloc are
as follows:

Under the heading "Department of Agri-
culture— Title I — Regular Activities — Agri-
cultural Research Service — Salaries and Ex-
penses." on page 3, line 1, after the word
"or", to strike out "3" and insert "5."

On page 3, line 6. after the word "stations",
strike out "$48,994,890" and insert "$58,-
794,890", and in the same line, after the
amendment Just above stated, to strike out
'Provided. That not to exceed $25,000 shall
be available for alterations of buildings,
without regard to limitations prescribed
herein" and Insert In lieu thereof "Provided,
That the limitations contained herein shall
not apply to $1,965,000 for the construction
of btiildings or to replacement of buildings
needed to carry out the act of April 24, 1948
(21 U. S. C. n3a);".

On page 3, at the beginning of line 17. to
strike out "$25,682,000" and insert
"$26,082,000."

Under the subhead "State Experiment
Stations." on page 4. line 25, after the word
"Agriculture." to strike out "$29,003,708"
and insert "$30,003,708," and on page 5,
line 3. after the word "all." to strike out
"$29,503,708" and insert "$30,503,708."

Under the subhead "Extension Service —
Cooperative Extension Work, Payment and
Expenses." on page 6. line 11. after "(69 Stat.
683-4)." strike out "$47,606,000" and insert
"$49,370,000," and in line 14, after the word
"all." to strike out "$49,101,000" and insert
"$50,865,000."

Under the subhead "Agricultural Market-
ing Service — Marketing Research and
Service," on page 8. at the beginning of line
8. to strike out "$14,041,700" and insert
"$14,141,700,"

On paee 8, line 21, after the word "States."
to strike out "$14,274,900" and insert
"$14,324,900."

Under the subhead "Foreign Agricultural
Service." on page 10, line 2. after "(70 Stat,
10341." to strike out "$3,902,300" and insert
"$4,052,300," and. in line 7. after the word
"basis." to Insert a colon and "Provided fur-
ther, That provisions of the act of August 1,
1956 (70 Stat. 890-892), and provisions of a
similar nature In appropriation acts of the
Department of State for the current and
subsequent fiscal years which facilitate the
work of the Foreign Service shall be appli-
cable to funds available to the Foreign Agri-
cultural Service."

Under the subhead "Office of the Secre-
tary." on page 15, at the beginning of line 14,
to strike out "$2,640,660" and insert "$2,664,-
060."

On page 16, after line 20, to strike out:

"SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION

"For necessary expenses to carry out soil
and water conservation programs authorized
In the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allot-
ment Act, as amended (16 U. S. C. 590a-
590q), the Watershed Protection and Flood
Prevention Act, as amended (16 U. S. C.
1001-1007). the Flood Control Act, as
amended and supplemented (33 U. S. C. 701-
709). subtitles B and C of the Soil Bank
Act (7 U. S. C. 1831-1837 and 1802-1814),

the acts of May 10, 1939 (53 Stat. 685. 719),
October 14, 1940 (16 U. S. C. 590y-z-10), as
amended and supplemented, June 28, 1949
(63 Stat. 277). and September 6, 1950 (7
U. 8. C. 1033-1039), $635 mlUlon. to remain
available until expended : Provided, That not
to exceed $40 million shall be avaUable for
administrative expenses in carrying out sec-
tions 7-17 of the Soil Conservation and
Domestic Allotment Act and subtitles B and
C of the Soil Bank Act of which not less than
$30 million may be transferred to the appro-
priation account "Local administration, sec-
tion 888, Agricultural Adjustment Act of
1938"; Provided further. That not to exceed
$7,200,000 shall be transferred to and merged
with the appropriation "Salaries and ex-
penses. Agricultural Research Service, Re-
search" for soil and water conservation
research, of which $1,200,000 shall be avaU-
able for construction of buildings and for
the acquisition of necessary land therefor,
and not to exceed $20,000 for alterations of
buildings, without regard to limitations
prescribed In this Act: Provided further.
That this appropriation shall be available
pursuant to title 5, United States Code,
section 565a, for the construction, alteration,
and repair of buildings and improvements,
but unless otherwise provided the cost of
constructing any one building shall not
exceed $10,000 and the cost of altering any
one building during the flscal year shall not
exceed $3,750 or 3 per centum of the cost of
the building, whichever is greater; not to
exceed $150,000 for employment pursuant
to the second sentence of section 706 (a)
of the Organic Act of 1944 (5 U. S. C. 574),
as amended by section 15 of the Act of
August 2. 1946 (5 U. S. C. 65a); and for
the temporary emplojrment of qualified local
engineers at per diem rates to perform the
technical planning work: Provided further.
That the unexpended balances of appro-
priations heretofore made for "Watershed
protection". "Flood prevention", and "Water
conservation and utilization projects" shall
be merged with this appropriation: Pro-
vided further. That programs included here-
under shall be subject to the following
additional provisions :

"Agricultural conservation program: This
appropriation shall be available for adminis-
trative expenses in connection with the
formulation and administration of the 1958
program of soil building and soli and water
conservation practices under sections 7 to
15. 16 (a) and 17 of the Soil Conservation
and Domestic Allotment Act, as emended
(amounting to $250 million, including ad-
ministration, and no participant Ehall re-
ceive more than $2,500, except where the
participants from two or more farms or
ranches join to carry out approved prac-
tices designed to conserve or Improve the
agricultural resources of the community ) ;
and for the purchase of seeds, fertilizers,
lime, trees, or any other farming material,
or any soil -terracing services and making
grants thereof to agricultural producers to
aid them in carrying out farming practices
approved by the Secretary under programs
provided for herein. Not to exceed 5 per-
cent of all the allocation for the 1968
agricultural conservation program for any
county may. on the recommendation of such
county committee and approval of the State
committee, be withheld and allotted to the
Soil Conservation Service for services of Its
technicians in formulating and canylng out
the agricultural conservation program in the
participating counties, and shall not be util-
ized by the Soil Conservation Service for
any purpose other than technical and other
assistance in such counties, and In addition,
on the recommendation of such county com-
mittee and approval of the State committee,
not to exceed one percent may be made
available to any other Federal. State, or local
public agency for the same purpose and
under the same conditions.

:%

8790

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

if

ifi

11

"Conservation reserve program : No part of
this appropriation shall be used to enter
Into contract* with producers which to-
gether with contracts already entered Into
would require payments to producers (In-
cluding the cost of materials and services)
In excess of 1250 million In any calendar
year, and for purposes of applying this limi-
tation, practice payments shall be charge-
able to the Qrst year of the contract period.
"ConEervatlon operations. Soil Conserva-
tion Service: This appropriation shall be
available for preparation of conservation
plans and establishment of measures to
conserve soil and water (Including farm Ir-
rigation and land drainage and such spe-
cial measures as may l>e necessary to pre-
vent flotxls and the slltatlon of reservoirs! :
operation of conservation nurseries: and
classification and mapping of foIIs Provided
further That In the State of Missouri, where
the State has established a central Stat©
agency authorized to enter Into agreements
with the United States or any of it3 agen-
cies on policies and general pr<'.i;rams for
the savlr.j; of Its soil by the extension of
Federal aid to any soil conservation di3«
trlct In such State imder sections 1 to 6 of
the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allot-
ment Act. .=«s amended, the a.rreements m.ide
by or on behalf of the United States with
any such soil conservation district shall have
the prior approvr.I of such central State
agency t>efore they shall becum.e effective as
to such district.

"Plo^d prevent! -n ■ No part of the fur.ds ex-
pended in accordance with the Flood Cm-
Irol Act, p.s am-^nded and supplemented,
shall be used f t the purrh.<\^e of lands m
the Yazoo and I.itrle Tallahatchie water-
sheds without specific approval of the county
board of supervisors of the county in which
such lands are situated "'

On page '1\. after hne 3. to insert

"sort, CONSERVATION SERVl'^I

"Conseri-ation operation-t

"For necessary expanses fi>r carrying out
the provisions of the act of .April 27. 19J5
(16 U S C 590a-590fi. Including prennra-
tlon of con'-ervation plans and establish-
ment of measures to conserve soil and water
(Including farm Irrigation and land drain-
age and such special niea.surt^s as mav be
necessary t<' prevent floods and the sllta-
tlon of reservoir? I ; operation of conserva-
tion nurseries, classification and mapping
of trolls; dissemination of inf srination. pur-
chase and erectlor. or alteration of perma-
nent building?; and operation and main-
tenance of aircraft, $73,545,003: Provided.
That the 'cost of any permanent building
purchased, erected, or as imp'->.ived. exclu-
sive of the cost of construct inij: a water
supply or sanitary system and connecting
the same to any such building and with
the exception of buildings acquired in con-
junction with laud be:ng purchased f :r
other purposes, shall not exceed t2,.'J00, ex-
cept for el£;ht buildings to be constructed
or imprn-ed at a cost not to exceed $15,000
per bulldmj; and except that alteralion^s or
improvements to other existlnt: permanent
biiildiiigs costing $2.oC0 or n: re m<.v be
m »de in any fl<cnl year In an amount n a
to exceed 8600 per building P'mded fur-
the'. That no p^rt of tins appropriation
shall be available fur the construction of
any such buildine on land not owned by
the Government Proitded fwth^r. That In
the State of Missouri, where the Sta'e has
established a ceirral State agency author-
ized to eater into a;.^reemen-s with ihe
United States or any of its agencies on pol-
t'Ues and general programs f.r the saving of
1-3 soil by the exLen.slon of Federal aid to
any soil conservation district In such State,
the asrrecments made by or on behalf of
the United States with any such soli con-
eervarion district shall have the prior ap-
proval of stich cent-al State agency bef-.Ve
they shall btc^me elTeciive aa to such dis-

trict: Frmided further, Ttiat no part of this
appropriation may t>e expended for soil and
water conservation operations under the
act of April 27. 1935 (IS U. S. C. 590a-590f).
In demonstration projects: Provided fur-
ther. That not to exceed $5,000 may be tised
for employment pursuant to the second
sentence of section 706 (ai of the Organic
Act of 1944 i5 U. S C 574). as amended by
section 15 of the act of August 2. 1946 (5
U, 3. C. 55a I : Provided further. That quali-
fied local engineers may be temporarily em-
ployed at per diem rates to perform the
itclmlcal ju.innlng work of the service."
At the top of pa:?e 23. to Insert;

"W\TnR«:HrD PROTECTION

"For expenses necessary to conduct sur-
veys. Invcstlgattonj, and research and t<i
carry out preventive n;e:\^ures. including,
but not limited to, engineering opcratlon.'5,
metlKxis of cultu vtlon. the growing of vege-
tation, and chant'es In u.se of land. In ac-
cordance with the Watershed Pmcctlon and
Fl '.id Prevention Act. approved Aiigu.st 4.
1951 (16 U. S. C 1001-10071, and the pro-
visions of the act of April 27, 19 i5 ( 18
U. S C 59lI\ 5yuf». to remain .ivailable
until extx-nded, $2,t,6C.0.OC0. wuh which
shall be mergtxl tiie unexpended balances of
funds here: ii\>re apprt)pr.a:ed or transferred
U^ the D'»partment for v. af.'^hed pr-'tecf.on
purposes "

On pa^e 23 after line 12. to insert:

•'n-OOD PRETVEVTIOM

"F ir expenses necessary. In ai-cordance
w:th the Flo.>d C mtrol Act. appr- ved June
22, 19J6 i33 U S C 7'Jl 701). a5 an.endcd
and supplemented, and in accrdance with
the provisions "f l.iws relating to the acUM-
t.es of the department, to perform works
of Improvement. Including not to exceed
$100,000 for employment pursuant to the
second sent-^nce of section 706 lai of the
Orgmlc Act of 11*44 (5 U S C 5741. as
amended by section 15 of the act of August
2. lJ4f> .5 U S C 55a>. to rem un available
until expended $13. 22(^000. with which shall
be merged the unexpended balances of funds
hcrcofnre appropriated or transferred to the
department f<ir flo<>d pre\entlon purp-oses-
Pruiided, That no part i.f such funds shall
be used for the purchase of lando In the
Yaz.x) and Lit'le TalLihatchte wi.terrheds
without spec'flc approval of the county
b.>ard of supervisors of the county in »hlch
such lands are situated ""

On pa.;e 24. after line 6, to Insert-

w\ri.a caNsi:a\MiON *no UTin;:,\Ticif

FBOJCiTi

"For expen.'-es necessary to carry out the
functloua of the Department under the ac ts
of May 10. 1933 i 53 Stat. 635, 719). October
14. ICiO 1 16 U S C 5yOy-z lui. as arn. iidcd
and suppi'-menf^d. June 28, 19 U) (63 slat.
277 1, and September 6. I9.S0 (7 U S C 1033-
1039 1. relating to water conservation ai:d
utinitatK.il projects, tj rem.ain available until
exptuidcd. $)j0.L»Ou. which sum shull be
nitr^'cd with the unexpended balances of
fuiKli heretof ire appropriated to said De-
partment for thf purix:).«e of ^.aid acts ■

Oa page 24. alter line 16. to insert

"CttE.^T PI_\IN3 CCNSrav.\TI0N FKOCRAM

"Fur necessary expenses to carry Into ef-
fect a program of conservation In the Great
Plains ana, pursuant to section 16 ibi of the
Soil Cmstrvatlon and D..mestic .Allotment
Act, as added by the act of August 7. 19.S6
(70 Stat. 1115-J117), $lu million, to remain
uv.iilable un*;I expended "

On page 21. after line 22, to Insert:

"aGRIC: LTtS-AI. CO.VSERVATION PROGRAM SERVICE

"For nece.ssrtry expenses to carrv Into ef-
fect the program authorized In sections 7
to 15. 16 lai, and 17 of the Soil Conserva-
tion and Domestic Allotment Act. approved
February 29. 1936, as amended (16 U S C.
590g 590 (oi. sWp ia:-,S90q). Including not
to excefxl fo.OOO for the preparation and dis-

play of exhibits. Includli^ such displays at
State. IntersUte. and International fairs
within the Unlt«d States; $212,000,000. to re-
main available until December 31 of the
next succeeding fiscal year for compliance
with the program of soll-buildlng and soU-
and water-conserving practices authorized
under this head In the Department of Agri-
culture and Farm Credit Administration Ap-
propriation Act. 1957. carried out during the
pert(xl July 1. 1956. to December 31. 1957.
Inclusive: Proi'tded. Tliat not to exceed $24,-
698,000 of the total sum provided under this
head shall be available during the current
fiscal year for adminlst.-ntlve expenses for
carrying out such program, the cost of aerial
photographs, however, not to be charged to
such limitation: but not mo.e than $5,025.-
8«X) shall be transferred to the appropria-
tion account Administration expenses, sec-
tion 392. Agricultural Adiustnient Act of
1938" Provided further. That none of the
funds herein appropriated shall be used to
pay the Fhlarles or expenses of any regional
Information emplnye^^s or any State Infor-
mation employees, but this shall not pre-
clude the an.sv.erlng of Inquiries or sup-
plying of liif.>rinatlon at the c .untv level to
individual farmers; Provided further. That
such amou: t shall be available for admin-
istrative exi)enres In connection with the
form.ulation and administration of the 19j3
program of soll-buildlng and soil- and water-
conserving practices, under the act of Febru-
ary 29. ly3ti, as amended (amounting to
$260 000.000, including administration, and
no participant shall receive mire than
$1,500. ex'cpt where the participants from
two or more farms or ranches J(.ln to carry
out approved practices designed to conserve
or improve the agricultural resources of
tlie community I Proi id.ri further. That not
to exceed 5 percent of the allocation for
the 11*58 astrlcultural conservation program
for anv county may. on the recomendatJon of
such county committee and approval of the
.state committee, be withheld nnd allotted
to the Soil Conservation Service for serv-
ices of Its technicians In formulating and
carrying out the agricultural conservation
prugrim in the partlclp:-.ting counaea. and
shall not be utilized by the Soil Conserva-
Uon Service for any purp<jse other than
lecnn.ca' and utJier assistance m such coun-
ties, and in addition, on the recommenda-
tion of {.uch county committee and approval
of the State committee, n it to exceed 1 per-
cent may be made available to any other
Federal. Stale, or l<x;al public agency for
the same purpose and unjer the .•■amc cn-
rtiilons P'o- -.ded t\-ther. That for the 1958
pr gram $2 Suo.OOO shall b.? available for
technical assistance In formulating and
carrying out agricultural cuni^rvation prac-
tices and $1.0-30.000 shall be available for
conscrvatl(.n pract.ces related directly tj
flood prevention work In approved water-
sheds: P-nvtded fwther. That such amounts
fh.i.I be available fwr the purclia.-e of seeds.
fertilizers, lime, trees, or any other farming
material, or any s<.il-terraclng services, and
making grants thereof to agricultural pro-
ducers to aid them In c.irrying out farming
practices appr<jvcd by the Secretary under
programs provided for herein: Prriidcd
further. That no part of any funds avail-
able to the Department, or any bureau, office.
c orpi 'af.oii or cher aprency constituting a
part of such Department, shall be used In
the carrei t fiscal year for the payment of
salary or travel expenses of any person who
has been convicted of violating the Act
entitled An act to prevent pernicious poliU-
c.il activities.' approved August 2. 1939. as
amended, or who has been found In ac-
cordancj uith the provisions of title 18.
United States Code, section 1913. to have
violated or attem.pted to violate such section
which prohibits the u.se of Federal appro-
prt.Ttlons for the payment of persona' serv-
ices or other expenses designed to Influence

8791

In any manner • Member of Congress to fav-
or or oppose any legislation or appropriation
by Congress except upon request of any
Member or through the proper official chan-
nels,"
At the top of page 28, to Insert:

"SOIL-BANK PSOGEAMS

"Conservation reserve proffram
"For necessary expenses to carry out a
conservation reserve program as authorized
by subtitles B and C of the Soil Bank Act
(7 U. S. C. 1831-1837 and 1802-1814), $162.-
940.000: Provided, That not to exceed $18.-
000.000 shall be available for administrative
expenses of which not less than $13,500,000
may be transferred to the appropriation ac-
count, "Local administration, section 388,
Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938": Pro-
vided further. That no part of this appro-
priation shall be used to enter into contracts
with producers which together with con-
tracts already entered Into would require
payments to producers (Including the cost
of materials and services) in excess of $350,-
000,000 In any calendar year, and for pur-
poses of applying this limitation, practice
payments shall be chargeable to the first
year of the contract period : Provided fur-
ther, That the sverage annual rental pay-
ment per acre shall not exceed $7.50 per
acre for conservation reserve contracts en-
tered Into 30 days after approval of this act."
On page 28, line 21, In the subhead after
the word "Acreage." to strike out "Reserve.
Boll bank" and Insert "Reserve program."

On page 29, line 2, after the fl^gures "$600,-
000,000." to strike out "Provided. That no
part of this appropriation shall be used to
formulate and administer an acreage reserve
pi gram with respect to the 1958 crops, or in
t<jtal compensation being paid to any one
producer In excess of $2,500 with respect to
the 1968 crops", and. in lieu thereof, to Insert
•Provided. That not to exceed $34,600,000 of
the total sum provided under this head shall
be available for administrative expenses:
Prorided further. That no part of this appro-
priation shall be used to formulate and ad-
minister an acreage reserve program which
would result In total compensation being
paid to producers in excess of $500,000,000
wuh respect to the 1958 crops, or In total
compensation being paid to any one pro-
ducer In excess of $5,000 with respect to the
1958 crops."

Under the heading "Title II — Corpora-
tions— Limitation on Administrative Ex-
penses", on page 30. line 17. after the word
"exceed", to strike out "$34,398,000" and In-
sert ■•$35,398,000."

Mr. MORSE. Mr, President, a par-
liamentary inquiry.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator will state it.

Mr. MORSE. I did not understand
the last part of the request, about no
points of order.

Mr. RUSSELL. The reason for in-
cluding that in the unanimous-consent
request, to be perfectly frank with the
Senator from Oregon, is that there is
one amendment which is subject to a
point of order. I did not wish to have
any Senator say I took advantage of
him by having Incorporated in the bill
under a unanimous-consent request an
amendment which he could not reach
by a point of order.

Mr. MORSE. I misunderstood the
language. It can be reached.

Mr, RUSSELL. It can be reached, and
that is the purpose for Including the
statement in the unanimous-consent re-
quest.

Mr. MORSE, I wish to accommodate
myself to the wishes of the Senator from

Georgia. I have a few questions I should
like to raise about the committee report.
The questions will of course relate to
some Items in the committee report.
Does the Senator prefer to have me wait
until the Senate goes over the bill
amendment by amendment?

Mr, RUSSET J. Mr. President, I wish
to make a very brief statement with
respect to the over-all size and compo-
sition of the bill. I do not think it will
take more than 5 to 8 minutes. Then
I shall be delighted to refer to any item
in the bill in which any Member of the
Senate Is interested.

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Georgia yield for a
request?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. ANDERSON. I have been tied
up in another conference which I must
attend, I wonder if the Senator from
Georgia would mind permitting me to
take 2 or 3 minutes on another subject,

Mr. RUSSELL. If the Senator does
not think it will take any longer than
that I shall be happy to yield.

Mr, ANDERSON, Not over 5 minutes.
I thank the Senator from Georgia.

THE JOHNSON DOCTRINE

Mr. ANDERSON, Mr. President, there
have been many comments on the daring
and Imaginative proposal which the
majority leader made in New York last
Saturday night,

I rise to add my voice to the com-
mendations which his address has re-
ceived. But I wish to go further and
comment on what appears to me to be
the heart of his proposal.

For a number of years, I have been
closely associated with the atomic en-
ergry program, I have followed the de-
velopment of the atom from a horrible
weapon of destruction to a horrible
weapwn of total annihilation.

It Is my considered opinion that the
nations of the world must find some
means of controlling the atomic arms
race — or run head on into catastrt^he.

From the very beginning, the United
States has consistently followed the pol-
icy of trying to bring the atom under
control. We have been generous — more
generous than any other nation in his-
tory— in our proposals.

We offered to share all the secrets of
the atom at a time when we had a mo-
nopoly. We offered arms reduction.
We offered mutual inspection.

Every proposal has been turned
down — either rejected flatly or lost in
endless haggling.

I have little hope that future proposals
will be accepted until we find ways and
means of cracking the Iron Curtain,
And there can be no halt in the arms
race, no end to the present pattern, until
we can find mutually acceptable pro-
posals.

Mr. President, that is why the pro-
posal of the majority leader Is so ap-
pealing to me.

I am convinced that we must find a
means of limiting nuclear explosions im-
der conditions that guarantee the mu-
tual security of all nations.

I am convinced that the Communists
would not be able to reject reasonable

and honorable proposals cynically if
their people knew the truth.

I am convinced that we caimot bring
the truth to their people unless we find
some way of breaking through the Iron
Curtain.

The majority leader proposes to use
the Khrushchev broadcast as a tech-
nique for penetrating the curtain that
seals out truth. That would represent
a bold and daring response to the
Khrushchev broadcast — and we need
bold and daring reactions,

Mr. President, the Johnson doctrine
is one that appeals to all Americans
who think it through.

It is based on confidence in the
strength and vitality of this country. It
rejects timidity and the concept that
we are helpless in the face of disaster.

Mr. William H, Stringer, chief cor-
respondent for the Washington Bureau
of the Christian Science Monitor, com-
mented at length on the proposal yes-
terday,

I ask unanimous consent that the ar-
ticle by this distinguished commentator
and analyst be printed in the body of
the Record as a part of my remarks.

There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows :

Lyndon Johnson, Statesman
(By William H. Stringer, chief, Washington

bureau, the Christian Science Monitor)

Washington. — It is not simple for the Dem-
ocratic majority leader in the Senate to dou
the full toga of bipartisan statesmanship.
His first Job Is to shepherd legislation through
that august upper chamber, to give it a Dem-
ocratic flavor, to write a farseelng record on
which his p>arty can run In the next election.

But Ltndon B. Johnson, the Senate ma-
jority leader, In a quite remarkable speech
at New York, has sounded an eloquent plea
for Imagination In foreign policy, for getting
on with the disarmament negotiations with
Moscow, and for boldness In a radio-TV ex-
change of ideas between the United States
and the Soviet Union,

And, noting the way in which this plea
parallels and supports what President Elsen-
hower Is trying to do in the difficult, pains-
taking field of disarmament, Washington Is
immediately reminded of Senator Walter P.
George and how be cleared a "space for ma-
neuver" around the President before the
Evmimlt conference at Geneva and at the
time of the Formosa resolution. And one
thinks of the late Senator Arthur H. Vanden-
berg and his conversion to Internationalism
and how this so markedly saved the day In
the United States Senate for Marshall plan
aid and the NATO alliance.

Senator Johnson made his New York
speech, before the United Jewish Appeal, at
a moment when President Eisenhower
needs domestic allies in his endeavor to ex-
plore the prospects of first-step disarmament
with the Soviet Union.

Adm, Arthur W. Radford, Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has declared that
the Soviets cannot be trusted in any sort of
agreement. The Chairman of the Atomic
Energy Commission, Lewis L, Strauss, has
stressed many technological reasons why
genuine disarmament is next to impossible.
Without Mr, Elsenhower's own wish to wage
peace, disarmament expert Harold E. Stas-
sen's hands would be almost impossibly tied,
at the London talks, and indeed he already
has had to return to Washington for further
talks because of snags In the dlsctisslons.

This is a significant moment In Soviet-
American relations. It is a time for caution.
as always. But it may also be a moment

, ;|

■: .

'. ]

i I

8792

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8793

\M

when careful diplomacy can make som©
headway on the arnM-controI front. And
It Is a moment when th<? breach In the Iron
Curtain represented by the Khrushchev m-
dlo-televLslon Interview a week ac;o can con-
ceivably be exploited Into a larger exchange
of fusillades In this "war of Ideas."

Into this picture strides Senator Johnsov
With a speech in which he urgently calls for
action on Ave phases of disarmament, most
of them closely approxlrrwiclng the Elsen-
hower administrations own thinking and
proposals. Thus the Senatcr from Tex;is
thn-ws his powerful weight lnferent;.iily
against those who would so hedge and re-
strict Mr. Stassen at London that he could
not reach a flrst-strp arms-control agree-
ment this side of the next appearance of
Halley's comet.

Controlled reduction of military forces,
a start on the "open skies ' Inspection sys-
tem, a search for methixls of suspenditi^
tests of the big weapons, a reduction In nu-
clear-weapons stockpiles, and a global agree-
ment not to make new fissionable materta'.s
for weapons — by the present atomic powers
and tne "fourth nations." Uk> — tiese are the
Johnson prop<isa!s.

Simultaneously, he makes an Imastma-
tlve bid for reciprocal exchange of broad-
casts through the Iron Curtain — In which
the United States would present It.s own
ca.se on disarmament In det.ill to the Sovlf't
people via Soviet radio and television I;i
return the Soviet leaders would be allowed
to bruadcast ov?r the American networks.

Let the reciprocal broadoa-sts be every
week of the year If need be. says Senator
Johnson

Th!s address was a useful contrlbuMin ti
American p"Ucy It should stir American
thlnkh-.g The administration should wel-
come It It Is the voice of a new and wide-
vlslored T<*xas. It l.s the voice of the St»n-
ate In Its most thoughtful traditions It Is
the view of a Senator whose energies, dedi-
cation and general.'^hlp have given his or!n-
lons grtat weight In that gentlemen's club.

If Senat.-ir John-^on corMnu^-'s tn this vein,
he will help blp-^rtlsanship where it mi 't
needs helpinT- He has already bmught a
JelTer^-onian breath cf fearless mental Trre-
dnm Into the current worry about whethT
Mr Khrtnhcbpv'3 talk cr>:;tMmlnated the
American peop:e Of the Khruihchev de-
marche Senator Johnson savs:

"I am glad he did so I have crmple'e
trust and faith In our penp'.e. • • •
Khrtishchev Is not going to convert the lean,
spare Texan who runs the cattle on m.y
ranch Into a Communist. He's Just plain
got too much sense "

Mr. MANSFIELD Mr. President, will
the Senator yield to me''

Mr ANDERSON I will yield to the
able Senator from Montana, if the able
Senator from Georgia will permit me
to do so.

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. MANSFIELD Mr. President. I
wish to ask the Senator from New Mex-
ico, the former Chairman of the Joint
Committee on Atomic Enertry. and at the
present time the rankinK member and
vice chairman of the committee. If I
understood correctly that what he said
on the matter of the suspension of bomb
tests was not to call for a total suspen-
sion, but instead for a multilateral sus-
pension above a certain level of strength?

Mr ANDERSON. Ye.s. I wish to sav
to the able Senator from Montana. I
wa5 in support of the proposals made
by scientists. We know the safe level
of fissionable material which can be put
In the atmosphere by all countries. It is
something in the neighborhood of from

4 mepaton.; of fission products to 10
mei?atons of fission products. Some-
where in between is the safe limit. I
have said that so long as we stay within
the 4 to 10 metcatons of fission prod-
ucts— not the totaJ tonnage of bombs.
but of fission products — we ought to be
able to secure an International a^rree-
ment amons Russia, Britain, and our-
selves, which would still leave plenty of
room to test all of the devices now being
tested at Las Vegas proving ground or
in the far Pacific, all of the devices the
Ru.^.-^ians want to test, and all the devices
the Briti'^h want to test, provided we try
to u.se cleaner bombs — not totally clean
bombs, but cleaner bombs than we have
been u.smg, I believe it can be done. It
should be done. I believe this country
ought to move boldly in that direction.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I thank the Sen-
ator.

Mr CHAVEZ. Mr. President, jcill the
Senator yield'

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the
Senator frrm Georgia yield to the Sena-
tor from New Mexico''

Mr RUSSELL I vield.

Mr CHAVEZ. I like the statement
maile by my colleague from New Mexico.
I think he is correct. But I would not
want thp Senate to understand now
that what he tlunks is right and what
I think is rii^ht. as to what the people
of New Mexico are thinking, correctly
reflects tl.eir views. I do not know,
and I de ire to make this statement for
that vry reason. While we appreciate
the statement made by the junior Sena-
tor from New Mr-xico. and I agree with
it complet-'iy, I do not know whether it
ref.ects the feeling of the people of my
State.

AGRICULTT-RAI. AND FARM CREDIT
ADMINISTRATION APPROPRIA-
TIONS. 19J3

The Senate re.-;umed the con.sidera-
tion of the bill .H R. 7441' making ap-
propriations for th» Department of
Agriculture and Farm Credit Admin-
istration f( r the fiscal year endin^'
June 30. 1958. and for other purpo.-es.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. Pn>sident, I de-
sire to make a very brief statement to
the Senate to explain the reasons why
this bill IS pre.sented to the Senate In
such a .substantial amount over the ap-
propriations for fiscal year 1957.

The bill which is before the Senate at
the piesent time includes, for ail pur-
poses— expenditures for loan*, and to
restore the impaired capital stock of the
Commodity Credit Corporation— the
total sum of S3.668.732.157. The amount
of the appropriation for the cunent
fiscal year was $2,026,689 968

Thi.^ IS the Largest agricultural appro-
priation bill which has been presented
to the Senate, certainly, since the days of
the processing tax and the large pay-
ments which was made in the early
thirties to the farmers.

Mr President, it may look a.^ if it Is a
very large appropriation— and it Is. In-
ured as we have become to large expend-
itures, a sum in excess of $3 6 billion l.s
a great deal of money. But I wish to
point out to the Senate that the appro-
priations carried by the bill, large as

they are, are $550,714,000 below the
original estimates which were submitted
to the Congress by the Bureau of the
Budget. That reduction came about be-
cause of the fact that the President him-
self reduced the budget estimate for the
soil bank by $254 million, and the Senate
committee has reported a bill which is
$296,714,460 below the revised budget,
and $24,157,600 below the amount of ap-
propriations carried in the bill as it
came to us from the other body.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
President, will tlie Senator yield very
briefly?

Mr. RUSSELL. I am glad to yield to
the distinguished Senator from South
Dakota.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I hope it
will not be considered out of order for me
to tell the Senate that some years ago,
in the House of Representatives, Repre-
sentative James W. Wadsworth, of New
York, who previously had served in the
Senate, when an appropriation bill for
the Department of Agriculture, in carry-
ing large sums, came before tlie House,
reminded that body of the time when his
father, a former Representative from the
State of New York, came home one day
shaking his head. Jim Wadsworth's
mother asked, "What is the trouble?"
And the elder Wadsworth said, "You
know, we passed an appropriation bill
for the Department of Agriculture today
that ran to $25 million. "

Mr RUSSELL. That was prior to the
days of the fir^t billion-dollar budget,
I .suppose, when Czar Reed .said that this
was a billion -dollar cjuntrj-. We have
now reached the point where It is a $73
billion countiy budgetwise; and, on the
basis of expenditures of allocated funds.
It Is much nearer an $80 billion country
each year

I .sometimes fear that the fl-rurcs ha«e
become .«o astronomical that the averas*
Member of this body, including the pres-
ent speaker, cannot fully comprehend
their magnitude. Sometimes we deal
with them more as a line of digits than
as dollars which the American taxpayer
must contribute in order to meet the
cost of Government

Mr. Piesident, I wish to deal briefly
with the rea.son why the appropriations
for the fl.scal year 1958 are so substan-
tially lar'i^r than they were for the fiscal
year 1957.

Of the increase which I mentioned,
namely. $1,642,000,000 there Ls $763 mil-
lion for the soil bank We did not ap-
propriate for it for the year 1957. for
the soil-bank program. This bill carries
$763 million for next year for the soil
bank and $473 million will be required
next year to replenish the capital stock
of the Co^nmodlty Credit Corporation.
It will be recalled that when we passed
the soil-bank provision last year we
made no appropriation for its operation.
We placed a limitation on the total
amount which could be expended, but
we gave the Department of Agriculture
wide discretion, and told them to operate
the program through the Commodity
Credit Corporation, with the full knowl-
edge of every Member of Congress that
It would be necessary to restore the
capital of the Commodity Credit Cor-
poration.

I wish to point out that, excluding the
soil bank program, thia bill carries only
about a $9 Mi million Increase for the reg-
ular activities of the Department, over
and above the sum that was available for
the current year. The largest part of
that item — indeed, practically all of It —
is for research in various fields.

We allowed the Extension Service an
increase of $1,764,000 above its appro-
priation for the current year. That is
substantially less than the budget esti-
mate, but it represents an Increase in the
amount which it had for the current
year.

For the payments to State experiment
stations we allowed an increase of $1
million.

Mr. BARRETT. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr, RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. BARRETT. For the purpose of
expanded utilization research on wool. I
am very much interested in the item for
the Western Regional Research Labora-
tory at Albany, Calif. I should like to
inquire if provision Ls made under the
item of $58,794,800 on page 3 of the bill
for Agricultural Research Service of
$400,000 to obtain about 30 items of ex-
perimental equipment and for additional
personnel to conduct wool research proj-
ect.s during fiscal 1958 and another item
of $105,000 for the building. The equip-
ment wiU be used to convert the raw wool
into finished products.

Mr. RUSSELL. There is $105,000 for
the pilot wool plant, to be constructed at
Albany. Calif. I do not have the opera-
tion figure, but I think it is approximately
the figure given by the distinguished
Senator from Wyoming.

Mr. BARRETTT. I appreciate the con-
sideration given by the committee to this
Item. I think it is a very wise provision
in the bill.

There is one other item about which I
am very much concerned. I refer to the
item on page 4, line 17. for the Meat In-
spection Service. It seems to me that the
effect of that provision will be that the
Department will be required to reduce its
force considerably.

Mr. RUSSELL. No. The Senator is
in error about that. The Department
will not be compelled to reduce its force,
because the proposed appropriation is
the same net amount which it had last
year for this purpose. The Department
has gone to the Civil Service Commission
to ask for upgrading of positions, to pro-
vide an increase in salaries for meat In-
spectors. If It applies an Increase In
salaries it will have to reduce its force.
That is not the result of congressional
action. In recent years that has become
a very popular way to obtain salary in-
creases. The Department will upgrade a
position and say, "This is a more impor-
tant position than we thought it was for
25 years. We will spell out about eight
pages of fine print describing the duties
to the Civil Service Commission." As a
result, salaries for the various positions
are upgraded two or three thousand dol-
lar.s. and when Congress comes to make
appropriations the next year it wonders
why all the increases have occtirred. The
Congress has been bad enough about in-
creasing salaries; but when we find It
done by this wholesale method, through

the Civil Sendee Commission, it is doubly
bad.

Mr. BARRETT. I should like to ask
the Senator if the Increases rec(xnmend-
ed by the Civil Sendee Commission are
not in fact mandatory on the Depart-
ment.

Mr. RUSSELL. I do not so under-
stand.

Mr. BARRETT. I am given to under-
stand that they are mandatory, and that
it is necessary for the Department to put
them into effect.

The Classification Act of 1949 author-
izes the Civil Service Commission to set
job standards and under sections 501,
502, and 503, I am advised that these
standards are mandatory on the depart-
ments.

It seems to me that the Senator ought
to take into consideration the fact that
the grades under which the inspectors
are working at present are extremely low,
I do not know of any employees in the
legislative branch who start at grade 3,
at $3,175 a year.

The next, grade 4, Is $3,400, and grade
5 is $3,670.

Mr. RUSSELL. How many of them
actually receive any such salaries? The
Senator well knows that he has given
the minimum salary. In most cases
that applies for only 6 months. Then
the Department starts to increase sala-
ries. Does the Senator have before him
the figure representing the average
salary of those engaged in meat inspec-
tion work?

Mr. BARRETT. I have not.

Mr. RUSSELL. I think it is approxi-
mately $2,000 more than the figiu-e the
Senator has given.

Mr. BARRETT. I do not know about
that, but I do know that grades 3 to 5
run from $3,175 to $3,670. The Civil
Service Commission recommends that
these men be started at $3,670. I submit
to the distinguished Senator that if the
Department is required to place these
recommendations of the Civil Service
Commission into effect, there is no alter-
native except to reduce the meat inspec-
tion force. I understand that that
would Involve a reduction of from 100 to
125 inspectors over the country.

Mr. RUSSELL. We had no such evi-
dence before us.

Representatives of the Department ap-
peared before us and lu-ged that the
appropriation be Increased so that, for
the first time, the Government would
assimie the cost of buying white cloth-
ing for the inspectors to wear. No
statute authorizes the purchase by the
Government of such clothing. We en-
acted a special statute in order to buy
uniforms for mail carriers and some
others. It may be desirable for us to
give the meat inspectors white suits.
There Is no statute authorizing it; but
the Department added several hundred
thousand dollars for that purpose. It
asked for several hundred thousand dol-
lars in order that It might apply the
Increased salary scale, and it asked for
a substantial amount to employ new
inspectors.

Mr. BARRETT. There Is no question
about that. To take care of the esti-
mated additional workload, the Depart-
ment asked for $1,212,000 to provide for

192 additional man-years of employ-
ment, but that request was not granted.
I also understand that the request, with
reference to uniforms, was not granted,
either.

Mr. RUSSELL. No; It was not. The
Senator from Georgia will oppose it as
long as he can stand here. He will op-
pose any such policy of having depart-
ment officials ask for money for an item
that is not authorized by law.

Mr. BARRETT. If the force is re-
duced by 120 men then the end result
will be to back up the cattle in the yards
and hold them there until the inspection
can be made with a reduced force.

Mr. RUSSELL. Of course, as all of us
know, that Is the argument that Is made
every yesir when we deal with the item of
meat inspection. There is a provisi(m in
the law to the effect that iirtien there are
not adequate fimds with which to pay
the inspectors from the Federal Treas-
ury, and the packers want the meat In-
spected, the packers must themselves
pay the fees in the form of overtime paid
to the inspectors.

For the past 10 years packers have
striven valiantly to have the entire cost
of the inspection borne by the taxpayers
through the Treasury of the United
States. They have been very successftil
in their endeavor, because we have in-
creased the number of Inspectors. Last
year we provided $281,000 for additional
inspectors. Now we find that for fiscal
year 1957 there were more man-years of
employment paid in the inspection serv-
ice than there had ever been in the his-
tory of the country.

We find that the number of livestock
estimated to be slaughtered In 1957 is
4^2 million head below the number
slaughtered in 1956. It is perfectly true
that the number of plants inspected has
shown a slight increase. The number
has increased from 1,148 to 1,241. The
packers are paying by way of overtime
approximately $300,000 less in 1957 than
they paid in 1956. In 1956, they paid
$4,440,000. In 1957, It is estimated they
will pay $4,137,000.

Furthermore, Mr, President, there Is a
general clause in the organic act of the
Department of Agriculture which allows
the Department to make transfers within
its appropriations. It can transfer not
to exceed 7 percent of the amount appro-
priated in a fiscal year for miscellaneous
expenses from one division or bureau to
another division or bureau. The only
limitation is that it shall not exceed
7 percent of the appropriation for the
agency.

Last year the Department transferred,
under this clause, $103,000 to the meat
Inspection division. That law is still in
effect. Here we have before us a bill
making the most substantial appropria-
tion ever made to the Department of
Agriculture, and the Department can
transfer up to 7 percent of miscellaneous
expenses irom one division to another
division. Under the transfer power. It
can transfer fimds to the meat inspec-
tion service, if the situation should reach
the point so vividly described by the
Senator from Wyoming, with the ani-
mals backed up in the ys^rds.

Mr. BARRETT. I thank the Senator.

■»

i

8794

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

^

June 11

iiji

Mr RUSSELL. T may say to the dis-
tinguished Senator from Wyoming that
I have conferred with the Senator from
Illinois I Mr. DirksenI. who is greatly in-
terested in this subject, and with the
Senator from Minnesota, who has an
amendment, and who is also vitally con-
cerned with this matter. I am hopeful
that we may he able to draft an amend-
ment that can be accepted and taken to
conference, and which will provide a
reasonable increase in this field. How-
ever. I regard the requested increase of
$2,132,000 as greatly excessive.

Mr. BARRETT. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield at that point?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. BARRETT. I am not concerned
with the kind of Increase the Senator
visualizes. I am advised that the Civil
Service Commi.ssion would start the in-
spectors at $3,670. instead of $3,175. I
do not know how any man. with a family,
can do work of the character required,
for $3,175 a year. It seems to me that
the recommendations of the Civil Serv-
ice Commi.^sion are modest. It would
cost $165,000 merely to rai.se the starting,'
salary to $3,670 a year. In addition to
that, I am advised that the increase the
Civil Service Commission ha.s made nec-
essary in order to meet the pay standards
It has set will cost another $590,000.

Therefore. I hope the committee will
accept an amendment which will take
care of these two items.

Mr. RUSSELL. I must say to the dis-
tinguished Senator that I could not agree
to an amendment which would provide
such a large increa.se in this appropria-
tion bill. When we reach these items,
amendments will be offered, and we will
discuss them at that time. However, at
this stage of the proceedings. I could not
accept any amendment which would
raise the appropriation for the Depart-
ment of Agriculture by such a lari;e
amount.

Mr CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
President, will the Senator yield '

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I should
like to express the hope that some pro-
vision will \>e made to take care of the
packing plants. I am particularly inter-
ested in the smaller plants, which find
the inspection fees a considerable bur-
den. It seems to me that we should try
to help small business, and not follow a
policy which discriminates in favor of the
large packers and against the small
packers.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, there
are a number of packing plants in my
own State. All of them are relatively
.small. Of course, whether large or small,
they do not like to pay the overtime they
have been paying, in order to make up
the difference in the cost of inspecting
the meats they proce.ss, as between the
amount that is appropriated and what
it actually costs. There was a time
when a distinguished Member of the
Senate was successful in having adopted
a provision requiring the meat packers
to pay the whole cost. It is my own in-
dividual viewpoint that they should do
that today — every dime of it. It is an
adjunct to their work. However, that
i.ssue IS not now before us. Congress
saw fit later to repeal that provision.

There has never been a time when the
meat packers have not had to pay a
substantial sum each year for the over-
time work involved in th*» inspection of
the meat, to the extent that the amount
was not covered by the appropriation.

Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. CAPEHART. I should like to ask
the able Senator from Georgia if I am
correct In understanding that the ap-
propriation in the bill for so-called utili-
zation re.search is $14,145,000.

Mr RUSSELL. I will have the exact
figures for the Senator in a moment, but
I may .say that the utilization re.search
has fared far better in the pending bill
than any other item. It received an in-
crea.se of $2 million, practically all that
had been requested.

Mr CAPEHART. I was about to ask
the able Senator from Georma with ref-
erence to that point. Is it not a fact that
the appropriation this year will be ap-
proximately $14 million, whereas last
year it was $12 million, and the year
before it was approximately $9 milhon?

Mr. RUSSELL. Tho.se figures are ap-
proximately correct.

Mr. CAPEHART On page 2 of the
report, under •■Re:,'Ular activities," ref-
erence IS made to an item of $58,794,890
for research, which is an increase of
$9,800,000 above the House appropria-
tion. The report states;

ThLs iiicreiise consKsts of $2 mllllnn for
utilization research and to strengthen re-
search m carr 't breedlni?.

Mr. RUSSELL. First I should to say
that $7,200,000 of that is involved in a
tran.sfer, and is not an increase,

Mr. CAPEHART. I should like to
know who it was that asked for money
to strengthen research in carrot breed-
in','.

Mr. RUSSELL. I will say to the Sen-
ator that service on the subcommittee
on Agricultural Appropriations has been
one of the great experiences of my sen-
atonal career. I have found it to be the
most educational process in which I have
ever participated. I have learned a great
deal by having people explain to the sub-
committee why various commodities
stand in need of development and mar-
keting from areas about which I know
nothing. No other phase of my work has
taught me so much.

I wish the whole Senate could have
been present to see the presentation
made by the persons who are interested
in trowing carrots and who wanted a
small sum appropriated to enable them
to engage in research to produce a carrot
which would be edible all the way
throutih, without having the core or pulp
which is so often found in carrots. They
had carrots at the hearing. They
showed them to us. They have made
some progress in their research. But
there are 1 or 2 questions which they
think can be an.swered only by research
on the national level. It will not cost
a large sum; I think about $12,000 or
$15,000 a year will be the total cost.

I remember that 3 or 4 years ago a
group came before the committee. They
were interested in onion research. I be-
lieve they were from Idaho, or perhaps
it was Michigan. Merely at the mention

of onion research, one might say. "My
gracious alive, what Is onion research?"
But those persons intrigued my curiosity,
and on my motion there was Included
in the bill $15,000 above the budget so as
to provide for research in onions. In 2
years the group came back with pictures
which showed uniformity in the onions.
I was amazed at the size of the onions.
There was practically a revolution in
onion production in this country.

Senators may be Interested to know
that in the field of winter wheat the seed
which is now planted was not commer-
cially available 4 years aso, Re.search
has developed entirely new breeds of
rust-resistant and wilt-resistant wheat.
It has revohitionized wheat growing by
farmers who produce wheat. The farm-
ers of the Nation are practically pros-
trate today. If it had not been for the
advances of research, which have
brought down the unit cost of production
they would have been exterminated.

Mr CAPEHART Being a farmer my-
self. I will t.\ke the Senator's word for
that, but I am not particularly conscious
of that fact, neither am I prostrate. I
am in pretty pood shape as a farmer.

Mr. RUSSELL. If the Senator de-
pended completely on his farm for his
income, while he might not be prostrate,
he miKht be a little bent.

Mr, CAPEHART. I make money on
my farm every year; I always have. My
point IS that we have an agricultural ap-
propriation bill of almo.st $4 billion

Mr RUSSELL Oh. the Senator won-
ders why that figure was mentioned,
does he?

Mr CAPEHART No. no; not at all.
My question is. Did the Department of
Agriculture ask for more than the
amount provided in the bill for utiliza-
tion re.search''

Mr RUSSELL. Yes; they asked for
$185,000 more than we allowed.

Mr. CAPEHART Only $185,000?

Mr RUSSELL. That is correct. That
Item fared better than did most others
in the bill.

Mr. CAPEHART. 1 am very much
discouraged with the Department of Ag-
riculture. We are considering an agri-
cultural appropriation bill providing al-
most $4 billion. That is an extremely
high tax load with respect to agriculture.
Yet it IS proposed to .spend only atx)ut
$14 million for utilization research. I
am not criticizing the committee, be-
cause the committee included in the bill
everything which the Department of Ag-
riculture requested to enable it to find
new u.'^es for farm products in industry,
although we have been spending over
the years hundreds and hundreds of
millions of dollars for agricultural ap-
propriations alone.

Again I say I am not criticizing the
committee, because the committee
knows what the Department asked for.
But Congress is appropriating millions
of dollars annually to .show the farmer
how to grow more and more and more —
even $15,000 for research In carrots —
when the problem today is overproduc-
tion, and a lack of markets in which to
sell farm products.

What Congress ought to do. In my opin-
ion, is to appropriate $100 million or $200
million of the $4 billion to find new uses

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8795

for farm products In industry, to enable
the fanner to grow more instead of less,
but to have more markets for what he
grows.

I am not criticizing the committee: I
am criticizing the Department of Agri-
culture.

Mr. RUSSELL. I hope the Senator
will t>e pleased to know that in the argu-
ment which the committee made for ap-
propriations to provide an increase for
utilization research, the fact that the
Senator from Indiana had introduced a
comprehensive bill along this line was
mentioned by more than one member of
the committee.

Mr. CAPEHART. I understand that.
I introduced such a bill last year and
again this year. The Senate passed the
bill last year, as the Senator from
Georgia will remember, to establish a
Commission, known as the President's
Commission on Utilization Research.
That Commission now is making its final
report, after studying the whole problem
of finding new uses for farm products.

Yet the E>epartment of Agriculture has
not asked for an appropriation in this
bill to carry out the recommendatioz^
which the Commission will make.

I am almost tempted to vote against
the Department of Agriculture appropri-
ation bill for the reason that Congress ifl
appropriating literally billions of dollars
for agriculture, or at least hundreds of
millions, but no effort whatsoever is beings
made by the Department of Agriculture
to spend any money to find new uses for
farm products in industry.

I know of one manufacturer who spent
last year more than $80 million in an
effort to find synthetic products so that
he would not have to use cotton. Yet
the Department of Agriculture asks for
only $14 million for the purpose of re-
search. Last year they asked for $12
million. The year before that they asked
for $9 million. In the years before that,
the amount they requested in order to
find new uses for farm products in in-
dustry was even less. That is a disgrace-
ful situation.

Eventually the taxpayers of the Nation
will be made bankrupt if we continue
to encourage the farmers to grow more,
by showing them how to grow more, while
on the other hand we ask the American
taxpayers to pay for the surpluses.

Why do we not get wise? Why does
not the Department of Agriculture get
wise and start attacking the problem on
the basis of finding new uses for farm
products? The only way to find them
Is to use "gumption." I use that term
because it is a good old Indiana and
Georgia expression — "gumption." It
means using a little bit of common horse
sense.

Mr. RUSSELL. Indeed it does; the
Senator does not have to explain that
word to me.

Mr. CAPEHART. The Department of
Agriculture could use a little gumption
In seeking new uses of farm products in
order to alleviate the farm problem.
The farmer will not be helped by the
Government spending millions and mil-
lions of dollars to show him how to grow
more, to get his production high, but
have his markets low. In order to utilize
the surpluses, it will be necessary to find

ways of bringing the market up to the
production, and to push both the pro-
duction and the markets up. To do that,
it will be necessary to find new uses for
farm products in industry.

I do not know what we can do to get
the Department of Agriculture to under-
take this work. We provided them with
five laboratories. Yet the Department
has not asked for any money or help to
get the work done.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I am glad to yield to
the Senator from Illinois, who is a dis-
tinguished member of the subcommittee.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I think one of the real
functions of the subcommittee in taking
testimony is to determine, in every case,
the amount that can be usefully and pro-
ductively spent. The committee could
dump $100 million into the bill for utili-
zation research; but if the work was not
organized, if there were no technicians
striving for a definite goal, instead of
searching aroimd for a lot of chemical
curiosities, we would get nowhere.

In addition, we would be wasting much
of the public's money. It is all very well
to say that $100 million, $20 milhon, or
$5 million, should be spent in research;
but personnel are required to do the re-
search. Simply looking into a test tube
or using a bunsen burner in a laboratory
will not do the Job. Some competency is
required. A huge undertaking such as
this will reqiiire time for organization. I
believe the committee, in its discretion,
has undertaken to move as fast and pru-
dently as the work can be done produc-
tively.

Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Georgia yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. CAPEHART. Of course. It Is nec-
essary to have more manpower and other
assistance; but when will a start be made
to organize and begin such a program?
Are we going to ask the American people
to spend $4 billion every year primarily
because the Department of Agriculture
will not organize Itself on a basis to get
the work done which Congress authorizes
It to perform?

The Senator from Illinois Is 100 per-
cent correct. Certainly it is not feasible
to look down a test tube. But neither
does private industry look down a test
tube. At least, we ought to do as much
as private industry does.

The Senate remembers the develop-
ment of the synthetic rubber program.
The Congress appropriated $700 million,
and the head of the program was In-
structed to commence the production of
synthetic rubber, to build a pilot plant,
and to engage in research, design, engi-
neering, and all the other phases of the
program. We can make similar provi-
sions in the case of new uses for agricul-
tural products.

The Senator from Illinois talks in the
same way that those in the Department
of Agriculture do. Under those circum-
stances, it is no wonder that the neces-
sary development do not occur. We are
aware of that situation. But what is the
sense of urging the appropriation of $4
billion for the purchase and use of agri-
cultural surpluses, and the appropriation
of (60 million to show the fanners how to

grow more and more agricultural com-
modities, when we have too many now,
and then to propose that as Uttle as $14
milhon be appropriated for the pxirpose
of finding new industrial uses for farm
products?

I can remember the time when, in
Indiana, soybeans were not grown by the
farmers. Today, soybeans are used very
widely in industry; and today the soy-
bean crop is one of the big cash crops in
the United States, and I would dislike to
think what would be the situation of the
farmers in Indiana today if soybeans
were not grown. The extensive use of
soybeans in industry has resulted from
research.

The almost 6 million farmers in the
United States cannot do this job them-
selves. Some imagination is needed in
the Department of Agriculture, in con-
nection with research, if the necessary
job is to be done. The report of the
President's Commission will come to us
the day after tomorrow, I believe; and
the members of the Commission are
practically unanimous in recommending
research to find new industrial uses for
farm products. This problem will not be
solved in any other way.

Frankly, Mr. President, I become tired
listening to the statements of the De-
partment of Agriculture Uiat the neces-
sary technicians cannot be obtained and
therefore it is impossible to solve the
problem.

Mr. RUSSECL. Mr. President, I was
in the process of making a brief general
statement, which I do not think would
have required more than 10 minutes, if I
had not been diverted.

The Senator from Illinois has asked
me to yield briefly to him. I shall do so,
and then I wish to conclude my brief
statement. Thereafter, I shall yield the
floor ; and the bill will be open to general
discussion.

Mr. MUNDT and other Senators ad-
dressed the Chair.

Mr. RUSSET J. Mr. President, several
Senators wish to ^eak, but I have agreed
to yield at this time to the Senator from
Illinois. I now yield to him.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I have
never seen the time when an argument
comparable to that made by the Senator
from Indiana has not been made; and
that goes back to the days when I was
chairman of the Agricultural Appropria-
tions Subcommittee in the House of Rep-
resentatives. But I have discovered that
in the field of agriculture, as in the field
of physical health, progressive steps
have to be taken.

All the money on this side of the Rocky
Motintains could be dumped into the De-
partment of Agriculture, but that would
simply be a waste of money.

The Congress is appropriating him-
dreds of millions of dollars for the in-
stitutes of research in the fields of health,
including studies regarding arthritis,
rheumatism, cancer, and various other
diseases; and some results have been ob-
tained. But over a period of time, pure
research must be done; and after a while
it becomes applied; and later it becomes
really practical. But it is impoesible to
Jtimp over the various necessary steps.

CXu* distinguished friend, the Senator
from Indiana LMr. CapkhariI would like

IN'

mi

8796

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

to rush by them: he says, "Just appro-
priate the necessary funds, and the De-
partment will And the proper persons,
and will solve the problem overnight."
But. Mr. President, that is not possible.

I am no tyro regarding these matters.
I helped conduct the first experiments —
down by the Memorial Highway between
Washington and Mount Vernon, in
1933 — with anhydrous alcohol produced
from surplus grain, to be mixed with
gasoline, and then to be converted into
premium fuel. What was the answer?
We found that a new carburetor was
called for, and that new design was nec-
essary, and that various special processes
were required. In that connection we
have not gotten very far, although 1.800
stations were selling such f'jel in Ne-
braska.

So I know something of the difficulties
involved; and they will not be solved by
saying. "Give the Department $50 mil-
lion or $100 million and, presto, we will
have the solution."

Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Georgia yield to me?

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President. I shall
3rleld briefly to the Senator from Indiana,
but thereafter I desire to complete my

Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President. I
would prefer to have the Government
waste $100 mlUlon in an effort to solve
the problem (rf finding new industrial
uses for agricultural products, rather
than to have the Government waste hun-
dreds of millions of dollars in connection
with telling the fanners how to grow
more and more, even though at the pres-
ent time it is impossible to sell all the
commodities the farmers are producing.

There can be only one answer to this
problem, regardless of whether rapid
progress or slow progress is made. I say
we had better begin to make rapid prog-
ress, and we should spend the necessary
funds on research and on developing new
Industrial uses for agricultural products,
if we are ever going to begin to solve the
farm problem. I am not unmindful of
the fact that much time is required and
that such developments cannot occur
over night.

But a start must be made. It is ridicu-
lous for as little as $14 million to be spent
in an effort to develop new industrial
uses for agricultural products, when I
could name, if I had the time to engage
in a little research, a thousand private
industries in the United States which
spend twice, 10 times, or 20 times that
amount of money on their own research.

As I said a moment ago. I know of one
company in the State of Georgia which
spent more than $80 million in an effort
to find synthetic substitutes for cotton.
Yet the Department of Agriculture re-
quests the small sum of $14 million for
the purpose of engaging in research for
the benefit of all the farmers in the
United States. That amount is $2 million
more than the amount provided last
year, and $5 million more than the
amount of 2 years ago.

Mr. MUNDT addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER < Mr. TaL-
MADGi in the chair) . The Senator from
Georgia has the Poor. Does he yield?

Mr RUSSELL. Mr. President. I hope
the distinguished Senator from South

1957

Dakota will permit me first to finish my
brief explanatory statement. Five or six
Senators wish to discuss the Item of
utilization research; and after I have
finished my brief statement. I shall be
glad to yield for a discussion of that
matter.

Mr. President. I was discussing the
fact that in the case of the total bill, the
appropriations for the regular activities
represent an increase In the amount of
only $9,500,000 over the appropriations
made for the fiscal year 1957. The larg-
est item is for utilization research.

Most of the total increases provided by
the bill do not concern the regular ac-
tivities of the Department of Agriculture.
An increase of $297,501,493 is required to
restore the capital impairment of the
Commodity Credit Corporation for
losses sustained in 1956. The bill also
includes increases over 1957 totaling
$572,226,556 for special activities. These
are programs — including sales of com-
modities for foreign currencies under
Public Law 480. the International Wheat
Agreement, emergency famine relief to
friendly peoples, and animal disease
eradication activities — which are carried
out using Commodity Credit Corporation
funds, and the Corporation is subse-
quently reimbursed by appropriation, in
order to restore its capital structure.

Mr. President, a large part of the ap-
propriations carried by the pending bill
could more properly be charged to the
foreign-aid program. In considering the
Department of Agriculture appropria-
tion bill, it is important to note that
much of the funds in the bill do not go to
the American farmer.

For example, the bill Includes $637
million to reimburse the Commodity
Credit Corporation for sales of commodi-
ties for foreign currencies under Public
Law 480. It also includes similar reim-
bursement items of $94,483,518 for emer-
gency famine relief to friendly peoples,
and $92,930,611 for the International
Wheat Agreement.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Georgia yield to me?
Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, if the
Senator from Minnesota will permit me
to do so, first I should like to complete
my brief statement.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I shall be glad to
wait.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, a
number of the items included in the bill
are not primarily for the benefit of agri-
culture. Among those items is the one
of $100 million for the school-lunch pro-
gram and the one of more than $45 mil-
hon for the school-milk program.

Also included in the bill are $16,586,-
000 for meat inspection and over $22
million for the eradiction of brucellosis
and tuberculosis in livestock — activities
which primarily benefit the consumer.

Whitehall of these programs are neces-
sary'. I think it is important for us to
note that very substantial appropria-
tions— over $1 billion — in the bill are
primarily for the benefit of consumers
and others, rather than for the benefit
of the farmers and ranchers of the Na-
tion.

Over one-half a billion dollars of the
appropriations represent expenditures
on REA and Farmers Home Adminis-

tration loans which are repayable, and
on which the repayment history is ex-
cellent.

Mr. President, having concluded my
brief statement. I am glad to yield. I
promised first to yield to the Senator
from South Dakota IMr. MundtI; and
at this time I am pleased to yield to him,
if he wishes to have me do so.

Mr. MUNDT. I thank the Senator
very much. I simply wanted to make a
few comments relative to the colloquy
engaged in by the Senator from Illinois
and the Senator from Indiana, and to
point out that there Is validity In what
they both have said, but I think, first,
that the committee in giving the De-
partment a $2 million Increase over the
House figure for utilization research,
has provided In the bill all the money
the Department of Agriculture has re-
quested; and, second, all the money the
Department of Agriculture shows any
indication that it can use.

I do not think it Is going to provide
any solution for the Senator from Indi-
ana to suggest that the I>epartment
have $10 million or $20 million or $50
million more. I agree with the Senator
from Illinois In that regard. We are
providing in this bill the maximum go-
ahead for the existing research utiliza-
tion In the Department. I myself
offered an amendment to Increase the
amount $2 million. I believe It carried
unanimously or with only a few dissent-
ing votes. That amount was within
$185,000 of what the Department had re-
quested As the distinguished chair-
man of the subcommittee has stated, it
was the greatest single Increase received
by any service in the Department of
Agriculture.

What we In the Congress should do
Is recognize the challenge of research
into uses for farm products. We should
move in the direction of establishing a
separate commission or t>oard or di-
rector of research in the utilization of
farm products for industrial purposes,
and should provide for that group a con-
siderable sum to put such a program on
a crash basis, as we did in the field of
synthetic rubber and guided missiles, or
as we would do In any area where we
want to get progress. We are never
going to get a program out of the worm-
wood stage by putting such a program in
a department which employs only hired
scientists. We are going to make prog-
ress only by utilizing the genius of
America, from its industrial organiza-
tions, its educational institutions, and
its chemical plants. If we provided
funds and a director, and gave him
enough latitude so he could sp>end money
in subsidies, bonuses, and incentive pay-
ments working with private industry we
could get somewhere. But, so far as the
Department of Agriculture is concerned,
at the slow pace at which it is moving, I
am sure the $2 million is going to be
enough.

Mr. RUSSELL. I am sure the Sena-
tor from South Dakota means $2 mil-
lion added to what has already been
appropriated.

Mr. MUNDT. Yes; I refer to the $2
million additional.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8797

Mr. RUSSELL. I had promised to
yield to the Senator from Oregon. Then
I shall be happy to yield to the Senator
from Nebraska.

Mr. MORSE. I should like to ask the
Senator from Georgia a question or two.
Before I ask the questions. I wish first to
express ray very deep appreciation for
the great leadership the Senator from
Georgia has given the Senate for many
years In connection with agriculture ap-
propriation bills.
Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the Senator.
Mr. MORSE. I do not think agricul-
ture has a greater friend In the entire
Congress than the distinguished Senator
from Georgia. I want the Senator from
Georgia to understand that the questions
I shall raise in regard to the appropria-
tion bill are raised not with any criticism
Bt all. I wish him to know that the
questions are based on Inquiries I have
received from people in my State and
from farm organizations. I want him
also to know that I do not believe in par-
ticipating In political gestures. I could
offer a .series of amendments based upon
the protests I have received, but, unless
the chairman of the subcommittee feels
that there is some chance for an amend-
ment on any of the points raised being
adopted. I shall not, as a mere political
j;esture. offer an amendment.

My first question goes to the matter of
the cuts in funds for experiment stations,
which the Senator has discussed some-
what already. It Is my understanding
tliat the Hou.<5e cut $4,500,000 from the
payments to State experiment stations
as called for in the budget estimate. It
is my understanding that the Senate bill,
as reported by the Senator from Georgia,
in effect restores $1 million of that cut.
Is that correct?

Mr. RUSSELL. The Senator from
Ore?;on is correct. The reduction, of
course, was made In the budget estimate,
not in the current appropriation. I may
j-ay. The Senator from Oregon is well
aware of the fact that we have manifest-
ed an inten.se interest in the work of the
State experiment stations in recent years.
Since 1952 the committee and the Con-
};ress have Increased annual appropria-
tions for the State experiment stations
from $12,670,000 to $29,503,000. The bill
before the Senate allows an increase of
SI million over the current appropria-
tion.

No Member of the Congress believes
more strongly than I do in the State
experiment station work. Many of the
most amazing developments in our agri-
cultural revolution have come about as
a result of the cooperative work between
the Federal Government and the State
^;overnments at the State experiment
stations.

The Senator from Oregon is. of course,
aware of the fact that this Is a rather
unusual year for dealing with almost any
appropiiatlon. The fact that the com-
mittee allowed a $1 million increase over
the current appropriation did give this
activity a slightly preferred status over
those which did not get an Increase of
even $1. or took a reduction.

I would have liked to have seen the
$4*2 million appropriated. I am sure it
could have been programed and the
money well expended; but, in my judg-

ment, we are in a better position If we
keep the appropriation at an increase of
$1 million, and insist on that amount in
conference, than if we arrived at an un-
realistic figure that would cause us to
lose the entire item if it were taken
back to some other body for a vote.

Mr. MORSE. Am I correct in my un-
derstanding that the Senate committee
has allowed $9,800,000 more than the
House figure for the entire agricultural
research program?

Mr. RUSSELL. No; a part of that
represented a transfer. The House took
soil and water conservation research out
of the regular research program and put
it under Soil Conservation Service. The
Senate committee restored it. A part
of the Increase is reflected in that item.
The real Increase is only about $2,800,000,
However, that figure does not Include the
appropriation for the State experimental
stations, which will be found under an-
other item.

Mr. MORSE. So the increase for agri-
cultural experiment stations is a little
more than $3 million.

Mr. RUSSELL. The total increase in
the research appropriation is consider-
ably more than $5 million throughout the
bill.

Mr. MORSE. A little more than $4
million?

Mr. RUSSELL. Yes.

Mr. MORSE. The Senator, in his ex-
planatory remarks, spoke about plant
diseases, experiment station funds, and
brucellosis. I should like to tell him of
a conversation on the long distance
telephone last night, which Is supported
by some telegrams I shall ask to put
in the Record. Mr. Ed Coles, who is
president of the Oregon Cattlemen's As-
.sociation, who is one of the great agri-
cultural leaders in Oregon, and who
works closely with various research
groups — and I also had strong repre-
sentations on this matter from our ex-
periment stations — asked me if I was
aware of the fact that the brucellosis
program as provided in the bill is not
adequately financed in the sense that a
great many of the State programs will
have to l)e cut out. He points out that,
as the Senator from Georgia and I
know to be the case, discoveries are still
being made in regard to the effects of
brucellosis.

Just a few days ago we read in the
press about the findings of a medical re-
search group in regard to health haz-
ards to himian beings caused by brucel-
losis, over and above those which were
previously known as constituting serious
threats to human life.

Mr. Coles pleaded with me over the
telephone last night to seek on the fioor
of the Senate today to get the viewpoint
of the Senator from Georgia in regard
to the brucellosis program, and to see if
there is any chance at all of getting
some increase in the brucellosis fund,
because, as he reports to me, a reduction
in funds for the program will do great
damage to State programs which are al-
ready underway, by which it is hoped
to stamp out Bang's disease. Will the
Senator from Georgia enlighten me as to
what he thinks the situation is in re-
gard to the brucellosis program?

Mr. RinsSELL. Mr. President. I can
say to the distinguished Senator that
this is a program the details of which
the eminent Senator from Oregon, an
outstanding cattle breeder, is more
familiar with than I am. I have dealt
with the problem in the agricultural ap-
propriations bills for years. This is the
25th such bill. I can remember when a
chairman of the full Committee on Ap-
propriations, who had a herd of cattle,
shuddered at the suggestion that thera
could be any such thing as Bang's Dis-
ease, and opposed an appropriation for
that purpose. That has been within the
last quarter of a century, for I am net
talking about what happened in the
ISOO's.

Of course, a great deal has been found
cut about this disease. It Is not only
very costly to the farmers for it causes
them to lose calves, but it is also a threat
to the himian consumers of milk and
dairy products. We have had a pro-
gram for many years which has under-
taken to deal with it.

I will say to the distinguished Senator
that at the present time we are appropri-
ating $20 million for this purpose, which
is the full amount authorized by law.
The increased authorization, to $20 mil-
lion, was not passed until 1956. Prior
to that time, it was approximately $15
million. This bill carries the full
amount authorized by law. It would
take legislation to enable us to increase
the Federal appropriation for this ac-
tivity.

Mr. MORSE. I thank the Senator
vei-y much. TTiat is precisely the kind
of information I needed in this colloquy
in order to properly advise Mr. Coles in
regard to it.

Mr. Coles raised another question in
connection with the so-called meat pres-
ervation experiments, and he pointed out
that Oregon State College had joined
in a cooperative research program on
meat preservation. They have hired
their p>ersonnel. They have committed
their contribution to the program.

Mr. Coles is advised that this bill does
not carry a sufficient amount of money
for the meat preservation experiment
program, and he wanted me to raise a
question today with respect to whether
or not the chairman of the committee
thought there was any possibility of hav-
ing restored to the budget the funds
which the Department of Agriculture
had previously been authorized to ex-
pend. Is the chairman aware of such
a program?

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, I must
say if that is the fact it grows out of
a departmental decision in allocating
the $1 million increase we have pro-
posed. We may be coimting our chick-
ens before they are hatched in the case
of the $1 million. There has been no
reduction in the program and the ap-
propriation for last year. The fact is
we have allowed the full amoimt of the
budget requested for this item for sev-
eral years. We allowed, in this bill,
a $1 million increase over last year.
I am not completely familiar with the
activity to which the Senator refers, but
I think it is one in which 3 or 4 States
and the Federal Government are coop-
erating.

I

! 1

il

8798

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

I

Mr. MORSE. The Senator Is correct.
Several State colleges are cooperating.

Mr. RUSSELL. I have a recollection
that I have heard of that particular
project. There is nothing to prevent the
Department of Agriculture from allo-
cating from this $1 million increase,
when and If it is approved, a sufficient
amoimt to help carry on that work, al-
though of course it means the funds will
have to be spread rather thin, because
it is $1 million out of a $4 4 million
budget estimate.

Mr. MORSE. My guess is that what
Is happening is that the Department oi
Agricuiture officials involved are proba-
bly advising that If the $4^2 million for
experimentation work is not restored,
they will have to cut such projects.

Mr. RUSSELL. That they will not be
able to make an allocation for this work.

Mr. MORSE. That leads me to the
next question, and I should like to have
the Senators frank appraisal, after
which I am going to follow his judg-
ment.

I have received certain telegrams, and
I am going to ask permission to insert
them in the RrcoRo. I should like to
ask the opinion of the chairman on the
point I now mention: If I carry out
the suggestion in some of these tele-
grams, namely, to offer an amendment
to i^.crease the amount for experiment
station allowances by $4*2 million as-

tsuming for the moment that I suc-
11 ceeded in having it adopted by the Sen-

ate— which could be a false a.ssumption.
since I am inclined to think I would not
be able to do so, over the obj'^ction of the
Senator from Georgia — would that make
it more dilBcult for the Senator in con-
ference to hold the $1 million already
added to the bill, as it came from the
Senate committee?

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, let me
say first to the Senator from Oregon
that he of course understands how a
Senator in charge of a bill can be placed
in a certain position. Although the
Senator from Georifia might be strongly
in favor of the $4'^ million increase for
the State experiment stations, he had
difficulty getting $1 million from the
committee he represents on the floor,
and he is committed to that amount.
It would be his duty to defend the in-
crease, or to at least keep it limited to
what the committee recommended.

Mr. MORSE. The Senator would
have equal difficulty, in the conference
committee, even in holding some of the
Senate conferees?

Mr. RUSSELL. I had not reached
that ix)mt. It i3 my intention to insist
very vigorously upon this Senate
a.-nendment when and if this bill
reaches the conference stace with the
other body. If it were a $4'_. million
item, and the Senate insisted, I think
ti^erc would be a very remote possibil-
ity that the amendment would ever
carry on the floor of the House, whereas
a $1 million increase would have a sub-
stantially better chance of approval.

Mr. MORSE. The Senator in his gen-
eral statement on the bill also men-
tioned the matter of research and ex-
perimentation in connection with plant
diseases, such, for example, as the po-
tato 'oUght. Does the amount of money

for research into plant diseases fall into
the same category which Involves tho
$4'-i million cut on the House side?

Mr. RUSSELL. No. There are some
different phases involved. There Is the
purely Federal research, and then there
is the Johit State-Federal research. I
do not remember at the moment
whether the research in the case of po-
tato blight is done purely as a Federal
function, or as a joint SUte-Federal
function, but whatever its status is there
can be no reduction in that research,
because we have provided on the mini-
mum the same amount of money they
have for the current year.

Mr. MORSE. I wish to thank the
Senator from Georgia very much. I
h^ve decided to make any future re-
marks on ray own time, later on in the
debate.

Mr. RUSSELL. I am always glad to
hear the remarks of :he Senator from
Oregon on agricultural matters. He has
always been a valuable friend of the
ApiTican farmer.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I am glad to yield to
the Senator from Minnesota.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I wish to thank
the chairman of the committee. I can
assure my colleagues that my qucotions
will bj^ fev.- and to the point.

V/iLh respect to the expenditures cov-
ered by the bill. I listened to the Senator
from Georgia list the reimbursements
to the Commodity Credit Corporation.
I should like to ask the Senator if in
the bill and in the report the amounts
which are to be reimbursed to the Corn-
mod. ty Credit Corporation for our for-
eign policy requirements are grouped as
such?

Mr. RUSSELL. Thev are not.
Mr. HL-MPHREY. it seems to me
that somewhere in the discussion of this
airrlcultural appropriation bill the ex-
r:"^iitures which relate to fore:i:n policy
matters ou:;ht to be tabulated. For ex-
ample, consider the sales of surplus com-
modities under Title I. Pubhc Law 480,
the donations under title III, and the
activities under title II of Public Law
480. All this relates to the fulfillment
of American forcxsn pohcv objectives.

Mr. RUS^^ELL. Of course, the Sen-
ator from Mmr.e.sota is correct. For
that rea.son, although it is not spelled
out in the bill, it is all to reimburse the
Commodity C.-edit Corporation for its
impaired capital structure. I read the
fleures so that they would appear in the
RrroRD, and stated that practically $1
biLion of the money was more in the
fiJld of international relations and for-
eii^n policy than in the field of amlcul-
ture.

I gave a figure of $637 million to re-
imbuise the Commodity Credit Corpora-
tic n for sales of commodities for forei'-'n
currencies. There is $94 5 million for
emergency famine relief for friendly
peoples. There is $92,930,000 for the
International Wheat Agreement.

Mr HUMPHREY. All thn.se relate to
specific objectives m American foreign
policy.

Mr. RUSSELL. Yes. I stated that
there was more than $1 billion in the
bill which might be included in the

category not having to do primarily
with the agricultural situation in this
country.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Some of the for-
eign currencies we have are not con-
sidered an asset to the Department of
Agriculture until they are converted into
dollars, or reimbursed.

Kir. RUSSELL. A great deal of it
never is reimbursed at all.

Mr. HUMPHREY. That Is correct.
Therefore, it is considtied a loss.

Mr. RUSSEIJ;^ It Is a complete loss.

Mr. HUMPHREY. It may be that

.some other department or service of the

Government gets the benefit of the use

of such currencies.

Mr. RUSSELL. The State Depart-
ment has personnel in all those coun-
tries, and some of the counterpart funds
are used by the.m. Scmo of the coun-
terpart lunds are spent on activities
withm the country.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Indeed.
Mr. RUSSELL. For the improve-
ment of railroads or highvays. or for
building dams or Irrigation projects.

Mr. HUMPHREY. To the extent of
about 60 percent.
Mr. RUSSELL. YC3.
Mr. HUMPHREY. We are going hi to
that study now. I wanted to have the
Record show that the expenditures
which have been li-sted as Department
of Agriculture expenditures, and have
been heralded in the press as a four or
five billion dollar cost for agriculture,
are not all agricultural costs.

Mr. RUSSELL. Of course not. One
of the most commendable programs in
the bill is the school-lunch and school-
milk program, which costs $145 million,
not including the surplus commodities
which are given. Only 13 percent of the
.schoolchildren of the countrj' could pos-
sibly be purely farm children. The
program helps children in urban com-
munities. It is a good program, but it
is not properly chargeable strictly to
agriculture.

Mr. HUMPHREY. It is not an a?rrl-
cultural cost.

Mr. RUSSEIL. It Is not an agricul-
tural cost. Even the cost of the meat-
In-pecticn service is charged to the
farmer, but the meat-inspection service
protects the American consumer who
buys meats on the market.

There is also a tendency. In looking at
the size of the bill, to .say that all of it
is appropriation; but more than half a
billion dollars represents hians made
through the Rural Electrification Ad-
ministration and the Farmers' Home Ad-
ministration, both of which have excel-
lent records of repayment. The money
is turned back into the Treasury.

Mr HUMPHREY. How much of this
appropriation would the Senator esti-
mate could be attributed directly to ex-
penditures or co.sts for the operation of
a farm program, as related to the farm
cconomV

Mr RUSSELL. I have never ap-
proached the question directly in that
way. However, the sums of $637 million.
$(^5 million, and $93 million, involve sales
for foreign currencies, and emergency
famine relief under the International
Wlioat Agreement. Then there Is $310
million worth of materials secured In

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8799

barter, which goes into the stockpile for
the national defense effort. The sum of
$225 million goes for shipping, under
the proviso that one-half of it must be
shipped in American bottoms. I have
not totaled all the items.

Mr. HUMPHREY. They total about
$1,300,000,000.

Mr. RUSSELL. About $1,300,000,000
or $1,400,000,000 of this amount is prop-
erly chargeable to international rela-
tions and foreign policy, rather than to
the farmers.

Mr. HUMPHREY. There is another
$500 million in loans made through the
REA and the FHA.

Mr. RUSSELL. There is $145 million
for the school lunch and milk program,
and $17 million for the meat inspection
item.

Mr. HUMPHREY. So about $2 billion
out of this appropriation could be de-
classified, as being nonagrlcultural.

Mr. RUSSELL. It represents activi-
ties which are just as important to any
citizen of the United States living in a
penthouse in New York as they are to a
farmer in Minnesota or Georgia.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I thank the Sena-
tor for his observations and for the in-
formation he has given.

I should like to ask one question on
the subject of brucellosis control. I
heard the Senator from Oregon [Mr.
Morse 1 asking about it. Would the ap-
propriation before us result in cutting
down a State program, such as that car-
ried on in the State of Minnesota?

Mr. RUSSELL. No. No reduction in
the appropriation is involved. The ap-
propriation recommended is $20 million,
which is the full amount authorized by
law. and the same as the amount appro-
priated last year.

Mr. HUMPHREY. So we can con-
tinue with the same schedule we had
last year?

Mr. RUSSELL. There will be just
as much money as w«is carried in the
bill for the present year.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Through the fiscal
year 1958?

Mr. RUSSELL. Yes.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I should like to ask
a question in reference to the soil-con-
servation program. I refer the Senator
to the lanjliage on page 26, line 6, under
the headj "Agricultural Conservation
Program Service." The amount which
is fixed as the maximum for any par-
ticipant under the soil-conservation
program Is $1,500. Is that correct? I
beheve the House set the figure at
$2,500.

Mr. RUSSELL. The House had placed
the figure at $2,500, but the amount
carried in the bill at present, and the
amount which has been carried for the
past 3 or 4 years, it $1,500. Without
being apprised of the specific reasons
for the increase, the Senate committee
went back to the old figure, so that we
could ascertain if there was any justi-
fication for the Increase when we meet
with representatives of the other body
in conference.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I appreciate that,
and I shall not press the Item at all.
I merely wish to explore the subject for
a moment with the Senator.

As I understand, the reason given by
the proponents for the increase in the
House, which was agreed to by a majority,
relates to what we call gully control.
In the hilly country, there is a great deal
of soil erosion due to the rapid flow-off
of water, and gullies develop. Because of
the increased cost of labor and materials
for gully repairs and conservation prac-
tice relating to gully repair, the $1,500
item has been considered to be too small.
I ask the Senator, when he goes to con-
ference on the bill, to examine quite care-
fully the debate.

Mr. RUSSELL. I shall approach the
question with an open mind. The De-
partment did not ask to have the amount
increased to $2,500. No testimony was
submitted to the committee in justifica-
tion of the increase. In the absence of
any reason for the increase being called
to our attention, we set the figure at the
old level of $1,500. I shall certainly ap-
proach that subject with an open mind
when the bill goes to conference.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Let me ask the Sen-
ator again with reference to the con-
servation reserve program. As I under-
stand, the maximum amount provided
on page 28, line 18, is $7.50 an acre "for
conservation reserve contracts entered
into 30 days after approval of this act."

As I recall, the national average last
year was around $11.

Mr. RUSSELL. The average paid un-
der contracts concluded, up to this year,
is $8.84.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes; I remember
that.

Mr. RUSSELL. The figure In the
Senate committee version of the bill
represents a reduction of $1.34 through-
out the Nation, which would have to be
applied. I shall discuss that question
later. The Senator from South Dakota
has an amendment seeking to eliminate
that reduction, but I shall take the posi-
tion that the committee's action was
completely justified in the light of the
testimony before us. Very large practice
payments are made, some of them for
building dams. In one instance the pay-
ments amounted to as much as $1,062,
in addition to annual payments for
the land which is fiooded. That is an
extreme case and the most expensive
one I know of. This is an effort to get
the Department to be a little more care-
ful in examining the conservation re-
serve program, in which I think we all
have more hope and faith than in the
acreage reserve program.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I am glad to hear
the Senator say that, because I feel
that the conservation reserve program
offers the greatest opportunity for long-
run good.

Mr. RUSSELL. Over the long nm;
yes.

Mr. HUMPHREY. In my State, for
example, the average payment was
around $11 an acre, I believe.

Mr. RUSSELL. This provision would
not bring down the maximum that Is
paid for any one type of land in the
Senator's State. The fanners may still
be paid Just as much as they have been
paid on the highest level, but they would
find it necessary, in classifying the land
as to productive land and marginal land,

and so forth, to bring the State average
down

Mr. HUMPHREY. I should say that
I think it was about $11.

Mr. RUSSELL. It would bring the
average down to about $1.34 less than
that.

Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. AIKEN. The figures given to me
by the Department of Agriculture indi-
cate that the current average for Min-
nesota is $11, and that if the bill as it
Is written passes, the average would be
$8 for the coming year, rather than $11.

Mr. RUSSELL. That carmot possibly
be correct.

Mr. AIKEN That is the advice I have
received from the Department of Agri-
culture.

Mr. RUSSELL. If tlie Senator will
look at the language on page 28 of the
bill, he will see that the bill provides:

That the average annual rental payment
per acre shall not exceed $7.50 per acre lor
conservation reserve contracts entered Into
30 days after approval of this act.

If he will then look at the column
under Minnesota, he will see that the
average payment for Minnesota is $9.09
an acre. That is the average annual
pajntnent per acre on signed contracts.
Mr. HUMPHREY. That is correct.
Mr. RUSSELL. It is $9.09 for Minne-
sota.

Mr. HUMPHREY. That is why I said
I was not certain about the $11 figure,
I heard both figures mentioned.

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, there is
no need for any uncertainty about it,
because it is $11. That was the offering
rate. The actual signup rate shows in
the right-hand colimm as $9.09. That is
due to the fact that in the States there
are some nondiverted acres, which are
not included, and as a consequence there
is a reduction, which is shown in the
righthand column. The Senator from
Miimesota can be assured that if a $7.50
acre rate prevails every time a State
somewhere gets $10 an acre, some other
State will get $5 an acre, in order to
maintain the $7.C0 rate. Therefore, it
will pull down the returns of the farmers
in Minnesota substantially.

Mr. HUMPHREY. My concern is that
we must make the rental price adequate
enough to induce farmers to enter the
program.

Mr. MUNDT. And to deal equitably
with the farmers who cooperate.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I hope we can get
out of the acreage-reserve program,
which was a limited program, and get
Into the conservation-research program,
because that is the one that offers the
long-term good.

Mr. MUNDT. As the Senator realizes,
as a member of the committee, that day
is not too far removed. This program
will run, I think, for a contemplated 10
or 11 years,

Mr. HUMPHREY. As I understand,
the Senator from South Dakota has an
amendment to offer on that point.

Mr. MUNDT. The Senator is correct.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I shaU be very
much Interested in it.

t

\

8800

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

Mr. AIKEN. I merely wish to state
that the Department of Agriculture ad-
vised me last evening that the $10.11
fieure i.s the national average and that
If the $7.50 flsrure becomes law it will
affect the States which the Department
lists in Its letter to me. The letter goes
on to list about a dozen selected State.s.
In tint li.>t Minnesota is shown as $11
under the current level, and $8 under the
$7.53 maximum.

Mr. RUSSELL. I believe the flarures
that the Senator from Vei-mont h;is be-
fore him are the figures which were fur-
nished to the Committee on Appropria-
tions. They were furnished to show the
situation in the States represented on
the Committee on Appropriatioiis. Min-
nesota happens to be one of those S:ate.s.
These fi;ures deal with the original
amendment, not with the present
amendment. The original amendment.
which was approved by the subcom-
mittee, placed a fiat average of $7 an
acre within the States. When we got
to the full committee, that portion of the
bill was rewritten on a national average
basfs.

Mr. AIKEN. I am merely submittinrr
the figures which I received from the
Department of Agriculture.

Mr. RUSSELL. That does not con-
form with the testimony given to the
committee, tjecause the figures we have
show the avera<?e payment per acre on
signed contracts.

Mr, HUMPHREY, Mr. AIKEN, and
Mr. CURTIS addressed the Chair.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, the
Senator Irom Idaho (Mr. Church! has
been on his feet for some time to
ask some questions. I feel that the fact
that he has been askintj recognition for
some time, and because I have yielded to
6 or 7 other Senators. I should fast yield
to the Senator from Idaho.

Mr CHURCH. I thank the Senator
for his courtesy. I should like to say at
the out.-et that the Senator from Georgia
and the committee should be commended
for the work they have done on the bill.
I. for on", ceruiinly concur in the senti-
ment expre.ssed by the distinguished
Senator f ix)m Georiria with respect to the
importance of the agricultural research
work. I want to commend him and his
committee for the recommendations
they are making generally in this regard.

Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the Senator.

Mr. CHURCH. I have a question
which concerns the soil and water con-
servation research proi^ram. It was my
understanding originally that the budijet
estimates included a total increase for
soil and water conservation program
work in the amount of $840,000. When
this was called to my attention I was
naturally interested in knowing what
part of the increased amount would be
spent in the State of Idaho. Upon in-
quiry. I was Informed on April 15 of this
year by Mr. B. T. Shaw, Administrator
of the Agricultuial Research Service, as
follows:

There Is currently allocatM $40810 for
■oil- and water -conservation reBearch In
Idaho. This Includes $33,160 at B.olse and
•T.'SSO at St. Anthony. The 19.58 bud^er
estimates Include a Uilal of $88,920 f >r tlil.s
research hi Idaho, of which »46.I00 is f..r
prcgr-^m Increases ar.v.1 *JOIO lo to meet in-

creased retirement costa under Public Law
864 1 84th Cong i .

Mr. Shaw then sets forth where the
increased amount is to be used.

This morning, after the committee had
taken its action on the bill and rendered
its report, I received another communi-
cation from Mr Shaw, in which he ad-
vises me that the total allocated under
the Senate report for .soil- and water-
conservation reseach. a,'^ allocated by the
Department of Agriculture, permits only
$411,600 to be available as an increase
for the research program.

He states in his letter that inasmuch
a.s Ic-ss than half of the original amount
c.illed for in the budget estimate ha.s
been allowed by the committee, none of
the increased programing that had been
contemplated for Idaho is now contem-
plated by the Department. He con-
cludes by saying:

We regret that It will not be pi^5sible to ro
aliead with thU Important program in Id.iho
under the bill as reported by the Senate com-
mittee.

I should like to ask tlie distinguished
Senator from Genr4ia wlicLher tiie re-
port I received from Mr. Shaw today
conforms with the committee's ovkn
understanding as to the allocation of
this monty for soil- and water-conser-
vation purpo.'^es.

Mr. RUSSELL. Of course. I cannot
answer that que.Uion definitely in spe-
cific terms. The committee allowed an
increase over the current appropriations
cf approximately a million and a half
dollars, as I recall it. for ioil- and water-
conservation activitie.-;.

The Bureau of the Budget had a-^ked
for $840,000. The matter of allocating
increa.ses l.s within the purview or the
domain of the Secretary of A';iiculture.
I was advised by the ver^- eflicient staff
representative of the crmmittee that
the Department had to!d him that "^ome
$82 9J0 wcuJd be available for the .State
cf Idaho under this appropriation. As to
the accuracy of that statement. I cannot
say, becau.'ie the Department has the
authority to allocate and divert the
funds. But there is no rea'^on on earth
for completely discontinuing the work,
even if it were dealt with on a percent-
a:;e basis under the Senate appropria-
tion. The Department would have to
allow about half of the $16,000. If they
were to bo fair to the activities m
Idaho.

Tlie whole bud::Pt increase was not
allowed. It IS true, and the Secretary has
the authority to allocate the fund<.
But if the Department brought the
Item here as a budc:et request, they
must have thought it was valuable to
them, so they should, at lea.^t. carry on
a part of the activities with the sub-
.'t.mtial increa.se of iWmost $500,000
which was allowed m the bill.

Mr. CHURCH. That would be my
view. I certainly hope the Department
of Agriculture, in usinu the money which
is made available, will conform with the
expres{;ion of views by the chairm^in of
the subcommittee.

Mr. RU.'^SELL. I certainly hope the
Department will make some elfort to
deal with the problem v. hich the Senator
has in mind, because tlie committee ha3
allowed about hair tae request.

Mr. CHURCH. I thank the Senator
from Georgia.

Mr. President, In line with the impres-
sions expressed by the distinguished
Senator from Georgia, and in order that
the research programs to which I have
made reference might be more fully
identified, I ask unanimoas consent to
have printed at this point in the Record
the correspondence to which I have
made reference.

There being no objection, the cor-
respondence was ordered to be printed
in the Recghd. as follows:

UNrrrn SxArrs
Depaktment or AcRKrt.Ti;RE,

AcRiccLTCRAL KE.sr..Aacu Service.

Wa-s/iinpfon, D. C, Apni 15. 1957.
Hon Frank Cmurcm,

V'litri StaUi S.-natr.
Dear iitNAToK C'HfRcu: Thank you for
your letter cf April :<. 1957. ror.cerntng cor-
respondence on soil and water CMn.^ervatton
research in Idaho, from Mr CVni O. Fred-
erlckaen. President of tlie Idaho AsaoclaUoa
of i><jil Conservation Districts. In accord-
ance with your request, u copy of uur reply
to Mr FYederlcksen Is enclosed.

We appreciate \our Interest In this phase
of uur research program.
Sincerely.

B. T Shaw. Administrator.

tlNiTSD States
Dcpartmelnt or Acru riTiRE,
ActticuLTt ral Research StRViri:,

Washington O. C .. AprU IJ. 10^7.
Mr Don G. FRi;DERicKso.>f,

Prrsidfnt. Idaho A<>-^oriaV.cn of S>U
Con^ftrafton Districts, Gooding.
Idaho
DCAR Mb. Fredtpickson: Thank you for
your letter of March 128, 1957. concernli g soil
and water con.servation research in Idaho
and proposed Increases for thi* research lu
liical year IJofl.

There Is currently allocated $40,810 for soli
and water c-'iistr^atlun resoarth In Idaho.
This Includes $.13 160 at B<^l.«(e and $7 660 at
St Anthony The 1958 budr-t estlmateu
i:-.clude a total of .«8«,'.tjo fnr th:s research in
Idab.i of which $46.1O0 is for propram In-
creases and $;<!,UHJ la to meet increaaed re-
tirement CM.sts ui'.der Public Law tto4 (84th
Cung. . .

TXw profrram Increases are as follows:
• SJ-T.-iuO. to expand existing research Bt
Base on the devei. pment of improved draln-
affe prsictices. Irrigation metlioda. water ap-
plication Fystenis. and general soil and water
manat(emeat for nv re efficient u.se In crop
production- This is a part of a total In-
crease of $424,000 to Incrtiue cfflclency In
water manatren.v-i.t tn relation to Irrliration;
-* $20 700. to Initiate research at Moscow.
Idaho, to e.Ntab;iKh data on streamfluw char-
acterl.«:flcs and ram.'.iU relatlon.<!hli>8 of rep-
resentative ai;ncultural watersheds for de-
sign of me,i.>iures and structures for soil and
water con.servation. This Is a part of a
Utal tncreafe of $2;J8.0oO for expanding re-
search in water.shed hydrology.

We hope this provides the information you
desired A copy of this letter Is being sent
to Ci n^resawoman Gra( ix Prosx and to Sena-
tor Frank C hurlh. In accordance with their
Wishes

Sincerely,

B, T Shaw, Administrator

United States

DCTARTMENT OF AgRICULTVRE.

AcRicfLTvriE Research Scrvic«.

Washington. D. C ,

June 11. 1957.
Hon Frank CHtrmcH.

United States Senate.
Dear Senmor Chi-rch: In response to a
telephone request this morning from Mrs.

^^•^^ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE 8801

Sd^l'of";hffund\';7ov^dedT X"; T.r'j^ ^ """^ ,^^^ r?"^.^ '^^^^"^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^°^ a. he stated, per.

v^ater conservation research In the Senate v}^ Government, but also to contract haps 90 percent of the wheat grown in

Kep<;rt on the Agricultural and Farm Credit ,'^ pnvate parties, with land grant col- States like North Dakota Is grown from

Administration Appropriation bill. 1058. as ^^ses and other colleges, yes, even with a species of seed which has been devel-

interpreted to the Department by the staff of foreign agencies, because industrial oped within the past 4 years through

th; Senate Appropriations Committee: products may well be developed which production research, although it was

Ba.sc. nscai year 1957, $5,391,110 will have great possibilities for export. chiefly produced in order to obtain rust

inrrca.-es frr facilities: Such a policy should also incorporate and disease resistance. These programs

^\^ Salinity Laboratory— a plan for incentive payments to farm- should be continued in order to improve

s -r'^Hb .rat< rv re'cVamrtion ' ^ ^^' ^^ ^"' ^ ^^ ^° encourage them to grow new production which wiU always have an

.Slave rec.amation ^^^ ^^ crops. It should provide incentive pay- important place in agriculture.

Soils iabr.rJto7v."Midweit"^" ^450^ 000 ™^"^ ^ business to Undertake to use I regret that even though the chalr-

Soiis laboratory. Mississippi -f 450, 000 "^^ crops for industrial purposes. This man of the subcommittee offered an

Sc;s labt.ratcry. s uthcrn eood earth of ours can produce several amendment and led the fl'^ht in the sub-

Piedmont Soil Conservation thousand different types of plants. Our committee for an increase In funds the

Experiment station 4-275.003 agriculture industry has confined its pro- amount for agricultural research' for

lncrea..c to meet retiremen- co:-ts a 252. 290 duction to perhaps 150 kinds of plants State experiment stations Si sustaining

subtotal 7 338 400 f""" u "^"°^«^ ?^ ^^f"; .Agriculture a 10-percent decrease under the budget

Senate report authorized a total f?^^ been researched out of its own mar- estimate. Perhaps that is the largest

of 7.800,000 ^^ • ^ne soles of perhaps three pairs decrease of any program of its kind

of fchoes out of four are made of products which we have passed on to date

Increase provided for pro- Other than leather. Synthetics have This year Congress will be called upon

gram research +411,603 taken markets away from the producers to appropriate more than $4 billion for

» Includes $20,000 for alterations. Of cotton, wool, and fiax. military research. The fact that that
The budget estimates Included a total In- . ^^°*^ ^^^,^!i^^^.if ^^^'^^'^' ^^^ ^* needs amount is appropriated for military re-
crea.'^e for pro ^am Work In the amount of ^ '^e coupled With a program of action, search and development does not justify
$840,000 ina.'>muth ns less than half of this O^e of the important Steps in such a any particular figure for agricultural re-
amount would be avaiinbie under the Senate program is that cf trial commercializa- search but it certainly proves that the
report. It has been necessary for our research tion, SO that the ideas developed in the Nation' is able to provide the monev
pe- pie to select the problems which are most laboratories Will not remain nn thP ^'"'"''"/^.''"^^/'"i^™^*"^ me money.
important from the nationwide point cf view, shelves but wnihP ^^t in^'nn ^""^ ^^'^ ^^^* '^^^ ^^ ^^'^ ^'^^^ refer-
Under this requirement, the increase oriel- wl^^-rhV ii.v^ o ,1^ ^ ^"^^ ^° ^^ decrease is that for 2 con-
nai:y allocated to Idaho In the amount cf „«i„„J^;,, %^^^^",»f lesson from the de- secutive years there had been an appre-
$46 100, as mentioned In my letter of April y,, °P^^^"^ ^ ^^El^^.^^^? rubber in World ciable increase in funds for agricultural
15, 1957, to Mr. Don G. Frederickson, Presi- War II. The Umted States Govem- research, and that an enlarged program
dent. Idaho A5.«oclatkn of Soil Conservation Hient floundered around until a policy has been niif- infn r^fft^nt Tf irT,^!.rr
Distrirts, wuuid not be included in the was determined to fix In one place the ^nint; rnn^prn jl^J^ffL I *
Sefac^i^ -''''''' ^^ "^ "'^^^^ -- -P-sibility to produce synth'etic}ib! ITn^^r^-l^^,' ^^^^^f^TZ
"we'rerret u-t u will not be possible to go S^ducL^'und^'eTSriead'eShtnTl'^iif ^^^^'^^ abandonment of the progrlS
ahead with this In.p.rtant program In Idaho tin^,^^?-^ "fnJ.l Jn^ ^^^^1 ^^" °^ ^^^^ '^ ^'"^ ^e curtailed in future
unci, the bin as reported by the senate com- Sam J^ff'^rT^^Tgr^Jltu^^^^^^^^ L^d"' c^r^^^f tha^^ofnTLr"' '° "^

"""^'■■^B. T. SHAW. Adm..tr.tor. Z aS '^ '' ^^^"^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^ Se^JSL Thlh^ ^^"^ .'' '""^ '^^^^^^
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, will the p.IIjLn^'Sa^l- ^T/^^? '' 't^ cfawrde^r'eat ^d'ef ^ 1^^^^^^^^
Senator yield ? vp^ chnrtiv T .h.n l,h^ft f'^'l^''^''^'?- °^^- ^^^hough the amount is iSng in-
Mr. RUSSELL. I yield. T wki«^?p nrnnL^i T,1!h ^^^ ^'""f^^ "^^^ in the Senate version of the bill
Mr. CURTIS. I thank the distin- ?oS«Snl ?I™^i h .^"^ upon the over the House version.
puishcd Senator from Georgia. I wish fnTsTl shall comSumcate"^^^^ ^ ^^^^ ^^^^ '^^^^^^^^ ^°«^ ^^^ ^^^icate
also to express my appreciation for his senator and send hSircopv of the b,l? *^** ^^ ^^« ^° abandon the expanded
dedication to the cause of agriculture, Tn the hoSe that a n^o? many Senato^ P^°^^°^ ^" ^"^ ^^^^ We have increased
not only in the handling of this bill, but win join in wsSnsoring iS iStrodu^^^^^^ ^^^ Extension Service funds in recent
throughout the years. I thank the dS^eiS^^^ y^^rs. It must be continued on a broad-
Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the Senator from Georgia ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Senator ^j. ^^^ broader scale each year; and I
from Nebraska. j^j gTENNIS Mr President will the certainly hope the expansion of the pro-
Mr. CURTIS. I particularly wish to Senator yield' ^^- ^^esiaeni. will tne gram wiU be continued, as it is more jus-
mention his interest and assistance in ^Mr RUSSELL I yield tified.

getting underway a program of Indus- Mr. STENNIS I comrnend the Sen- ^^- RUSSELL. Mr. President, I wish

trial uses of surplus agricultural prod- ator from Nebraska for the work he has *° ^^^ ^^^^ ^ ^^^® ^^^^"^ known a more

ucts. Likewise. I would commend the done as the author of the bill to provide ^^'^^^^ supporter of the State research

soundness of the words expressed by the for a commission on the utilization of experiment stations and the Extension

Senator from Indiana (Mr. Capehart], farm products. I think the commission's Service than the distinguished Senator

the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. report will prove to be a very useful one °°^ Mississippi. Regardless of what-

MuNDTi, and the Senator from Illinois and a milestone in finding additional f^^^ ^^^°" ^^ committee may take in

I Mr. DiRKSEN]. Theirs is a viewpoint uses for agricultural products I com the future m respect to these approprla-

which is not only sound; it is one which mend the Senator highly for his work in *^°?^' ^ ^^" ^^^^^ ^^^ Senate that votes

has vision and which provides an oppor- this matter. "^^^^ ^^ taken on motions which will be

tunity for a sounder solution of agricul- Mr CURTIS I thank the Senator ^^^^ ^y the distinguished Senator from

tural programs. jrorn Mississippi Mississipi, and which I am quite con-

I believe there are great opportunities Mr. STENNIS.' I wish to add a word ^^^^\l l^^"^ ^^^^,^ support, to see

for the development of new markets for to what has been said with regard to the *° ^^ ^\^^^ ^^^i ^^"^ important work is

the farmers by increased industrial uses, agricultural research program, in which ^^°?^^^IJ^!^"^^'^-

I do not think that objective can be at- utilization and unit cost feature have ^^- STENNIS. I thank the Senator

tamed, however, by merely increasing the been emphasized. I point out that it is '^°™ Georgia. I merely wanted the Rec-

dollar amount of the appropriation for still true that the production of agricul- °^^ ^° ^^°w ^^^^ ^^""^ ^ strong senti-

that purpose. Congress should under- tural commodities needs to have con- ™^°^ ^°^ ^ continuation of the enlarged

take to write a legislative policy. That tinuing research programs, not espe- Programs for both the Extension Service

policy should create an authority— I be- cially at the present time for increasing ^^^ ^°^ agricultural research,

lieve it should be a board with a direc- yields, perhaps, but. as the chairman of acreagi: rxszhve phase or the son. bank

tor— charged specifically with this objec- the subcommittee pointed out a few min- Mr. President, the acreage reserve

tive. The board should be given power utes ago, for improving the quality of phase of the soil-bank program is not

GUI 5u4

1 .1

ij

8802

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

the correct approach to our basic agri-
cultural problem. The farm program as
a whole will rue the day it was forced
into a system of awarding Federal pay-
ments for failing to plant or cultivat«
land. A full reappraisal of this pro-
gram, and particularly its effect on farm
income and its impacts on the local
economy, is urgently needed. While the
short-rim money gains of this program
are tempting. I believe that the farmers
who continue to cultivate and improve
their land will not only be better off in
the long run, but will help out other
segments of the local economy who are
dependent on the land. These segments
include tenants, renters, merchants,
bankers, ginners. tind other processors
at the county and community level.
While I will vote for funds to operate
this program for another year at a re-
duced level, I shall do so only because
no other program is now available as a
substitute. I strongly believe that the
acreage reserve should be systematically
abolished.

The commitments of large acreages of
land placed in the acreage-reserve pro-
gram will encourage inefficiency, dis-
rupt the balance of our local economy,
and will in the end bring strong criti-
cism of the agricultural program. A
large part of the total budget request for
the entire Department of Agriculture for
fiscal year 1958 is for the acreage re-
serve; and even with this great expend-
iture to encourage idle acres, the Secre-
tary of Agriculture has predicted that
the acreage allotment for cotton in 1959
will be 3.5 million acres less than we
have in the current year. This level of
acreage would be far too low for eco-
nomic survival of the cotton farmer and
the cotton industry. This is clear ad-
mission on the part of the Department
of Agriculture that the acreage-reserve
program will not work and that it does
not provide a sound approach to our
basic problem.

The most serious threat of a program
of this nature is that it encourages idle
acres, without adequate safeguards for
sound conservation measures, and in the
final analysis it will tempt farmers to
sell their homesteads. Land values are
increasing, and will continue to become
more valuable as population increases.
Many rural communities at the present
are experiencing widespread shifts in
land ownership. Farms are getting
fewer and larger: and as this pattern
develops, local stores, banks, and mer-
chants will feel the full Impact of fewer
customers. Special attention must be
given to reappraising our present pro-
gram with the objective of encouraging
full utiUzatlon of aU land from the
standpoint of restoring fertility and in-
creasing income. The acreage reserve
program could make a much greater
contribution to agriculture by using at
least a part of the funds for meeting
competition and stimulating expanded
markets for agricultural products, and
thereby increasing acres.

I shall vote for the appropriations for
this program for 1958 with the full hope
and belief that a substitute program will
have to replace the acreage reserve
aftor 1958.

CONSnVATION USERVX PHAU OF THl SOIL BANK

The conservation reserve part of the
soil bank is a more constructive meas-
ure, since it is an investment in terms
of the future, and will give long-range
benefits to each individual participating.
This phase of the program, however,
needs to reach more of our small and
family-size farmers. It is these small
landowners who have the most difficult
problem of idle acres and erosion.

Mr. WILEY. Mr President. wiU the
Senator from Georria yield to me?

The PRESIDINd OFFICER (Mr.
Eastland in the chair >. Does the Sena-
tor from Georgia jield to the Senator
from Wisconsin?

Mr. RUSSELL. I am delighted to
yield to the Senator from Wisconsin.

Mr. WILEY. I wish to join the other
Members of the Senate who have com-
plimented the distinguished Senator
from Georgia. I always listen with
profit and with great interest to what he
has to say. because he has a logical
mind, and he always records the facts.
Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, the
Senator from Wisconsin fiatters me
beyond my deserts; but I appreciate it.
nevertheless.

Mr WILEY. No. Mr. President, I do
not flatter the Senator from Georgia;
what I have said is the general con-
sensus of all the other Members of the
Senate. I am not in the habit of speak-
ing carelessly or. as the saying is. "throw-
ing bouquets." Instead, I am in the
habit of stating facts.

Let me say. first, that I was interested
in the discussion regarding research. I
am satisfied that the answer lies in that
direction. In Wisconsin, 18 billion
pounds of milk are produced. In the
Southland, oleomargarine has taken up
to 50 percent or more of the spread
market.

Mr. RUSSELL. I may say to the Sen-
ator from Wisconsin that the Southland
is not responsible for all of that, because
the soybean production in Illinois has
also contributed largely to the produc-
tion of oleomargarine.

Mr. WILEY. I agree. I was referring
to oleomargarine only as an example.
The increased use of oleomargarine has
curtailed the market for butter and.
consequently, the market for milk.

The Senator from Georgia remembers
that last year I introduced a bill — and
I expect to introduce a smiilar bill this
year— providing for the establishment
in Madison, Wis., which, after all.
is the milk center of America, of a re-
search laboratory. When I consider the
miracles which have been accomplished
regarding the utilization of corn. I real-
ize that we have only touched the sur-
face in the case of what can be done
with the constituents of milk. For in-
stance. I have a friend who makes what
I regard as the most delicious candy
made in the United States; and in mak-
ing the candy, he uses, for 40 percent of
the candy, processed cheese. It makes
excellent candy, as I can testify, for I
have eaten samples of it. That is only
an indication of what can be done in
utilizing the constituents of milk and
their products.

The cow has been called the mother
of the race; and I believe It obvious that
from milk It Is possible to obtain ex-
tremely important products which can
be utilized in many ways. As a result,
I believe it will be found that the farm
income in the State of Wisconsin can be
greatly increased; and in that case there
would be no need for the Goverrunent to
provide any form of direct or indirect
subsidy.

I may say that many groups are ex-
perimenting In respect to the utilization
of milk. Other industrial groups are
experimenting with wheat, specifically.
Certainly a laboratory which would
concentrate upon research on milk,
should be established. If It ts estab-
lished. I believe the answer to the prob-
lem will be found.

In connection with the vast produc-
tion of milk, which is increasing all over
America. I think various matters must be
considered. First, we must consider how
to increase consumption.

The other day I read a newspaper ac-
count which stated that in the metro-
politan area of Washington, DC, 50,000
persons will receive food assistance.
Think of that. Mr. President. However.
the milk produced in Wisconsin cannot
be shipped into Washington. D. C; cer-
tain barriers prevent that. Therefore.
Increased consumption must be provided
for. in the first place; and. in the second
place, better distribution must be ar-
ranged; and. in the third place, utiliza-
tion programs of the type we have been
discussing must be provided.

The distinguished Senator from Min-
nesota addressed himself to a problem
which is quite general, although It is
particularly localized in Wisconsin. In
the western part of Wisconsin, border-
ing the Mississippi River, there are hills:
and on the farms in that area, great
gullies are virtually stealing the top soil.
Previous appropriation bills have In-
cluded a limitation of $1,500 on the
amount which could be used for gully
control. That program worked well
when a dollar was w )rth a dollar. How-
ever, today a dollar is worth only fifty
cents. Last year approximately 89 gully-
control projects of t.nat type In Wiscon-
sin could not be commenced because of
the $1,500 limitation. In 1955. Wiscon-
sin returned to the fund $1,758,000: and
in 1956. Wisconsin returned to the fund
$750,000.

Recognizing the seriousness of the
soll-eroslon situation, the House of Rep-
resentatives has voted— as stated by the
Senator from Minnesota— a maximum
limitation of $2,500. That will not cost
the Government anything; but It will
make possible the development of the 89
projects which are for the purpose of
preventing the erosion of the top soil
in the western part of Wisconsin into
the Mississippi River and its tributaries.
Therefore, Mr. President, I hope the
Senator from Georgia will give most
earnest consideration to the provision
voted by the House of Representatives.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed at this point in the
Record a statement on this subject made
by Representative Johkson. In his
statement he quoted certain Wisconsin

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8803

omcials. The statement appears on
page 7018 of the Congressional Rec-
ord of May 15. Representative John-
son described very fully the situation,
and quoted from conservation officials
in Wisconsin.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
cbjection?

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed In the
Record, as follows:

Mr. John;;on. Mr. Chairman, I rise in op-
position to the amendment striking out the
fl"ijr? »2..500. lowering the present limitation
in the bill before us.

I am principally interested In seeing the
limitation lelt as it 1b m the bill so that mo.'-e
work can be clone on gully control structures
In States with a topography like we have In
we-tern Wisconsin. The present limitation
wr.s established at a time when construction
costs were C'.nsiclerably le<=s than they are
today. People active In this work In Wis-
consin tell me that the llmiution is block-
liig gully cuiitrol work because of Increased
c sU.. An Incomplete survey In \Vl8coii.<rln
bhTAs th.it 89 pj'Oj^cts for gully control were
mt started la.«t year becau.^e. und"r the pres-
ent limitation In the law, the Government
pMuld not enter Into the construction be-
yond the 81.500 fl::ure.

Many of the farms and hilly areas of west-
ern Wisconsin and other States with similar
topop.'-aiihy are uiiable to progress any fur-
ther with soil cor.servatlrn work unless the
amount allowed for gully-dam con?triict!on
is Inrre-^.sed. The old «1,500 limitation ac-
count* for the fact that many States are
ntjt using the total ACP appropriation. Wis-
consin reiurned $1,758,000 in 1955. and the
preliminary figure Un the year 1956 thows
that the State returned $750,000.

In speaking to people engaged !n soll-
con.servatlfm work, I was told that for a
number of years It has b«>n Impossible for
the State to proceed with major gully-
oontrol work because of this provision In the
law. They told me that If this exception
were not Included In the law. they would be
able to go int) the various watersheds, do
part of the gully-control work on indlvld-
ti.il farms and, when the total project came
up for planning, the cost -benefit ratio would
come out favorably and the project would
be eligible for Federal assistance.

I believe every member of this committee
Is aware tliat, if this condiUon is permitted
to exist, areas where the gullies have m.ide
such headway will be without value for
future farming operations and we will have
a country similar to China, where soil ero-
sion was permitted to run rampant for cen-
turies. The gullies I refer to In my district
have made such headway that, even if the
farmers follow the conservation practices
set up for them, they are unable to retard
these large gulUes from making further ad-
vances through the valleys without doing
special gully-control work.

Let me quote from letters I have received
from Wisconsin soil-conservation leaders
concerning the price UmlUtlon. The first
statement la from Mr. Henry E. Graff,
chairman of the Eau Claire County board,
and Mr. Arthur Donaldson, chairman of the
Eau Claire County agricultural committee:
"The $1,500 limitation per farm in the AC
program has deferred the Installation of
large control structures. Construction costs
have frone up to a point where the $1,500
limitation does not provide for equitable
cost sharing on large structures. It Is our
understanding that sizable unexpended bal-
ances from the AC program have been re-
turned. We believe It would be far better
to encourage the structure program by rais-
ing the present limitation and using at least
a portion of the unexpended balance for
permanent structures."

I should also like to quote from the letter
of a man engaged In soil -conservation work
in western WisconBin:

"You are familiar with the rugged terrain
of this area. Many of our farms have large
gullies on them. In order to prevent them
from spreading, It Is necessary to construct
earthen and mechanical structures at their
heads. This sometimes runs as high as $6,000
for a single gully. The average cost is prob-
ably close to $3,000. Most of the farmers in
this 6 or 7 county area cannot financially
t.lord to spend this much on these gullies.
The agricultural-conservation program of the
Agricultural Conservation and Stabilization
Service of the Department of Agriculture
helps share the cost of these practices. The
law states that the Government will pay 75
percent of the cost of these structures. How-
ever, another section of the same law states
that no farm may earn over $1,500 in any 1
year. In the case of guliy control structures
costing $3,000, the percentage immediately
falls from 75 percent to 50 percent because
of the $1,500 limitation. I understand that
a change In the law requires an act of Con-
gress. I feel that the $1,500 limitation should
be removed In case of structures and the 75-
percent limitation alone apply."

The Dunn County Soil Conservation Dis-
trict annual report for 1956 also recommends
a change In the law, and I shall quote in
part from It:

"We would like to make one recommenda-
tion for a change In the above-mentioned
ACP. We have an estimated 150 large gul-
lies in need of gully control structures.
Many of these will cost the farmers from
$3,500 to $5,500 to install. Under the present
ACP the Grovernment will reimburse the
farmer 75 percent of the cost of gully-control
works. This Is fine, but Congress has im-
posed a maximum payment per farm of
$1,500. Under this regulation the farmer
Is not able to recover anywhere near 75 per-
cent of the cost. For the benefit of the
gully-control program, we would like to
see the $1,500 celling raised to $3,500 per
farm for gully-control work only. Most of
our farmers find themselves in a financial
stress and are unable to spend necessary
money to halt large guIUes which are eating
Into valuable cropland and in some cases
building sites. In most cases, these gullies
are a threat to neighboring farms as weU as
to public highways."

In reply to an inquiry I made of a county
agent to Wisconsin, I received the follow-
ing statement:

"There Is one Item on which we might get
more done, If the ASC aid was a little more
realistic. The present incentive payments
on erosion control structures put in by a
farmer are 75 percent of the cost, with an
upper limit of $1,500. In this area, the aver-
age cost of structures has been about $3,000,
and a top of around $6,000, which means
that the average man only gets about 50
percent of the cost back, and in tae larger
ones, they would get as little as 25 percent."
This situation Is not confined exclusively
to my district. I am told the same prob-
lems exist In Kentucky, eastern Iowa, parts
of Missouri and Nebraska, and perhaps In
many other States of which I am not aware.
I believe the purpose of the restriction Is to
prevent a few large farms from receiving
large granta under the ACP, and I am in
favor of this purpose. However, I would like
to see the language changed so that the
limitation of $1,500 for individual farmers
for doing gully-control work is raised to s
figure compatible with current construction
costs, or excepted entirely.

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, if my
colleagues will examine the statement
I have Just placed In the Record, they
will realize that this situation must be

met head-on, and that it will be possible
to do so without costing more money.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, I can
assure the distinguished Senator from
Wisconsin that, if in the conference any
sound reason for increasing the amount
for this item is advanced, I shall ap-
proach it with an open mind. I am not
adamant about the matter. The amount
had been $1,500 for many years, and no
evidence whatever as to why an increase
should be made was presented by the
representatives of the Department or by
any other witness. In view of that fact,
the committee decided to use the old
figure, not having knowledge of the
reasons which prompted the House to
vote for an increase.

Coming from Georgia, I certainly be-
lieve in preserving the assets of the
Nation. If our civilization is to endure
as long as the Roman Einpire endured,
we must pay more attention than we
have heretofore paid to the conservation
cf our soil. Every year, a smaller num-
ber of acres is required to support a per-
son in the United States. I believe that
at the present time 3.4 tillable acres are
required for each person in the United
States. With the population of our
country increasing at the rate of ap-
proximately 7.000 a day, it is obvious that
it is essential that all our fertile land
must be conserved and protected.

Mr. WILEY. I thank the Senator
from Georgia. It was for the reason I
have stated that the House of Repre-
sentatives voted the allowance of $2,500.
As I have said, many of the projects can-
not be completed under the smaller
allowance; and in the last 2 years large
amounts of money have been returned to
the Treasury, as a result of the smaller
allowance.

Knowing the situation as I do, I wish
to state that an increase in this item
would represent the type of statesman-
ship the Senator from Georgia always
manifests.

Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the Senator
from Wisconsin.

Mr. MONRONEY. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Georgia yield to me?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
Church in the chair) . Does the Sena-
tor from Georgia yield to the Senator
from Oklahoma?
Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.
Mr. MONRONEY. I wish to con-
gratulate the chairman of the subcom-
mittee on the splendid Job he has done
on the Soil Conservation Service items
and those relating to watershed protec-
tion in the case of the upstream dams.

1 appreciate very much the increase the
committee has recommended, even
though It is not quite so large as the one
we wished for. Nevertheless, we realize
that the budgetary pressures are very
great.

Mr. RUSSELL. I may say that those

2 or 3 items are about the only ones in
the bill which received the full amount
of the budget estimates.

Mr. MONRONEY. I realize that, and
we appreciate very much the fact that
they were not cut.

In my State and elsewhere in the
Southwest we have Just experienced the
most devastating floods in our history.

5

8804

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

f't

As the distinguished chairman of the
subcommittee knows, our rivers have
washed hundreds of thousands of tons of
sand and silt onto the fertile bottom
lands through which the rivers flow.
Prom one end of the State to the other,
there has been great flood damage. In
the case of Oklahoma alone, more than
$50 million of damage has been done.
The farmers are desperate; they wonder
whether there will be any way for them
to rehabilitate their land and to get rid
of the sand which covers the land and
to remove the large trees and logs and
debris which htter the fields.

I wish to ask the distinguished Sena-
tor from Georgia whether in agricul-
tural legislation there is authority which
will permit appropriations to be made
later on. to help these farmers defray a
part of the co5t of putting their lands
back into shape.

Mr. RUSSELL. I think there is no
question that there is authority for that
activity, because such assistance has very
properly been given in times past, when
disaster as a result of flood has stricken
various areas. I hold in my hand the
overall law. It pertains to disaster re-
lief. It is certainly sufficiently broad
to cover almost any conceivable restora-
tion of land damaged because of flood.

Mr. MONRONEY. Does the Senator
refer to Public Law 875?

Mr. RUSSELL. Yes.

Mr. MONRONEY. That law dei^ls.
however, primarily with public agencies
and not with private ones.

Mr. RUSSELL. As I understand, that
Is the authority which is utilized for the
transfer of funds which have been appro-
priated for the Presidents disaster relief
fund to the Department of Agriculture,
to carry on the .specific work which the
Senator has :n mind.

Mr MONRONEY. Under the Depart-
ment of Agriculture rules relating to soil
consetTation and ACP. the fund.s can be
u.'^ed to rehabihtatp the land and to re-
store Its productive capacity. Ls that
correct?

Mr. RUSSELL. That is correct.
That is my understanding.

Mr MONRONEY But the floods oc-
curred too late to enable the situation to
be taken care of in the present or current
appropriation bill There are no esti-
mates from the Department of Agricul-
ture, are there''

Mr. RUSSELL. There is no specific
request in connection with the floods
which have been mentioned. Not t)emg
able to get a budget estimate, naturally
the committee did not go into the field
to examine the situation. Unquestion-
ably, It is a matter which should be dealt
with. I am of the opinion that there
will be at least one. if not two or three,
supplemental appropriation bills. If
there is not sufficient authorization at the
present time, such an authorization can
be taken care of in a supplemental ap-
propriation bill. As one member of the
Appropriations Committee. I shall cer-
tainly lend a very sympathetic ear to any
pre.sentation which the Senator from
Oklahoma may make with regard to ap-
propriations in this field.

Mr MONRONEY. I appreciate that
assurance, because the States of Okla-
lioma, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and

parts of Missouri and Kansas are In
rather desperate shape as a result of the
flood conditions that now exist.

In the third supplemental appropria-
tion bill, a copy of report on which I
hold in my hand, funds in the sum of $4
million are appropriated for the Depart-
ment of Agriculture for this type of
work; but I understand that all but SPj
million of that will have to be reimbursed
to the Presidents fund. Then, in an-
other place, a reimbursement of S1L500.-

000 is provided in the conference report,
which will also be used to reunburse the
President's disaster relief fund.

Mr RUSSELL. If the funds can be
reimbursed, there is no rea.son why we
cannot reallocate the funds for d:sa.--
ter. I tho'.uht that was the ptupose of
disaster relief funds.

Mr. MONRONEY. I am glad to hear
the Senator say that, because we shall
desperatelv need s<:>mc funds which will
be available to agriculture throu-jh the
President's disaster rehef fund, which is
now depleted. It will be replenished
with money through the third supple-
mental appropriation bill. Tliat money
asain needs to be applied to agriculture
so that clearing of the land can take
place.

Mr RUSSELL. I hope the adminis-
tration will take cognizance of this con-
dition and submit a reijular budt,'et esti-
mate for nece-sary relief as a result of
the rava^'es of the flood. If that is not
done. I hope the Committee on Appro-
priations will consider the matter.
Wheth'^r it is necessary to replace the
Pres. dent's disaster relief fund or make
a direct appropriation to the Depart-
ment of A'-Triculture. I hope some steps
will be taken to alleviate this condition,
which IS so disastrous to the farmers. I
understand in the area of fiood many
farmers have not even planted crops.
Perhaps they are better off than tho.se
who had planted crops, becau.se those
who had planned them lost thnr .seed.
fertilizer, and labor, and the land is now
covered with log.^ and debris. If that is
not a diNaster. then I am unable to un-
derstand the implioutiono of the word.

Mr MONRONEY It could become a
permanent di.saster unless the silt and
debris is removed.

INANIMOUS-CoNSEVT .tCREEMINT

Mr JOHNSON of Texas Mr Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield to me so that

1 may propound a unanimous-consent
request'

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield for that pur-
pase.

Mr JOHNSON of Texas. Mr Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that an
order be entered that when proposed to
the pending bill H R 7441, the Agricul-
tural and Farm Credit Administration
bill for the fi.scal year 1958. debate on
the amendment of the Senator from
South Dakota I Mr. MundtI striking out,
on page 28. beginning with the colon in
line 17 down through the matter in line
20 and inserting a period, submitted for
pnntinij on June 10, 1957. and lettered
' B, ' shall be limited to 1 hour, to be
equally divided and controlled, respec-
tively, by Mr Mundt and the majority
leader: Provided, That no amendment
that is not german>, to the provisions of

the matter proposed to be stricken out
shall be in order.

In the event any other amendment is
proposed, debate shall proceed under a
like arrangement as to the division and
control of time.

Ordered further. That on the question
of the final pa.ssage of the said bill de-
bate shall be limited to 1 hour, to be
equally divided and controlled, respec-
tively, by the majority and minority
leaders.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the unanimous-consent re-
quest'

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, reserv-
ing the iiuht to object, and I shall not
object. I ihould like to have the majority
leader give me his assurance that he will
help me get a yea and nay vote on my
amendment.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I want to
assure the Senator he will get a yea and
nay vote. I do not want to assure him
that I will help him get it. I have dis-
cu.ssed It with the minority leader. The
Senator will get a yea and nay vote on
his amendment.

Mr THYE. Mr. President. I iust came
from a committee meeting. Reserving
the right to object, may I ask what the
proposed agreement provides?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. One hour of
de'oate on tne amendment of the Senator
from South Dakota. 30 minutes to a side;
1 hour on any other amendment. 30 min-
utes to R side; 1 hour on the bill, 30 min-
utes to a side

Mr. CARLSON Mr. President, reserv-
ing the right to object, am I to under-
stand that the Senator from Texas has
proposed a limitation of 30 minutes to a
side on the Mundt amendment and a
total of 1 hour on other amendments?

Mr JOHNSON of Texas. It is the
same on all amendments.

Mr CARLSON. I shall not object to
the unanimous consent request, but I
think the Mundt amendment is a most
important amendment so far as agricul-
ture is concerned and so far as the con-
servation re.serve program is concerned.

Mr JOHNSON of Texas I asked the
Senator from South Dakota to suggest
the amount of time he would like to have,
and the consent request was formulated
with his full knowledge and approval.

Mr. CARLSON. If the Senator from
South Dakota is willing to accept it, I
am, of course, willing to abide by his de-
cision, but I think this is one of the most
important amendments to the bill.

Mr MUNDT I agree with the Sena-
tor I shall be glad to allocate some time
to him. because I do not intend to take
all the time that will be allotted to me.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the unanimous. coasent re-
quest of the Senator from Texas? If
not. the unanimous-consent agi"eement
IS entered.

Mr. CARLSON. Mr. President, wiU
the Senator from Georgia yield to me?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield to the Senator
from Kansas.

Mr. CARLSON. I did not wLsh to let
this opportunity pass without paying
tribute to the very distinguislied and
able Senator from Georgia. Agiiculture
IS in good hands when he is in ciiarge of
bills pertaining to it. I share the views

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8805

expressed by the Senator from Missis-
sippi IMr. Stknnis] on the Items having
to do with agricultural research, experi-
ment stations, and extension work. I
know the chairman of the subcommittee
has been as generous as he thinks he
could be under the circumstances. I
have listened to the debate this after-
noon. I sincerely hope this is not the
beginning of a program of reducing ap-
propriations for these important agen-
cies.

Mr. RUSSELL. I can assure the Sen-
ator that if there is any reduction in
these appropriations, it will be over my
vigorous protest.

Mr. CARLSON. That is the reason I
said agricultiu-e is in good hands.

Mr. RUSSELL. I appreciate the com-
mendatory remarks of the Senator from
Kansas.

Mr. CARLSON. I should Uke to ask
one or two questions in order to obtain
explanations. I have reswi the commit-
tee report. I notice about 3 pages are
devoted to the soil and water conserva-
tion programs. Some of that I do not
understand; and maybe that is express-
ing it mildly.

One question I should like to ask is,
what has happened to the water facili-
ties program under the bill, and what
will happen to It.

Mr. RUSSELL. I will say to the dis-
tinguished Senator that the water fa-
cilities program is one of the few items
in the bill which has received an in-
crease over the appropriation for the
current year. The appropriations for
the watershed protection for the present
fiscal year are $17.5 million. This bill,
as presented to the Senate, carries $25.5
million.

There is a carryover of about $4 ' 2 mil-
lion in that Item, but the item received
the full amount of the budget estimate,
including an increase of some $8 million.
Mr. CARLSON. One of the things
which concerned me, if I may say so, was
the provision on page 6, which reads:

Provided further. That the unexpended
balances of approprlatlona heretofore made
for "Watershed protection." "Flood preven-
tion." and "Water conservation and utiliza-
tion projects" shall be merged with this ap-
propriation.

Mr. RUSSELL. Permit me to say to
the Senator that when this bill was con-
sidered in the other body they under-
took to merge the appropriations for
the agricultural conservation program,
the old soil conservation program, the
conservation reserve under the soil bank,
the watershed program, the Soil Conser-
vation Service, the small dam program,
the Great Plains program— a total of
budget activities for which budget esti-
mates of $668 » 2 million were submitted.
In order to bring about a reduction in
the bill, the House lumped them all
together and made a lump sum appropri-
ation of $535 million to meet budget
estimates of $668 > 2 million.

The Department, be it said to its credit,
did not wish to merge the appropria-
tions, which would certainly diminish
the ability of the Congress to keep in
contact with the programs, by doing
away with line item appropriations. 'We
restored the separation of these appro-

priations and made a specific appropria-
tion for each activity.

In the bill the Senator will find lan-
guage following the precedents of the
past, which make line item appropria-
tions instead of lump-sum appropria-
tions.

I wish to be perfectly frank. 'We had
great good luck. The funds which were
estimated for the soil conservation re-
serve were not all used. I think that
was primarily due to the fact that the
acreage reserve was given greater pri-
ority, and more emphasis was placed
upon It. There was about $100 million
which was not needed to meet the pay-
ments under the conservation reserve
program, and by virtue of that fact we
were able to allow the full amount of the
budget estimates, including the soil con-
servation service, the pilot plant proj-
ects, the conservation districts, and
other activities.

Mr. CARLSON. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield further?
Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.
Mr. CARLSON. I wish to state I sin-
cerely hope that the views of the Senate
committee, which I trust will be the
views of the Senate, prevail In the con-
ference. I think it is most important
that we keep these appropriations sep-
arate and tied to their individual pro-
grams.

Mr. RUSSELL. There is no way the
Congress can possibly control the pro-
grams, and determine which progran^j^i
should be expanded and which prograS^^r(
should be diminished, unless we have
line item appropriations, where they are
separated. If we lump them all together
we transfer any authority we might ex-
ercise to the Department of Agriculture.
Mr. CARLSON. Yes. I wish to say
I appreciate very much the views of the
chairman on this item. I know of no
program which is more important to
the great Midwest than the control of
water at the source. It affects conser-
vation and the growth of that section
industrially and agriculturally, through
holding back a volume of water which
can be used for beneficial purposes. I
syicerely hope that the funds will be suf-
ficient to carry on that fine program.

Mr. RUSSELL. I beUeve the funds
will be adequate. As I stated, there was
a carryover. All the funds were not
used, and we have a carryover for the
present year, although the program is
increasing and is popular.

The Senator did not refer to the
amount of flood damage which was elim-
inated by carrying on this program
where the water arises.

Mr. CARLSON. I appreciate the Sen-
ator's comment.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield to the distin-
guished Senator from Minnesota.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President. I wish to
commend the distinguished Sentor from
Georgia, the chairman of the Agriculture
Subcommittee of the Committee on Ap-
priations. As a member of the Senate
Committee on Appropriations, I am quite
familiar with the amount of detailed
hearing work that was Involved in de-
veloping the information which enabled

this bill to be brought to the Senate
floor.

There are several phases of this ap-
propriation bill which are most con-
structive. One of the programs for
which the bill provides Is the rural-de-
velopment program. That promises a
great deal of future benefit to the areas
of the Nation where farm income is at
a minimum

I know in northern Minnesota, in ttie
cut over area, this program is being
developed, and It holds promise of in-
creasing income and making it possible
for the farmers to stay on the small
farms in that part of the State. That is
true also of northern 'Wisconsin and
Michigan, as well as some of the South-
ern States.

Another desirable feature, of course.
Is the restoration of funds for the acre-
age-reserve program of the soil bank.
It would have been a serious mistake if
the Senate had not reinstated those
funds, because we did not have a his-
tory of complete operation for a full year
under the acreage-reserve program. If
any program will reduce farm surpluses
and also conserve the fertility of our
land* it is the soil -bank program with
its conservation and acreage-reserve
aspects.

The able and distinguished chairman
of the subcommittee, the Senator from
Georgia [Mr. RiresELL], did a very suc-
^ce^isful job in piloting that provision of
"^"^e appropriation bill through the Ap-
iropriations Committee.
There was one other phase of the ap-
propriation bill with which I was disap-
pointed, and that was the restriction of
$7.50 per acre under the conservation
phase of the soil bank. I think that is
a mistake. I do not believe we have a
suflBcient history so that we can justly
criticize the Department of Agriculture
in its administrative handling of the
conservation reserve phase of our soil-
bank program. With this restriction
being imposed, it appears as though we
are criticizing the Department. It ap-
pears as though we are restricting its
future operations.

I hope the amendment offered by the
distinguished Senator from South Da-
kota [Mr. MtTNDT] will prevalL That
will remove the restriction.

Other than that restriction, Mr. Presi-
dent, I would say that this is a very good
agricultural appropriation bill. It
promises to continue the administrative
functions of Public Law 480 in disposing
of our surplus agriculttu-al commodities
and products.

Those two phases, the soil bank and
Public Law 480. represent the only cer-
tainty that the farm economy is going
to be improved in the future. Those two
phases of this appropriation bill hold out
hope for agriculture that they will bring
the agricultural economy Into balance
with the rest of the Nation's economy,
which is at an all-time high.

Again I commend the distinguished
Senatdr from Georgia for his most con-
structive and able chairmanship of the
subcommittee which handled the agri-
cultural appropriation bill.

Mr. RUSSELL. I am very grateful to
the distinguished Senator for his kind

i

8806

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

/ '

comment, and for the very fine assist-
ance he always renders as a member of
the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President. I
wish to comment comparatively briefly
on the bill.

P^rst. I have been favorably impressed
with the adroitness and knowledge with
which the chairman of the subcommit-
tee has handled the rather difiBcult and
comphcated questions that have been
addressed to him.

I was particularly interested in the
disciisslon earlier today, when the dis-
tingruished senior Senator from Indiana
[Mr. CapehartI was raising the question
of additional funds for the use of agri-
cultural products for industrial pur-
poses. This particular issue reminded
me of a letter which had been sent back
in February to the senior Senator from
Oregon [Mr. Morse 1. a copy of which
was sent to me. by one of the most dis-
tinguished educators and agricultural
economists In my State. I refer to Dr.
A. L. Strand, president of Oregon State
College.

In this letter Dr. Strand emphasized
the fact that the increased use of agri-
cultural products for industrial purposes
can, in many Instances, he a mirage,
and that it can actually divert us from
the need for Increased research, by
which the farmers methods can be
made more effective, and as a r:?sult of
which agricultural products can be used
for their primary purpose, which is to
feed the people of our Nation and some
of the rest of the world.

I should like to include in the Record.
If I may. because this subject was dis-
cussed earlier today, the letter which
came to the senior Senator from Oregon
and myself m February 1957. from the
very eminent educator and agricultural
expert to whom I have referred. Eh".
A. L. Strand, president of Oregon State
College. This should be of real mterest
to my colleagues.

There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed m the Record.
as follows:

Oregon St*t» Collkje.
CoTvaUi.1. Oreg , February 12. 1357,
Senator Wayne Morsi.

Wastiingtnn. D C

Dtar SirvATOR Morse ITn glad your name
l.s not on Capiiharts Senate bill 724 to estab-
lish "an Industrial Agricultural Producu Ad-
mlnlstratloa."

The expenditures ot the Federal Govern-
meni are high enough, without running an-
other tlOO mllUon Into a blind aiiey each
year

H<v many times d^e.s It h'»ve to be demon-
strated that farmers are n.it ^ning to proflt
from the Industrial use of ai^rii^ultural prod-
ucts' Alohol from potatoes, corn, etc . ts
uneconomic. Alcohol can be made so cheap-
ly from sugar wastes thjit this established
method can drive any other method out of
the m-irket unless It has a subsidy. Does this
administration Intend to jjo into subsldle.s to
promote the use of agricultural products?
The scientific truth that sUnds In the way
of iny lar«?e success of this bill la that car-
bon-hydrtigen -oxygen chains are available to
industry through cheap and coastanUy avail-
able nonat<rlcu:tural materials (ccal. petro-
I*-':m 1 . Through my association with the
Q'jaker Oats Co. for 25 years. I observed the
development of furfural which Is used In the
dewaxlng of automotive fuels, the manufac-
ture of nylon, etc. At first It was made fn:)m
oat hulls. That worked for a while, as long

as oat bulls were worth only $2M per ton

f ir fuel When oat hulls canie into demand
for livestock feeds they were worth fifteen to
twenty dollars per ton. The return through
furfural was about $8 or $8 50. And so the
company turned to cottonseed hulls and
r.nally to corncobs, which are the basic mate-
rial now. But the farmers never got a cent
more for their oats or com on account of fur-
fural. That was not because of any unfair-
ness on the part of the manufacturer; he
Just can't pay more. The gathering of corri-
cobs requires some labor, and this throvrs
some money Into agricultural communities,
but not much.

If this proposed new agency Is established,
exempt from clvU service. It will rob the
USDA and our Institutions of scientific per-
sonnel who are producing: now Such a raid
at thU time would be very unfortunate for
even a good cause, but to raid us to launch
a dead duct.

This Is a Walllngford promoter',* bill to
fool the farmers and make them believe
something great Is being done for them.
Rt'memtjer the starch promoters who took In
the Grange In Washlngt.n and would have
nicked Oreeron. too. if our organization
hadn't stopped It.
Sincerely,

A. L. Stxand.

Preatdent.

Mr NEUBERGER. Mr. President. I
understand that the 1958 budret esti-
mates for the Department of Agriculture
included $34,003,708 for the .subappro-
priatton 'Payments to States. Hawaii,
Ala5!ca. and Puerto Rico." an increase of
$4. 500.000 over the current appropria-
tion of $29,503,708. However, the House
bill disallowed this increase, but $1 mil-
lion has bi-en restored by the Senate Ap-
propriatlon.s Committee.

The budtjet Increase wa.s recom-
mended in order, first, to meet rising
costs of research under this appropria-
tion: and second, initiate new projects
and expand some already under way.
The fields of research covered by the pro-
pasted increase are crop production, plant
diseases and insects, animal production,
animal diseases and parasites, water use
and conservation, soils and fertilizers,
agricultural economics, farm mechani-
zation and structures, marketing and
utilization, heme economics, and forest
crop production. The various States
have a heavy backlog of urvient requests
for research on SUte and local problems
in these fields.

Present research on many major prob-
lems facing the American farmer are
not adequate to meet his needs or to ar-
rive at a .solution at an early date. Be-
cause of differing climate, .soil, market
outlets, and other local conditions, each
State has distinct problems of produc-
tion and marketing of crops and live-
."^tock which can best be solved by the
States, or cooperatively by two or more
interested States. Such research is sup-
plementary to the national and regional
Interests of the Department of Agricul-
ture. To foster research between these
two Interdependent groups. Federal-
grant funds have been appropriated for
many years. Under this program the
States provide about three times the
amount of funds provided by Federal
grants. While the majority of grant
funds must be matched by States, most
of them more than match the Federal
portion.

1957

If there la no lncrea.se In the appro-
priation, it will not only be imtossible
to conduct the additional research which
is needed, but rising costs of research
will necessitate a reduction in research
at State agriculture experiment stations
from present levels.

The great importance of agriculture
research has been emphasized in etters
and telegrams I have received from Ore-
gon in recent days and weeks. In a let-
ter, F. L. Ballard, associate director of
extension at Oregon State College. Cor-
vallis, Oreg., explains that State and lo-
cal interests are increasing theii con-
tributions to research.

Industry for example, is incrcaauig its
investment in research every year. A
letter from F. E. Price, dean and director
of Agriculture at Oregon State College,
addressed to each member of the Oregon
delegation, contains a table from the
April 27 issue of Business Week. I ask
unanimous consent, Mr. President, to
have that letter included in the Coh-
C2ESSJONAL RECORD at thls point.

There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed in the Rxcoao,
as follows:

ORBQUN St ATI COLXJiCS,

CoriaUis, Oreg., May 13. 1957.

OaXOCN DCXGATION.

Unitrd States Senate. House Of Repre-
sentatives. Washington, D C.
MR.S Greitn and GcNTLiMrN When I read
the following table as regards research
spending by private Industry. I thought of
Oregon's delegation who arc confront«l with
the question of supporting or not support-
ing additional Federal funds for afp-lcultural
research. The following figures, taken from
the April 37 Issue of Business Week. 1 idlcat«
thit United States private Industrj plana
to boost Its spending on research by SO per-
cent In the neit 4 years. You will al«o not«
that they have made a substantial increase
In 1957 over lB5fl:

Research spmding aims at $9,000,000,000 «
year by 19S0

fVinion.«.ir.lolI(ir«l

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

i9se

lUft?

IV«I

I'lanufd

rnirarr nirtai!"

Mj*hltV:v

F '• ti'.ciU 1 'juipTirnt

.^trmft ".n^l pnrts

1- it't 'it.- 1 iii.ui j)r<j<lutt5

in 1 or^'n rn---
I*rol.>ss»or«l anil iclrptlflc

Lii.*tfiu;Kiil».
Th.-: !,-;tN in ! -i;;') •! iT'v'.ii.t-;
Pi|i*r >n<1 >\l!l»«l iiro<lui-ts . .
Kub'^JT l>ro<lti<t<

W7 'J

'<f\ 2

1. !(>> '.»

1,»7. »

K>« 3

iSil

<<r <*
*: 8

TAl

IS %

7&U

\? 9
1,071 i

■VTWI
310 4

KM A

.-.: .1

1 .10 7
2. 774. 4

17:1.5

300.0

•iT 7
47. «
M V

rr I
8&1

.V >■

i,iart u

7lM l
I.KT 1

a>i«i.i

2(10 •

4:^.10

f.!7 4
.S7 S
W> 0

.~:.'ti>'. <-.-ii , iinl .■l.i.'v.'<

HMn<lpiim |ir'-tiirt«

K'lol iji<l km'lrr<1 i.(Oi)urt.<

T['[v-il

Ottk* ninniirjttu/ini:

777 1
Wis

4? S

i.srza

All msTi'i'irt'tr'nir

NiiriDikiiiifiu'turTK luiliut M

6.971 7
.«7 1

4IH.S

0,2C8.

s. T-iv nose statistics (1933 . National Science Foan-
daCk II.

We have manr problems relating to pro-
duction efficiency and methods of reducing
costs of production which can only be un-
dertaken when additional funds are avail-
able, as we are wi rklng on as many ot these
OS we can with present funds. In behalf of
Oregon agriculture, I hope that you will see
r.t to support appropriations for additional
agricultural research

Very truly youn,

F. E. Pxics,
Dean and Director of Agnculturt.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, the
Oregon Potato Council in a recent wire
warned of new potato diseases of a seri-
ous nature and still unnamed which
threaten the yield and quahty.

In certain sections of Oregon the
growing of bulbs is an important phase
of our agriculture. A letter from Mr.
Carl A. DuBosh, president of the bulb
growers, stresses the need for research
of they are to meet competition from the
bulb industry of Holland.

Lyle W. Hammack, who is a prominent
figure in the Oregon dairy industry,
writes:

Most certainly the tax burden on business
today Is really becomluK a problem. How-
ever. Dick. It teems to me unwise to cut ap-
prupriations that are deslRned for research
that does ultimately produce new wealth In
economy.

Phil Farrel. president of the Oregon
Seed Growers Lea.^ue, emphasizes the
fcame thouBht in saying:

Tills organization believes that In economy
moves we should make a distinction between
money that will Increase our Income, and
money that, once spent. Is gone forever.

His letter tells of a .study of wild bees.
Important for the pollinization of seed
ciops. which may languish because the
cut in the budget request will deny the
$1,500 matching funds they require.
This is a small investment in an Oregon
agriculture Industry whose sales last year
v^eie in exce.ss of S20 million.

Roy Steven-son, president of the Ore-
gon Weed Conference, has added his
organization's support for greater in-
vestments for research. He writes that
"weed control is the biggest production
problem confronting the American farm-
er," and he explains that their effective
work depends on the testing program
carried on by the local experiment sta-
tions assisted by Federal Research funds.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed in the Record at
this point as a part of my remarks several
Illuminating telegrams which I have re-
ceived from leaders in agriculture in my
State.

There being no objection, the tele-
grams were ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

Klamath Falls. Oreg., June 7, 1957.
Hon. Richard L. Nevbercer,
Senate Office BuiLdtng,

Washington. D. C:
Request that you do everything possible
to restore to the budget the recommended
funds for support for agricultural research
work at the land-grant colleges. This Is
necessary to forestall a curUllment of agri-
cultural experimental work which Is of
great value to our agricultural development.
Respectfully yours,

Klamath County Cotmr.
C. Mack. County Judge.
E. W. GowEN, Commissioner.
Jerst Rajnus, Commissioner.

8807

Ntssa, Dreg., June 10, 1957.
Senator Richard Neubebger,
Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C.r
We strongly urge restoration of 94 million
for agricultural research. Our agricultural
economy Is more dependent now that ever
before on research.

PAtTL House,
President, Oregon Reclamation Congress.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, the
research committee of the National As-
sociation of Wheat Growers in a report
given by the committee chairman, Floyd
Root, of Wasco, Oreg., on the occasion
of their annual meeting in Lincoln,
Nebr., this past February, included the
following significant paragraph :

This committee recognized that major
Improvement In the status of agricultural
research in general, and of wheat research
In particular, has been largely due to the
combined efTorts of several commodity
groups Interested In effecting increased ap-
propriations for such research. Therefore,
this committee recommends that the NAWG
continue and expand Its efforts toward in-
creased total appropriations for agricultural
research with full recognition for the re-
search needs of other segments of agricul-
ture.

Klamath Falls. Oreg., June 10. 1957.
Senator Richard Nelt3Erger,
Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C:
Urgently request restoration of $4«/j mil-
lion in current budget for agricultural re-
search vitally Important to the future wel-
fare of our farmers.

Frank O. Howard,
President, Klamath Basin Water
Vsera Protective Association.

I have made these references to the
thinking of Oregon agricultural leaders,
Mr. President, to indicate that represent-
ative opinion in Oregon approves a more
generous support of agriculture research.
The wisdom of such an investment is
confirmed in messages from those so
closely identified with the industry.

Mr. President. I should like to ask
several brief questions of the able chair-
man of the subcommittee.

I am sure the chairman realizes that
some States do not benefit as much as
do other States from the various price-
support and soil-bank programs of the
Department of Agriculture and of the
Congress. I happen to help represent
a State which, with the sole exception
of the wheat crop in eastern Oregon,
raises very few agricultural commodi-
ties which come under the price-support
umbrella, or are included within ihe
various phases of the soil-bank program.
If I am not mistaken, as of Decemeber 31,
1956. farmers in our State have received
only $170,000 under the soil-bank pro-
gram, which the chairman realizes is
a very small sum.

Mr. RUSSELL. It is my understand-
ing that the soil-bank program, partic-
ularly the conservation reserve phase of
it, is open to States without regard to
the type of agriculture within any State.
Mr. NEUBERGER. That Is true.
Mr. RUSSELL. The degree of partici-
pation varies greatly, but some States
receive practically nothing. In the
State of Nevada I believe there was per-
haps one contract.

Mr. NEUBERGER. It SO happens that
comparatively small farm acreages, with
crops of a diversified nature, have at
least not lent themselves to the various
aspects of the soil-bank program.

Mr. RUSSELL. The Senator is cor-
rect; and they will not share in the
most remunerative part of it, namely,
the acreage reserve program, because
that is limited to the basic commodities.
Mr, NEUBERGER. That is correct.
I am sure the distinguished chairman of

5

the subcommittee, whose knowledge and
experience in this field are far greater
than mine, will agree that there are cer-
tain States which, because of the general
structure of their agricultural econ-
omy— that is to say, comparatively small
farm acreages with crops of a highly
diversified nature— have not thus far
adapted themselves to the price-support
program or to the soil-bank program

Mr. RUSSELL. That is certainly
true ; and, of course, the acreage reserve
program has been peculiarly applicable
to the corn areas. Up irntil now they
have received the lion's share of the
fund, and will do so this year.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Com is king un-
der the acreage reserve program.

Mr. RUSSELL. There is no question
about it.

Mr. NEUBERGER. I know that the
chairman of the subcommittee realizes
that there is absolutely no criticism of
him implicit in anything I have said.
Mr. RUSSELL. I must disclaim any
responsibility for the basic legislation
creating the soil-bank program.
Mr. NEUBERGER. I reaUze that.
Mr. RUSSELL. Members of the Con-
gress generally labored for many weeks
undertaking to get an agricultural pro-
gram across that was wise. Despite all
the inherent diflaculties involved in try-
ing to reconcile the basic crops as well
as the areas to which the Senator from
Oregon refers, we nnally did get a bill;
but the President dashed the work of
art on which we had labored for so many
months to the floor and crushed it with
one stroke of the pen.

Then we were confronted with the*
problem of the soil bank or nothing. I
took the soil bank rather than nothing.
Otherwise I saw no advantages what-
ever in the program.

Mr. NEUBERGER. I am aware of
the emergency circumstances which
confronted the leaders in the Senate and
in the House when the soil bank program
came before them, after the President
had vetoed the original farm bill.

The meat of the coconut is this: I
am sure the chairman of the subcom-
mittee realizes that in many States,
which have been outside the major farm
programs, one of the few direct ways in
which agriculture can benefit is from
research carried on at the college experi-
ment stations and elsewhere. I know
that the chairman of the subcommittee
has been a supporter of these research
activities, but he is likewise aware of
the concern which has been felt
throughout many farm States because
of the cut in research appropriations.
Mr. RUSSELL. Let us keep the rec-
ord straight. There has been no cut in
research appropriations. The bill be-
fore us, as reported from the committee,
would appropriate more money for State
experiment research stations than has
ever been appropriated in the history of
the United States. We did not allow
the full amount of the budget estimate.
There has been an increase of 133 per-
cent in appropriations for State experi-
ment research stations during the past
5 years, or since 1952. I am not satisfied
with the appropriation in the bill, but
there is no reduction. We could not get
the full amount of the budget estimate.

{ i

1 1

8808

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

Mr. NEUBERGER. There are certain
necessary programs which had been
contemplated, and which, because of the
size of the appropriation, howerer much
it may be. stUl will have to be cinrtalled
to some extent, in view of the plans
which have been made prevloxisly. The
full budget recommendation has not
been srranted. The telegrams which the
senior Senator from Oregon and I have
received have so indicated,

Mr. RUSSELL. Any plan which was
based upon the full budget estimate
might be somewhat curtailed.

Mr. NEUBERGER. The only assur-
ance I seek from the chairman of the
subcommittee— if it Is compatible with
his own ideas to give it — Is that there is
no thought now, and there will be no
thought in the future, that these im-
portant research programs undertaken
by the Department of Agriculture
through the experiment stations and in
other ways, are to be diminished or cur-
tailed substantially in any way.

Mr. RUSSELL. Certainly the Sena-
tor from Georgia would stand on his
feet in the Senate, and flght as long as
he could stand, against any reduction in
this program. There Is ofttimes a dif-
ference as to the amount by which it is
possible to increase them. This happens
to be a year of austerity with reference
to the national budget. Under ordinary
circumstances there is not great diffi-
culty in securing appropriations for the
Extension Service and for the State ex-
periment stations. We have been very
successful, particularly in the Senate,
with respect to that field of endeavor.
we have been privileged to allow very
large increases during recent years.

Certainly no cutback has been effected
that I know of, or that is contemplated
ai all. I hope that come next year we
may move forward with accelerated
speed. However, this year is not the
most advantageous year to ask to move
forward in this field. That is my Judg-
ment.

Mr. NEUBERGER. I desire to thank
the Senator for his assurances. I again
wish to emphasize that I agreed with
him completely when he expressed some
reservations and doubts about the ap-
propriation of vast sums of money for
industrial uses of farm products.

I believe, however, that we should con-
centrate to a great degree in trying to
increase the efficiency of our farms and
the efficiency of our agricultural produc-
tion, and to increase the use of those
commodities for food purposes.

Mr. RUSSELL. If we carmot do some-
thing to brmg about a reduction in the
unit cost of production of all farm com-
inodiUes, as well as obtain other uses
for farm products, the American farmer
ii on the way of the dodo.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Certainly so far
as the family -size farm is concerned

Mr. RUSSELL. Yes; I have in mind
the family-size farm. We will eventu-
ally have these great corporate farms
that will be able to operate. After we
have elimmated Uie famili'-size farms
there will be the large farms, or corpo-
rate-size farms, which will be able to
operate and expand with the increa.se in
our population. However, the famili'-
size farm has already diminished in

nimibers In many areas of our country.
If that trend continues, the family-size
farmer will be eliminated.

Mr. NEUBERGER. If that happens,
the family-size farm will be replaced by
an Impersonal enterprise, almost as im-
personal as the Soviet type collective
farm.

Mr. RUSSELL. I cannot think of any-
thing which would be more calculated
to impair the spiritual and physical
strength of the country than the elim-
ination of the farm boy on the indi-
vidual size farm, with his home on the
land. If we ever degenerate to a cor-
porate agricultural system, and if that is
all w: will have, we will have elim-
inated something from this counti-y that
has contributed more than any other
single factor to the upbuilding.

Mr. NEUBERGER. I could not con-
cur more completely with the Senator
from Georgia. In my own State already
there is a saying in rural areas that
there are only two ways of getting a
farm One way in to inherit a farm,
and the other is to marry a farm. Most
people familiar with the situation know
that it IS now virtually impossible in the
State of Oregon, at least, for a young
man to borrow money and Incur a debt
and to put a mort^asre on the land, and
have any success in being able to pay off
the mortcapp and eventually owning his
farm outright. Tliat is regarded as be-
Inar virtually Impossible today in the
rural areas of my State

Mrs. Neubergers family happen to be
dairy farmers. My mother-in-law has
often told me that If the farm had not
been in their family for many years, and
If they did not own the farm outri-iht.
they could not possibly run it today. If
they had to pay off a debt on the farm,
in view of the price squeeze that they
have been subjected to and the other
difficulties that they must face today.
Therefore they could not possibly, under
such conditions, pay the interest or the
prmcipal on any debt on that farm, and
still contmue to retain their property.
This is not a healthy situation. The
family-sued farm has been the back-
bone of ruial America. If that insutu-
tion cannot successfully survive, our
country *ill suffer. That is why I have
emphasized the economic dilficuiUes
faced Ly Mrs. NtuberKers family on
tlieir faim m the Northwest.

Mr. RUSSELL. That situation may
be more acute with respect to dairy
farms, because that is a raiher expensive
method of farming. But I beheve gen-
erally speaking it applies acroso the
board.

Mr. NEUBERGER. That is becoming
lr.crr:^sinrly true, and it is very unfor-
tunate. I again wish to thank the Sen-
ator for his patience and tolerance, in
answering my mquines.

Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President.
will the Senator yield?
Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.
Mr. SYMINGTON. I congratulate
the distinguished Senator from Georgia
on the most comprehensive and iiitelU-
gent bill he has brought to Itie floor of
the Senate.

Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the Senator

Mr. SYMINGTON. The Senator from

Missouri would ask 1 or 2 questions.

19j7

Does the aWe Senator believe the bill
is primarily a bill In favor of the family-
size farm; and therefore an effort to
maintain that size farm as a part of the
American way of life?

Mr. RUSSELL. The Senator from
Missouri, as a distinguished member of
the Committee on Agriculture and For-
estry, knows that the bill contains appro-
priations to Implement policies which are
prescribed by law or by the Department
of Agriculture. There are some phases
of the bill which tend to preserve the
family-size farm. I refer particularly
to the Farmers" Home Administration
and the Rural Electrification Adminis-
tration, and some of the loan programs.
However, by and large, the policies which
are now being followed, generally speak-
ing, are in my opinion completely de-
structive of the family-size farm. There
is nothing we can do about it in an ap-
propriation bill. It is a matter of policy.
Mr SYMINGTON. Knowing the dis-
tinguished Senator's firm belief in the
value of the family-size farm, may I ask
if he believes that to the greatest extent
possible this appropriation bill recog-
nizes the Importance of preserving the
family-size farm?

Mr. RUSSELL. Insofar as the items
that benefit the family-size farm are
concerned. I have always given them
priority, and I have done so this time in
this bill, and the committee has done it
consistently.

Mr. SYMINGTON. I thank the Sen-
ator. Inasmuch as there has been some
criticism expressed in my State that the
bill does not recognize the family -size
farm, I am very glad to have the distin-
guished Senator say that to the best of
his abihty he has sought to give it recog-
nition in the pending bill.

Mr. RUSSELL. Taking it as a general
proposition, we know that a good law
poorly administered is not so effective as
a bad law well administered. This con-
cerns a question of national policy. The
ba5ic policies must be changed if the
family-size farm is to be able to survive
In this world of concentration.

Mr. SYMINGTON. May I again ex-
press complete approval of what the dis-
tintrui.shed Senator has stated, because
durmg Uie years I have been in the Sen-
ate what has worried me as much as the
farm policies of this administration has
been the administration of thase policies,
in such matters as administration
drought relief and administration of the
county committees.

Whatever the future holds for the
family-size farm— and we have now lost
over a half million fann families, and
over 2 million farmers, in the past 4
yoars— I know that the dLstinguLshed
Senator from Georgia agrees that the
future of these farmers depends almor^t
as much on the administration of the
policies as it dees on the policies them-
selves.

Mr. RU.SFELL. The loss to which the
Senator has referred is one of the great
tragedies of our era.

Mr. COOPER. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. COOPER. I should like to Join
ether Senators in expressing apprecia-

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

tion for the work done by the senior
Senator from Georgia In maintaining
through this bill our agricultural pro-
grams.

Mr. RUSSELL. I thank the Senator,
but I must say that I am not entitled to
all this credit. I have a very able and
outstanding committee, and I am merely
the vehicle that undertakes to express
their views.

Mr. COOPER. There has been a great
deal said In the course of the debate
about the small family-size farm.

I am very much interested in the rural
development program — among other
programs of the Department of Agricul-
ture— because it is related to preserving
the life of many small farms. I might
say to the Senator that my State is in
many respects similar to his State. I
hope he will accept the fact of similarity
of our agricultural programs.

Mr. RUSSELL. There is no question
about the fact that both of us have, un-
fortunately, areas in our States where
the income of our agriculture has been
far below the average level.

Mr. COOPER. The Senator knows
that in many of the counties of our
States the farmers do not get much help
from price-support programs, although
they are protected by them, and must be
protected by them. Also, many of them
are not able to purchase or use the
modern machinery that large farms use.
Also, they are far from cities, and con-
sequently there is not much opportunity
for part-time employment by farmers.

There are three pilot projects in my
State that have done outstanding work.
They serve adjoining counties and in
fact, our State. There is a great deal of
enthusiasm about the possibilities of this
program. I know the Senator has stud-
led the program, and I should like to ask
him some question about it. I should
like to ask him whether he believes the
total of appropriations will adequately
support the future of the program.

Mr. RUSSELL. The Senator realizes,
of course, that this is a rural develop-
ment program, which could prove to be
of great significance. It has not yet
operated long enough for me to say that
It Is a solution for the low-income coun-
ties, but certainly It Is worthy of trial.
Some of the officials In the Department
of Agriculture have been greatly Inter-
ested In It and have promoted It as
vigorously as they possibly could. The
bill does not allow all that was sisked
for the rural development program, but
it does carry almast the full amount.

Mr. COOPER. The report states that
the amount has been Increased by
$1,764,000, but it is not clear whether
for rural development or for the entire
extension service.

Mr. RUSSELL. No; that Is for the
whole Extension Service. As I recall, the
Department expected to allocate about
$1,300,000 to the rural development
program from a total budget estimate of
about $5 million. So the committee pro-
vided that the Department could spend
up to $500,000 of the $1,764,000 mcrease
which was allowed. As a matter of fact,
the rural development program got half
of the actual increase.

8809

Seven hundred and sixty thousand
dollars of that money was necessary to
avoid a net loss in the State Extension
Service, so we allowed half of the net
Increase granted to the Extension Serv-
ice for the rural development program.

Mr. COOPER. In the report, on page
3, I find this language:

Not to exceed I5O0.0O0 of the Increase of
$1,764,000 may be expended for rural de-
velopment work In States which heretofore
have had no rural developnrent program.

I understand the concern of the com-
mittee to extend the program to States
which have not had the program
started; but does the Senator from
Georgia interpret the language to mean
that this is mandatory?

Mr. RUSSELL. No; I do not. The
language is:

Not to exceed $500,000 of the increase of
$1.764,0C0 may be expended for rural de-
velopment work in States which heretofore
have had no rural development program.

In the way the provision was finally
worded, I do not think it Is a Umitation
at all, although, frankly, It was proposed
as a limitation. Some members of the
committee raised the issue that their
States did not have any rural develop-
ment counties designated. My State
had two such counties designated. I did
not wish to seem selfish and seem to try
to get more money for my State when
other States did not have any. So the
provision was really intended as a lim-
itation, but I do not think, upon read-
ing It, that it accomplishes that pur-
pose.

Mr. COOPER. I take It, then, that
the Senator's judgment is that the lan-
guage could be Interpreted as being a
fiag to the Department of Agriculture
to look around, to see if it is possible
to initiate new projects, but not to
cripple existing programs.

Mr. RUSSELL. I Interpret the lan-
guage to mean that before the Depart-
ment actually reinforces the work in
States which have rural development
programs, they shall inaugurate it in
States which do not have it but which
wish to have it. I understand that some
20 States have the program now, and
It is proposed to install it In 25.

Certainly there is no desire on my
own part to start it in more counties in
my State until other States, which have
had no opportunity to share in the pro-
gram, have had that opportunity.

Mr. COOPER. But the committee
does not mean that the work which has
been started in States shall be cut back?
Mr. RUSSELL. Oh, no. This is not
a cutback. Whether or not it Is a
limitation, the language applies only to
the Increase.

Information has come to me since the
report was prepared that the Depart-
ment does not approve of this. They say
they want about $250,000 with which to
go Into States that have heretofore had
no activity, but they want to spend some
money in other States.

I can assure the Senator from Ken-
tucky that in the conference with the
other body it will be necessary, before
thlj item shall ever be agreed to at all,
to undertake to make certain that the

matter Is clarified so that the rural de-
velopment program may secure the
maximum benefit from this appropri-
ation.

Mr. COOPER. I thank the Senator
from Georgia.

Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.
Mr. HOLLAND. I may say, first, that
I appreciate the frankness and also the
fairness of the Senator from Georgia.
My State Is one which as yet does not
have any rural development program in
operation, but prc^rams for two coun-
ties, the counties of Suwannee end Cal-
houn, have been planned and will be set
up in fiscal 1958 under the decision of
the committee, as was so ablv explained
by the Senator from Georgia.

We have no desire to preclude other
States which already have rural devel-
opment programs from continuing with
those programs; and if the new money
provided is more than adequate to meet
the needs to establish programs in States
which do not yet have programs, we, of
course, would expect it to be used for
all States alike, wherever it was needed.
But we certainly feel that States which
have yet felt no benefit from the pro-
gram should come first. I am certain
the Senator from Kentucky will agree
that that is the fair and proper way to
approach the program.

Mr. RUSSELL. I may say, as a mat-
ter of legislative history, for whatever
it may be worth, that it was the unani-
mous opinion of the Conunittee on Ap-
propriations that in the allocation of
the increased appropriation, when and
if it be secured, priority should be given
to those States which heretofore had
not shared in the rural development
program. That was the opinion of the
committee, as I understood it. But it
was not intended to the exclusion of
improving the program in States which
now have it.

However, if it comes to the Issue of
giving the money to States which do not
have it or expending it In States which
do have it, the committee intended that
priority be given to States which did
not have the program.

Mr. HOLLAND. I thank the Senator.
I think that approach is fair. I am
certain that every Senator will agree
that States which are large agricultural
States, and which have not had any be-
ginning of the program, though It is
needed in some of their counties, should
at least have the chance to share In it
before there is expansion in States
which already have the program and
have profited from it in their own limits.
Mr. COOPER. I appreciate the fair-
ness of the statements of both the Sena-
tor from Florida and the Senator from
Georgia. There is another problem in-
volved. I can imderstand the feeling
of the people of a State needing this
program, and that it should be Initiated.
On the other hand, I think it is worth
while to point out that there are a few
agricultural States in the Union which
have much higher levels of agricultural
development and larger incomes than
others. I call back to mind the purpose
of the act. It is not to divide the money

■i

8810

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

'June 11

'

r t

among the States, but to reach and as-
sist needed areas, wherever they may be.

Mr. RUSSELL. That undoubtedly was
the purpose of the program when it was
instituted in the Department of Agri-
culture. I do not think it is contem-
plated to institute the program in some
of the States.

Mr. HOLLAND. I certainly under-
stand and agree with the philosophy of
the Senator from Kentucky that the pro-
gram was not to be used where it is not
needed. A large part of Florida, the
peninsula part of the State, is prosperous
in its agricultural operations. Certainly
we would not expect any program of this
kind to be placed there. But thai part
of our State which is producing basic
agricultural commodities, and frequently
in very small amounts per farm, has felt
the diflBculties which are generally pres-
ent now in areas which produce staple
commodities.

Two of our counties have been chosen
for these particular programs. We cer-
tainly would not expect any portion of
our State which is in a prosperous con-
dition agriculturally to be favored by
having one of these programs located
there.

I certainly think we are all at one on
this. We want the program to be es-
tablished where it is needed; we want it
to work when it Is established; and we
want it to be established this coming
year, in the first instance, in areas which
have not had the benefit of it but which
do have a crying need for it.

Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I have listened
with great interest to the discussion con-
cerning rural development. I am drawn
into the discussion by the fact that the
State which I represent, in part, is very
much interested in the proeiram. Several
of the pilot counties are located in West
Virginia.

I do not draw from the discussion
that because of the language any prefer-
ence would be given to the States which
have not already proceeded with the
rural development programs. That
would be based, as originally intended,
upon the need of the locality and where
the program could best be worked out.

I wish to ask the able Senator from
Georgia to stftte the total proposed ap-
propriation for rural development.

Mr. RUSSELL. Of course the Sena-
tor from West Virginia knows that this
is an intensive program, not a nation-
wide prop-ram.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I understand.

Mr. RUSSELL. At the present time I
believe it applies to only approximately
57 counties, of the more than 3,000 coun-
ties m the United States.

.Mr REVERCOMB. Yes; they are
called pilot counties, as I recall.

Mr. RUSSELL. That is correct.
The appropriation for .he current year
Is $2,061,000. The appropriation pro-
posed for next year is approximately
$2,900,000.

Mr. REVERCOMB. How do those ap-
propriations compare with those m prior
years?

Mr. RUSSELL. If the bill as reported
by our committee to the Senate is

enacted, there will be an increase of ap-
proximately $850,000 in the appropria-
tion for the rural development program.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I thank the Sen-
ator from Georgia.

Mr. RUSSELL. That is an approxi-
mate figure; I have estimated It.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Georgia yield to me?

Mr. RUSSELL. I am glad to yield to
the Senator from Ohio.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I have listened with
great interest to the distinguished Sena-
tor from Georgia, who has said that the
present farm program of the Federal
Government is destructive of the small
farmer of the Nation.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, I said
I thought the whole trend has been one
which is destructive of the small farm-
ers. There is no doubt in my mind that
we are in an age of bigness. That is
causing the increase in the tempo of
business. Industrial plants are becom-
ing larger. That trend is found in all
fields of activity in the Nation, and un-
doubtedly there is a trend toward elimi-
nation of the small farmers. All the
available stati-^tics show that is the case.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I share the appre-
hension of the Senator from Georgia
about the impact on our society of elimi-
nation of the small farmer. My con-
cern is that the programs thus far
evolved help the big man, not the little
man.

Mr. RUSSELL I share the Senator's
view.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Am I correct In un-
derstanding that. de.-<pite the repeated
sutemenUs which have been made, the
pre.sent ."loil-bank program is not work-
ing in the way expected '' I understand
that the bill as reported to the Senate
contemplates Implementing the soil
bank with the funds which will be
needed.

Mr. RUSSELL. Yes; within limits.
Of course, for this year there is no lUn-
itation on the amount which any one
producer can receive from the soil bank.
I think the larw:e.st payment made was
approximately $61,000, and there were
a number about that size. But under
the terms of the pending bill, as reported
to the Senate, there is a limitation of
$5,000 on the amount which any one
producer can receive That limitation
is proposed because we propose that the
total amount be reduced. Therefore,
we propo,se the limitation, in order to
a.ssure that all the smaller producers
will be able to participate in the pro-
gram.

Mr LAUSCHE. Yes. Does the plan
undertaken by the bill, as reported by
the Senate committee, differ from the
plan spon-sored and approved by the
House of Representatives, in the case of
the soil bank?

Mr. RUSSELL. The House voted to
eliminate the soil bank for the fiscal
year 1958. and proposed that there be
no soil-bank provision.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I suppose the House
did .so on the basis of the statement made
by the sponsor of the soil bank, the Sec-
retary of Agriculture, and on the basis
of the general experience; namely, that
the .soil bank is not workable and is not
producing the results contemplated.

Mr. RUSSELL. I wish to say that
most of that must be an estimate. The
only crop In connecU(Mi with which the
soil bank has received any real trial,
and for which we could obtain figures
for consideration, has been com. Al-
though a very large amount of money
was spent on the soil-bank program In
the commercial com area, the largest
crop of corn in history was produced.
From that point of view, the soil-bank
program failed. But the weather con-
ditions, and so forth, were exceedingly
good.

This year we shall have a real test as
to whether the soil- bank program will
reduce production — which was the pur-
pose— and yet will enable the farmer to
have an income similar to the one he
would have had if his regular crop had
been produced. In my own view, the
soil-bank program cannot be truly ef-
fective, because if a man places in the
soil bank some of the acreage he nor-
mally uses for production, the tendency
will be for him to improve — by means of
the use of more or better fertilizer and
by other means — the production on the
acreage remaining to him; and. as a re-
sult, his production per acre will be In-
creased.

So. on balance, I doubt that the pro-
gram will produce the desired reduction
of production, unless there are 1 or 2
bad crop years.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Then am I correct In
understanding that the House has voted
to eliminate completely the soil-bank
program, insofar as the fiscal year 1958
is concerned?

Mr. RUSSELL. That is correct.

Mr. LAUSCHE. On the other hand, I
understand that the recommendation of
the Senate Subcommittee on Agricultural
Appropriations is that, within certain
limits, the soil-bank program be contin-
ued.

Mr. RUSSELL. We voted to direct the
Department not to engage in a program
exceeding $500 million for 1958. In
other words, we would authorize a pro-
gram of that magnitude. The House
version of the bill includes language pro-
vidmg that there be no soil-bank pro-
pram in 1958. The bill as reported by
the Senate Committee on Agriculture
provides that there may be a soil-bank
program of not to exceed $500 million.
The basic authorization was $750 mil-
lion. So. the effect of the recommenda-
tion of the Senate committee is to cut
$250 million from the authorization,

Mr. LAUSCHE. Let me ask the Sen-
ator from Georgia to state his opinion
regarding the reason why the soil-bank
program should be continued, if it has
not worked well, at least in the first
year.

Mr. RUSSELL. As I sUted a while
ago, a year's experience has been had
only with com produced in the com-
mercial corn area.

I am not wedded to the soil bank.
I am supporting the authorization In-
cluded in the bill as reported to the
Senate, for the year 1958, because I hope
it will be a means of taking care of some
small, individual farmers during that
year, until the Congress can enact an-
other farm bill. The soil-bank program
has not worked out altogether well In

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8811

my own State this year. I know that
many farmers have left their farms, and
I know that has frequently been because
of the soil-bank program. In some of
the small riiral communities, the busi-
ness interests are suffering. When a
farmer puts into the soil bank some of
the land he owns, the Government com-
pensates him very fairly. But the result
Is to slow down the volume of business
activity in the small rural communities.

However, the soil-bank program is the
only program we have in this field. I
say in all frankness to the Senator from
Ohio that I am far from enthusiastic
about this program. I am supporting
it only because it is the only program
we have for the farmer for the year
1958.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Does the $5,000 limi-
tation on the payments reflect itself in
the $250 million reduction?

Mr. RUSSELL, No; not really to that
extent. This year the program is for
approximately $614 million. So as
much as could be reflected in that way
would be approximately $100 million.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Then, am I correct
In understanding that the view of the
Senator from Georgia regarding the
soil-bank program is that it does not
work well?

Mr. RUSSELL. I think It would be
fairer to say that it is my judgment
that it is not going to work well this
year, because it has not been apphed to
wheat and cotton imtil this year, and
no man can say for certain how it will
work for them. It certainly did not
work In the case of com last year. In
my opinion It will not be too effective
in the case of wheat and cotton this
year, although I may be mistaken. I
have been mistaken many times in my
life. I do not say it cannot work; I say
it has not worked thus far.

Mr. LAUSCHE. But the House of
Representatives has stated, in effect,
that the soil-bank program has not
worked, and the House has voted that
the entire soil-bank program be elimi-
nated; is that correct?

Mr. RUSSELL. The House of Repre-
sentatives voted to eliminate the pro-
f: ram completely. I hope the Senate will
take a record vote on this item.

Mr. LAUSCHE, Is there to be a rec-
ord vote on it?

Mr. RUSSELL. This Is an item in the
bill as reported to the Senate.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I thank the Senator
from Georgia very much indeed.

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President. I call up
my amendment identified as amend-
ment B.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated.

The Chief Clerk. On page 28, begin-
ning with the colon in line 17, it is pro-
posed to strike out all down through line
CO. and insert in lieu thereof a period.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment offered by the Senator from South
Dakota.

The Chair would like to remind the
Senator at this point that the unanimous
consent which the Senate has agreed to
is now in effect.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield for the purpose of my
suggesting the absence of a quonmi?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. With the
imderstanding that the time for it be
taken from both sides.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

Mr. MUNDT. With the imderstand-
ing that It not be charged to either side.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. It will not
be charged against the Senator's amend-
ment ; it will be charged against the bill.
We have additional time on the bill.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With
that understanding, the Clerk will call
the roll.

The Chief Clerk proceeded to call the
roll.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection it is so ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, a parliamentary inquiry.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator will state it.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. How much
time was consumed on the quorum call?

The PRESroiNG OFFICER. Six
minutes.

The Senator from South Dakota has
the floor.

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, we are
operating under a unanimous consent
agreement which allows 30 minutes to a
side, so I ask the Chair to advise me when
I have consumed 10 minutes.

My amendment. Senators, simply
strikes from the bill an amendment sug-
gested by the committee which is new,
novel, and untried insofar as the con-
servation reserve feature of the legisla-
tion is concerned.

At the present time the bill operates
against two fixed factors, the amount of
money which is available, which in this
bill is $350 million, and the further fixed
limitation that no individual, no corpo-
ration, or no farmer shall get over $5,000
in payments from the conservation re-
serve phase of the soil bank.

The committee amendment, which
was adopted by our committee by a vote
of 8 to 11, provides a new limitation of
$7.50 per acre as a national average. I
opposed that limitation amendment in
the committee. The amendment I now
have before the Senate will repeal that
unfortunate action taken by t^3 com-
mittee.

I should like to point out, first of all,
that there is not a single Senator in the
Chamber who knows exactly hew that
committee provision is going to affect the
farmers of his State, because not a single
word of testimony has been taken in
hearings on the subject. Nobody testi-
fied for it. Nobody testified against it.
The Department of Agriculture repre-
sentatives were not consulted. This is a
step in a direction which, in my opinion,
will make this program largely inojjera-
tive in 37 States of the Union — States
like Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Washing-
ton, Oregon, Missouri, Indiana, and New
York, where the land values and the pro-
ductivity are relatively high, because it
eliminates consideration of the proxim-

ity of the land to an urban area, or the
productivity of the ground, or the type
of product raised on the soil, and arbi-
trarily establishes a $7.50 national aver-
age.

That Is the first reason why I think
the Senate of the United States should
decline and refuse to gamble with the
prosperity of the farmers of the States of
the Union by enacting legislation of this
kind, on which not a single word of testi-
mony has been recorded and which
could virtually black out entirely farmers
of certain States and producers of cer-
tain products.

In the second place, I point out that
the provision creates a completely un-
workable. Impossible administrative
monstrosity, because when three con-
stant factors are added together — the
$350 million which Is available, the $5,000
limitation, and then the newly proposed
$7.50 per acre national limitation — I ask
Senators to put themselves in the place
of the person administering It. It would
confound a Solomon and perplex a Plato.

The Administrator could not possibly
sign up the farmers who come in from
the South, the North, or the West — the
farmers who would say, "How much will
I get for my conservation reserve?" He
would have to say to them, "We cannot
tell you, until every last farmer in Amer-
ica, from every State and county, has ap-
plied, because we have to meet a legisla-
tive mandate and strike a $7.50 average."

Consequently it would be impossible for
the farmer to come into the county ofiQce,
negotiate with the county committee, and
receive for the land the conservation
reserve payjnents per acre to which he
would be entitled on the basis of the pro-
ductive record and economic factors in-
volved. He would have to wait imtil all
farmers from every area had made ap-
plication since only then could the na-
tional average be determined.

The third reason we should reject this
proposal, Mr. President, is that not a
single nickel of economy is Involved in
it. We are all agreed that $350 million
should be spent for the conservation re-
serve program, not mentioning how we
are going to divide up the $350 million.
Our committee was unanimous about
that. Who is going to get it? That is
the question. Is it going to be made
available only to farmers in those States
which have the cheap land, the arid land,
the eroded land, where the farmers can
come within the $7.50 limitation, or will
it be made available to farmers all over
the country? The Senator from Idaho,
for example, comes from a State where
there is irrigated land. Not a single acre
of Irrigated land could come in under
this program, at $7.50 an acre as a na-
tional average.

May I point out that at the present
time only one State in the Union operates
with a $7 average. That is the State
of Nevada. How many people were there
who signed up at the $7 average in Ne-
vada? One. One farmer signed up for
a conservation reserve at a $7 average.

When we extend that to $7.50 and make
It a national average we will reduce the
efficiency of the program and the scope
of the program, and limit it to farmers
In areas where the land lacks produc-
tivity.

*:^.

*!«'

i^

7 I'W '^ ^

I i

Ml

8812

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

Mr. CURTIS. Mr President, will the
Senator yield to me?

Mr. MUNDT. I am happy to yield,
briefly.

Mr CURTIS I thank the dlstln-
guiAhed Senator.

The noil banlc does call for conslder-
p.ble money. I think it u a question of
how lon« It could be carried on finan-
cially. But so long as It Is to be oper-
ated. Its purpose is to reduce or lower
production.

Mr. MUNDT. The Senator Is correct.

Mr. CURTIS. We cannot do that by
taking out of production the poor and
unproductive land. If we are going ma-
terially to affect production, we will have
to take out the high producini? acres.
We cannot do that for a minimum pay-
ment.

Mr. MUNDT. The Senator is exactly
correct. It would reduce the dividends
the country as a whole would receive
materially from the soil bank by limiting
the application of this program to the
unproductive land, as the Senator from
Nebraska has pointed out.

Let me point out something else to the
Senate. This $7.50 provision creates a
great inequality, because it means that
the people who signed up for contracts
In 1956 or 1957 will continue to be paid
at whatever average they happen*»d to
sign up for with the local committees.
However, those people signing up in 1958
and the years ahead will have to arbi-
trarily comply with the $7 50 national
average. We will have all kinds of con-
troversies and all kinds of confusion,
with farmers within a single county be-
ing paid different amounts for the very
same practices and the same type of
soil. Part of them will be paid, by acci-
dent— of calendar date — having signed
up earlier — the kind of payment to w hich
they are entitled, and the other part will
receive, by action of the committee, pay-
ments scaled down to meet the $7 50 na-
tional average. Where is there either
logic or ju.stice in such a program'!'

I will further point out that at the
present time the Department of Agri-
culture has set-up as a guidepost for
Itself a proposed national average of
$10 11 per acre, but it is not bound by
the action of Congress. That is not a
legislative mandate. If the Department
should find on the average that it has
paid $12 or $13. or $8 44. as was actually
the case this year, they can continue to
Increase the amounts that are offered to
the people in the counties, until they can
attract the land necessary for the con-
servation reserve, just so long as they
come within the broad mandates of Con-
gress, pay no more than $5,000 to any
farmer, and expend no more than $350
million from the standpoint of the total
amount.

I should Uke to invite the attention of
Senators to page 8590 of the Record of
yesterday, the Record for June 10, 1957.
There Senators will observe a chart,
which shows how this would affect each
State and each area. There it is pointed
out how the law operates at the present
time. It is pointed out that the average
annual payment per acre on signed con-
tracts In almost every case — all but one.

Incidentally— Is lower than the approved
annual payment rate per acre. They
are lower, because In every State there
are some nondlverted acres, which are
Included in the contracts farmers make.
The nondlverted acres are acres not
planted in cropland. These are paid
only 30 percent of the regular rental
rate. If the $7 50 U cut down to 30 per-
cent. It IS a very small amount.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time the Senator from South Dakota has
yielded to himself has expired.

Mr. MUNDT. I yield myself 3 addi-
tional minutes.

It is said, and rightly said, that if we
adopt the $7 5J nalional average, that
would not mean we could not put the
rate up in some county and reduce It
elsewhere, correspondingly. That is
true, but certamly every time we offer
one farmer $10 per acre to retire his
land in th^^ conservation reserve, some
other farmer has to be offered, and has
to accept. $5 per acre If we offer a
farmer more than $10 per acre, then
some other farme; must t>e cut down
below $5

It has been denonstrated from the
Record that in Nevada, which is prob-
ably not the plu.shiest and most produc-
tive agricultural State in the Union,
where they tried to operate with a $7
averai;e per acre, one lone Nevada
farmer walked up to a county .some place
and si'^ned up in the conservation re-
serve— one, and one only.

I say we are entitled to give this pro-
gram a fair trial. We are entitled to give
the adm!n:<;trator a chance to operate
and make the program available, so that
It can reduce the number of acres, pro-
vide fertility, and bank it ahead for the
years to come

Mr. President. I ask unanimous con-
sent, at this point in my remarks, to have
printed in the Record a carbon copy of a
letter dated June 11, 1957, sent by Mr.
Earl L Butz. acting secretary, to the
chairman of the subcommittee, the dis-
tinguished Senator from Georgia, the
Honorable Richard Russell, which ex-
plains some of the rea.soning stated by
the Department of Agriculture. I read
one sentence:

We are greatly disturbed le.>;t the 17 50
natuinal average r.i'e be so low as to nullUy
the entire program.

There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed in the Record.
as follows:

June 11, 1957.
Hjii Rich.\rd RrssriL.

L'nit'd States Sfriate

Dr.^R Senator RnssttL There are two fea-
tures of the USDA appropriation btU as re-
ported from your committee which disturb
the Department seriously. This letter Is
written so that you may be advised of these
danger points before final actli.n Is taken In
the Senate. Your a.sslstance In bringing
about the changes noted Is respectfully re-
quested.

1. We appreciate very much your commit-
tee's action In raising the con.servatlon acre-
age limit to 9350 million. We feel that this
action Indicates an awareness of the need for
more realistic limits, but we are greatly dis-
turbed lest the $7 50 national average rate b«
so low as to nullify the entire program.

It Is entirely unrealistic to hsve an au-
thorization of S350 million and a 17.50 na-
tional rate. This would appear to contem-
plate the eetahllshment of a 1957'&8 goal
of t>etween twenty and thirty mlUton acres
($7 60 rental rate plus the cover practlcoe.
divided Into th« g3M million) In contrast to
the actual achlevemant of leas than 7 mlUlou
In 195«-57 with the tlO 11 rate

If we could acquire no more than O'^i mil-
lion acres toward a goal of 20 million at
$10 11. It seems hardly reaxmable to expert
any appreciable amount with the sharply
reduced figure of $7 50

We strongly feel that this national average
figure should be increased.

2 Tlie 1957 acreage reserve program of the
soil bank w;i* basj-d upon the authority con-
tained In the (irli;l:ial act of $7.S0 million, but
it resulted In a commitment of only $600 mil-
lion The admlnl.«tratlve dllBrulty of oper-
ating a vDluntary program Mirh as the acre-
age reserve doe.-> nut permit the utilization
of the maxuv.um funds available. It Id
therefTP obvhujn that limiting the expendi-
tures t ) $5()0 million would allow the actual
\itlllzntlon of a total figure considerably low«r
than that

The administration has always taken the
position that the acreage reserve program is
a temporary measure, designed to bring
about a sharp reduction of acreage over a
short period of time If the goal Is to spend
•500 million In this i-ndeavor, then obviously
In a voluntary program, the authorized
celling must t>e set at a considerably higher
f^i^ure If. however, the goal is to bring about
the greatest possible acreage reduction under
the provision of the law. then there should
be no celling at all and every farmer should
be given a full opportunity to Lhare In the
program If he chcxises. You have seen the
dlsapfvolntment In the faces of farmers In
your Slate who were turned away — and you
were quid- to endorse our efforts to see that
all were given an opportunity to participate.

We feel that these t»-o changes are so vital
to the goals of both your committee and the
Department tliat we respectfully solicit your
supp<5rt In the Senate as these measures are
coi;sidered

&lncere!y yours.

Earl L. Bvtz.
Acting Secretary.

Mr. MUNDT. I do not believe that the
Senate capriciously, without a word of
testimony, wishes to scrap and scuttle
the soil Ijank, or to jeopardize it to the
point of nullifying the entire program.

I also ask unanimous consent. Mr.
President, to have printed in the Record
some comments on charges that the soil-
bank program attracts nonfarm pwople
to purchase fannland and place it in
conservation reserve which I have had
prepared because a study has been made
of that, and there Is no evidence that
that has tiecome in any sense a national
nuisance or weakness In the program.

There being no objection, the com-
ments were ordered to be printed m the
Record, as follows:

Comments on Charges That Soil-Bank Pic-
cram Attracts Nonfarm Peoph To Ptni-

CHASE FARMI..AND AND PLACE IT IN CONSERVA-
TION Rkservk

Several news and feature stories recently
have charged that land has been purchased
by nonfarm Interests, placed In the conser-
vation reserve, and that the annual payments
during the life of the conservation reserve
contract pay a large portion of the purchase
price. The following facts relate to these
charges.

In our free society nonfarm people are
not only free to purcbase land Irotn farmers

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8813

with or without a aoll-bank program, but
this has b««n done Increaatngly since World
War I. There U little evidence to show that
such purchaaee In 1967 ultimately are fol-
lowed by conservation rttrr* eontncta to
any greater extent than land ptirebaaed and
operated by active farmers. In fact, there ta
some evidence to the contrary.

The Department waa authorized to com-
mit up to $460 million for the 1060 conser-
vation reserve program and the same amount
for the 1067 program. Of the $900 million
authorized by Congrese only $124,186,000
were obligated through the April 16, 1067,
closing date for signing 1057 conaervatlon
reserve contracts. If rates offered by the
Department were as attractive to nonfarm
people as has eometlmee t>een charged It
would seem that the programs would have
resulted In the obligation of a greater per-
centage of the amount authorized by Con-
gress.

Participation In the conservation reeerve
has t>een lowest near large population cen-
ters of nonfarm people and highest In strictly
rural regions. For example, no conservation
reserve contracts were signed In Westchester,
Rockland, or Nassau Counties In New York;
In Fairfield County, Conn.; or In Bergen,
Passaic, Hudson, or Essex Counties, N. J.,
which surround New York City. Similarly,
no contracts were signed In Middlesex and
Norfolk Counties adjoining Boston, Mass.;
only 1 contract was signed In the county In
which Pittsburgh Is located; 8 contracts
were signed In the county of which Cleve-
land. Ohio, Is the county seat; none were
signed In the counties In which Cincinnati,
St. Louis, and San Francisco are located;
only 11 contracts were signed In the county
of which Detroit Is the county seat; Dallas
County, Tex., has only 1 contract; and Loe
Angeles County, Calif., has only 0 contracts.
In contrast to these statistics, several coun-
ties In rural up-State New York have from
100 to 162 contracts; several agricultural
counties In Ohio have nearly 100 contracts;
while the farming areas of Texas frequently
have from 100 to over 300 contracts per
county.

The attached table shows the relative un-
popularity of the conservation reserve pro-
gram close to urban centers:

Conservation reserve program: Contracts
signed through Apr. 15. 1957, in specified
metropolitan areas

County In which locsiti-d

Con-
tnirts

City

Name

Nuin-
Ikt
ron-

tra<-t.< 1

In all
»<ljoin-

illR

coun-
ties

R'islon

Suffolk

None

None

Nonr

1

■4

None

11

3

r>

Sone

Nonp

11

Nono

W

None

Nrw York City

rhiliKlciphia

^lIt^t)llrBh

Clcvi-lan.l

( .lumnHli

l)itrolt

NarioiL'!

I'hiliiilvlphia

.Mloghcny

Cuyahf)»:a

Huiiiilti.n

WHvnp .

None

1110
MI3

ti7

n7

In li'tn:i|)()li:i

Marion...

25

<'lliCH4ri)

Cook

51

Sr l,<.iii.-

.•^t Ix>uis

4

.\<\\ (trlf:ui.->

ll'iu.'itiin

.^;ui Franri.'ipo

Los .^njifli's

Orlfiins

MHrris

San KninciiKfj...
Los Angtlcs

None

17

4

U

Tnlil. 14 niPtro-

43

5.".6

I Hill tan iircii.'i.

Ttir aviTapp number of ronlrftcts fo' ai! counties in
tlie liiiipil St. fes, both rural and urban, is 2S.
I'rep-.u-i'il by. CSS, Soil Bank Division, June i, 1U67.

Mr. MUNDT. I yield back any re-
maining time.

Mr. THYE. Mr, President, will the
Senator yield for 2 minutes?

Mr. MUNDT. I srield 2 minutes to the
distinguished Senator from Minnesota.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, the dis-
tinguished Senator from South Dakota
I Mr. MuNDT] has stated the qtiestlon so
clearly and so well that there Is nothing
which can be added. I wish to say that
I fully concur with his remarks.

I am a member of the Appropriations
Committee. I endeavored to prevent the
$7.50 celling being placed upon the con-
servation reserve program of the soil
bank. I believe it will have the effect of
defeating the program.

We have endeavored to encourage par-
ticipation under the conservation reserve
aspect of the soil bank, because it is soil
building, and it will take out of produc-
tion many acres of land.

These are long-term contracts. This
Is a 3-3tear or more program. Therefore,
this will be a soil building program over
the years, and will preserve the fertility
of the land. I think the limitation would
be a very serious mistake, and that it
would have the effect of destroying one
aspect of the soil bank program which
Congress enacted only a year ago.

We have no actual history of the ad-
ministrative functioning, to determine
whether it is advisable to continue this
program in the future. I most strongly
urge my colleagues to defeat this pro-
vision in the conservation reserve aspect
of the soil bank by the adoption of the
amendment offered by the Senator from
South Dakota [Mr. Mundt].

If there is any additional time, I yield
the time back.

Mr. CCXJPER. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. THYE. I yield, if I have any time
left.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
Senator's time has expired.

Mr. MUNDT. I yield an additional
minute to the Senator from Minnesota to
answer the question of the Senator from
Kentucky.

Mr. COOPER. I have before me a
statement which indicates that last year
about 7 million acres went into the con-
servation reserve program, at an average
payment, as the Senator from South
Dakota has said, of $8.84 an acre. Does
the Senator believe that reducing the
average annual payment to $7.50 would
bring about the results which the soil
bank program is designed to accomplish?
Would it bring into the soil bank pro-
gram sufflcient acreage to cover the
$350 million?

Mr. THYE. It would not. We had
hoped, when we enacted the soil bank
law. that 20 million acres would come
under the conservation provision of the
soil bank. We did not succeed in ob-
taining that large an acreage in con-
tracts last year, and we have not suc-
ceeded so far this year. For that reason,
if we reduce the amount per acre, we can
be certain that a lesser number of acres
will come in under contract, and that
there will be fewer participants in the
program.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
Senator's time has expired.

Mr. CARUBON. Mr. President, will
the Senator from South Dakota yield
me some time?

Mr. MUNDT. Z believe that the time
available to me Is almost exhausted. I
suggest that the proponents of the com-
mittee amendment have time.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, I have
had no requests for time. I intend to
take about 10 or 12 minutes on this
amendment, as the proponent of the
committee amendment. I think I am
entitled to do so at the conclusion of
the debate. I have received no requests
for time from any other Senator. I
doubt very much if I shall require more
than half the time available to me.

Mr. MUNDT. I yield 2 minutes to the
Senator from Kansas.

Mr. CARLSON, Mr. President. I rise
in support of the amendment offered by
the Senator from South Dakota. I
firmly believe that if the committee pro-
vision is retained in the bill and becomes
law, we may Just as well save $350 mil-
lion of the Federal taxpayers' money. I
cannot conceive how the program would
ever function under the committee pro-
posal.

The only way to appraise a farm pro-
gram is to try to understand how it
actually works on the farm. In Kansas
last year we were paying $10 an acre for
soil conservation acreage reserve land.
In 1958, if the committee provision pre-
vails, we shall be pajring $7.50 an acre.

It is reasonable to assume that about
1 million acres of marginal land were
taken out of production. Most marginal
land was taken out at $10 an acre. How
could we expect a farmer in our State
who lives on land adjoining land which,
was taken out of production last year
for $10 an acre, to take his land out at
$7.50? I contend that the restriction
would completely destroy the program.

I believe that this progiam offers a
great opportunity. I think it is the best
part of the soil-bank program. I agree
with the chairman of the subcommittee
with regard to the soil-bank program as
a whole. I do not have very much faith
in the acreage reserve program, but I
have great faith in the conservation
reserve feature of the program.

If we had paid $6.50, or if we had had
a $7.50 limitation last year, and then in-
creased it to $10 for this year, we would
have rendered a real service to soil con-
servation, and the program would have
worked.

I would sincerely regret to see the
limitation in the committee amendment
approved. I hope the amendment of
the Senator from South Dakota will pre-
vail. There are millions of acres of
marginal land which should be put back
into grass. We have an opportunity
to have it put back into grass, if we
adopt the amendment of the Senator
from South Dakota. If we adopt the
committee amendment, I think it will
be the end of the soil-conservation re-
serve program.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator from South Dakota yield
to me?

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, may I
Inquire how much time I have?

IS

S* i

Si'*

8814

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
Senator from South Dakota haa 13 min-
utes remaining. The opponent* of the
amendment have 30 minutes.

Mr. RUSSELL. I shall be glad to
yield to the distinguished Senator 3
minutes, even if he wishes to employ it
for purposes of subversion.

Mr. MUNDT. I appreciate that.

Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator Is
very generous.

Mr. MUNDT. I yield 2 minutes
from the time of the proponents of my
amendment.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I am very grateful
to the Senator from Georgia.

Mr. RUSSELL. The Senator Is about
to attack the position of the committee.
If he does not wish to use the 3 min-
utes

Mr. HUMPHREY. I am most grateful.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is the
understanding of the Chair that 3
minutes have been allocated from the
time of the opponents of the Mundt
amendment, and 2 minutes from the
time of the proponents, or a total of 5
mmutes.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, in
the 2 minutes allowed me by the pro-
ponents of the pending amendment. I
wish to make 1 or 2 observations.

It Is understandable that In a program
as new as the conservation reserve pro-
gram there may be some abuses. It is
also understandable that it requires a
certain period of time to arrive at fair
rental prices, in terms of not only the
fair rental rate, but a rate which will act
as an incentive to gaining compliance or
participation in the program.

There w£is established, as a national
goal for the conservation reserve pro-
^'ram. some 20 million acres to be re-
moved from production. The going rate
was about $10.11 an acre. That rate of
$10.11 an acre as a national average pro-
duced less than 7 million acres of farmer
participation.

I happen to believe that the conserva-
tion reserve program merits continued
national support.

The acreage reserve program is of an
emergency, temporary nature, designed
to remove a great many acres from pro-
duction under the price support program,
in order to reduce immediately tiie sur-
pluses which had accumulated under the
farm program.

The conservation reserve program Is
designed to conserve land, to take out of
production marginal land, to reforest
land, and to put some land that was In
production back into grass. It was de-
signed as a real soil bank for the years
to come.

It has had a very weak start at $10.11
an acre for a national average: and I
submit that to reduce the price to $7.50
would only weaken the program further.
As a matter of fact, there is evidence
that It would be wise to have a higher
fit^ure than even the present national
average of $10.11 an acre, in order to
encourage participation by the farmers
^ho own the land.

One complaint which has been made
Is that a great deal of land has been
taken out of production by nonfarmer

owners. I suppose there are some non-
farmer owners who have bought up land
and have put the land under OMitract
with the conservation reserve. I have
no doubt that there is plenty of that,
to start with. But the Department was
authorized to commit about $450 mil-
lion a year for 2 years. 1956 and 1957.
Of that amount of $900 million, which
has been authorized by Congress, only
$124,186,000 has been obligated, through
AprU 15. 1957.

If the business people, the Insurance
Interests, and the nonfarm people had
been abusing this program, there would
have been considerably more obligated
than $124,186,000. If the rates being
offered by the Depeirtment of Agriculture
today were excessive, we can rest assured
that the nonfarming Investors would
have been utilizing this program to a
much greater extent than they* have
done to date.

I hope the amendment of the Senator
from South Dakota will be adopted. I
believe there is little or no dispute about
the fact that we should change the pres-
ent situation, and there is much that
would indicate that we should continue
to develop some history under this pro-
gram, so as to provide for its effective-
ness.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
Senator's time has expired.

Mr. MUNDT. We are ready to vote If
there is no further debate. Does the
Senator from Minnesota yield back the
remainder of his time?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Minnesota has no time to
yield back. His time has expired.

Mr. COOPER. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the Record at this point a statement on
the pending subject.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

Statkmknt bt Senatob Coopxm
T was grattfled to see that the Senate Com-
mittee on Appropriations has recommended
restoring funds for operation of the acreage
reserve program of the soil bank In 1958, to
a total of 1350 million. An Impartial ap-
praisal of the value of this pro(?ram must
necessarily await the results of the 1957
operations. The results in terms of reduc-
ing surplus production may not then appear
to justify the cost. But this program was
also designed by the Congress to protect and
Increase farm income, and should not be
abandoned until we have something better
to t.Tlie i^s place

"Don't be an In-and-outer" Is time-tested
advice for any farmer considering his indi-
vidual operations — and Is sound counsel for
those charged with responsibility for our
national farm programs as well. It may be
that the continuing examination of this and
our other farm programs, both by the Con-
gress and by the Department of Agriculture,
will point to helpful modifications which
can be made to Improve and build on this
program in the year of grace provided by this
authorization.

sou. BANK— CONSESV.'kTION KESEBVC

On the other hand. I oppose the com-
mittee's recommendations regarding the
conservation reserve. Appropriating an ad-
ditional $100 million for this work will be
an idle gesture if limitations are tmpoeed so
that only a fraction of t^e $350 mililon now

In the Senate bill can be used. A national
average rental payment of t7.60 per acre U
Just such a restriction which wl;l tend to
defeat the program.

Last year, the average payment, in Ken-
tucky was %6&1 per acre and In the Nation
$8.B4. It is hard to believe that im average
of 17 50 per acre wlU attract more farmers.
Even in Kentucky, t7.50 per acre will attract
only the least-productive land — and very
little of that. It would do little or nothing
to decrease crop production, wh.ch Is one
purpose of the program.

Tlie conservation reserve. It seems to me. U
the part of the soU bank of grefitest long-
range value. It la the part whicli can con-
tribute poeltlveiy to our deposit cf national
wealth as It buUds value back Inx) the soU
and onto the land. It has been subject to
compcuittlvely Utile controversy, and hae
n^t with general satisfaction, as farm pro-
grams go. Although off to a mere modest
beginning than the acreage reserve, it ap-
pears to lend itself to Improvem-int as ex-
perience is gained with the possibilities It
offers. We should make that improvement
possible Instead oX hamstringing this pro-
gram.

The conservation reserve best lives up to
the sou bank name. It pays dlvld-snds to the
farmer, and to the Nation, In tlte form of
Increased soil fertility, enhanced Und values.
Improved conservation practices. In this
way. It builds for the future In iiddltlon to
helping adjust past and present problems of
surplus production.

I urge the Senate to consider carefully
what the effect of this proposed per-acra
limitation on conservation reserve payments
will be — In terms of the possibly disastrous
effect on the conservation reserve, and In
terms of yet another off-agaln. on-again
farm program.

If the Department of Agriculture Is to
carry out the responsibilities with which It
Is charged for operating an effecMve conser-
vation reserve. It surely should be given the
necessary discretion In setting these rates.
Por myself, I believe an average rate at least
as high as last year's national average of tlO
an acre is needed to obtain greate.^t benefit
from, and wider participation In. this worth-
whUe program, but at least It should not be
cut to $7 50 The limitation of i total pay-
ment of 15.000 to one Individual protects
against abuse.

I would like to mention here that several
ways In which an effective conservation re-
serve may contribute substantially toward
solving what have been perslstc;it and diffi-
cult farm problems — provided it is not crip-
pled by unreall.<itlc or arbitrary limitations.
First, It directly attaciis the troublesome
problem of diverted acres — whlrh has l>een
a source of very great difficulty In connection
with our wheat, cotton, and rl<e programs.
Second, it makes a positive contribution
for the future, in improved individual farm-
lands and in our basic national resource, as
I have mentioned. For farmers themselves.
and for the Nation, It provides a "nest egg"
which may prove of great val\ie in future
years. In this, it is in the t>est traditions of
our long-established soU- and water-conser-
vation progranis.

Third, when entire farms are put Into
the soli bank In this way, there Is no longer
a problem of Increased yield on these re-
duced acres. As my colleagues well know,
this continuing problem is in liirge measure
responsible for the difficulty In which we
find our farm programs today — both In our
price-support programs and In the acreage
reserve. Quantitative controls may provide
an answer to smaller and smaller allotments
for some comm<xlitles, but meanwhile we
should not ignore the new advance made
on this front so far — In the conservation
reserve.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8815

Foiuth, It provides a continuing, stable
program, with contracts of 3, 5, and 10 years'
duration. As a longer-range program, and
compared to the attention received by the
acreage reserve, the conservation reserve Is
developing more slowly, and, I believe, more
soundly. It can continue to develop In use-
fulness if rental payments can be set at
the levels necessary to make the program
work.

Finally, the conservation reserve promises
(through the farm-pwnd practices) to help
stabilize our water tables, to keep runoff
at the headwaters of our watersheds, to
conserve moisture on the hills and steeper
slopes being planted to trees and reseeded
to grass. It Is a most Important element In
our reforestation program. I believe the
conservation reserve will be effective In help-
ing attain these desirable and long-estab-
lished goals. In future years we may well
look back on the conservation-reserve pro-
gram of the soil bank as a central, valuable
part of our various farm programs — reach-
ing out in many directions to swslst In solv-
ing our manifold farm problems.

I therefore urge the Senate to sustain the
full amount recommended by the committee,
but to eliminate the »7.50 limitation which
would nullify the effectiveness of this pro-
gram.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, as a
friend of and a firm believer in the con-
servation reserve program. I rise to sup-
port the committee amendment. The
amendment was not in its present form
when it was originally adopted by the
subcommittee, and a great deal of the
argument and material offered here to-
day in opposition to the amendment is
not applicable, because it applies to the
original amendment, which limited the
payments within the States to an average
of $7. The amendment as now written
limits the average over the Nation to
$7.50.

I will not bore the Senate, or those
Members of the Senate who are present,
with reading the formula which was de-
vised by the Department of Agriculture
for the application of the program. I
have undertaken to look into this pro-
pram and I can assure the Senate that
the committee amendment will permit
payments per acre at as great a rate as
those which have been made within any
State, although it will compel a national
reduction, on the average, of about $1.34
an acre for the rental payments.

In my opinion, such a reduction is not
only justifiable, but is desirable. We are
dealing now with a program that can last
for 10 years. When $1 is committed
for rental payment, it means that on the
10-year contract the dollar must be paid
10 times.

Therefore, when we talk about this
$350 million program, we must bear in
mind the fact that we are dealing in
terms of billions of dollars and not mil-
lions of dollars, because it could run
to $3 '2 billion,

I believe in this program, but, in my
opinion, if Congress does not adopt an
amendment which will bring about a re-
duction in some of the payments which
are being made, and put a stop to some
of the things which are being done under
this program, we will have ample cause
to regret it.

Senators will have cause to regret it
because they will be criticized for com-

mitting the Treasury of the United
States to pajnnents of this nature over
such a long period of time, when they
are not justified. Senators who are
really interested in farm legislation will
face a reaction in the form of a revul-
sion of public sentiment, which will
come about when all the things that are
being done under this program are
revealed.

I realize that the purpose is to take
land out of production. However, how
are Senators going to justify paying
$1,062 for building a fishpond and then
paying the farmer $11 an acre for 10
years for the land that is covered by the
water in the fishpond?

That is an extreme case, but it is a
case that has happened already under
this program.

When the columnists start to WTite
about it, they will not write about the
hundred meritorious cases, but they will
write about something like that. The re-
sult will be to condemn the new farm
legislation, and to raise an issue against
every Senator who does not show some
interest in at least trying to bring about
some modification of this program.

The committee amendment does not
affect the practice payments, some of
which range as high as $88.74 an
acre. For the planting of trees, a farmer
gets $88.74 an acre as a practice pay-
ment. He will get an average rental pay-
ment for 10 years, and he will wind up
getting more than $200 from the Govern-
ment for improving 1 acre of his own
land, and after that he still retains the
land.

Senators may be able to justify such a
condition if they wish to do so. I think
we ought to put up a httle sign reading,
"Bring this down." The $1.24-an-acre
reduction on the rental payments will
not hurt the program. It will help the
program.

I know the Department of Agriculture
is opposing the committee amendment.
There has never been any commission on
agriculture that did not believe its for-
mula to be sacrosanct, and did not be-
lieve itself to be omniscient.

I read to the Senate the formula the
Department has used. I have not been
able to understand it completely. Some
of my learned brethren may be able to
understand it. It provides :
Formula for DrrEHMiNmo State Conserva-
tion Reserve Regui.ar Annual Rates fob

195&-57

Conservation reserve regular annual pay-
ment rates per acre were established for each
State composed of :

I. A constant amount of $5 per acre, plus

n. A variable amount per acre determined
separately as follows :

A. Establishing a State productivity Index
representing the corn feed value equivalent
of non'rrlgated oats, barley, sorghum grain,
and 6 tsrpes of hay yields for the most recent
available 10-year period.

B. Establishing a State land value Index of
farmland using a celling of $200 per acre for
States having average values higher than
$200 (to exclude Influence of mineral and
urban values) .

C. Establishing a composite State index by
giving the productivity Index (A) a weight
of 3 and the land value Index (B) a weight
of 1, and dividing the sum by 4.

D. Multiplying (5 by the State composite
index (C).

The national weighted average of the State
rates resvilting from the sum of I and II
above Is $10.09 per acre.

m. For example, for a typical State:

A. The productivity Index of equivalent
corn feed value of the 9 crops described In
II-A above was 74 percent of the national
average.

B. The land value index described In n-B
above was 41 percent of the national aver-
age.

C. The composite State Index described In
II-C above was 65.75 percent.

D. The composite Index multiplied by the
$5 national variable rate resulted In a varia-
ble ra -e for the State of $3.29.

E. When the variable rate of $3.29 de-
scribed In II-D and III-D above was added
to the constant $5 rate for all States de-
scribed In I above, the indicated result is
$8.29. This was rounded to the whole num-
ber of $8 as shown In the regulations.

Section 485.163 Annual payments — (a)
Amount of payment. An annual payment
will be made to the producers on the farm
for the period of the contract upon determi-
nation by the county committee that they
have fulfilled the provisions of the contract
entitling them to such payment. The
amount of the annual payment shall be de-
termined by multiplying the rate or rates of
payment per acre determined In accordance
with paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) of this
section by the number of acres determined
In accordance with paragraph (d) of this
section.

That Is the formula which has been
established. It will be seen that what is
provided and what we are not supposed
to touch, because it is sacrosanct, is an
average rental payment that is based on
a certain kind of hay, indeed, on six
kinds of hay. If a farmer does not grow
1 of those 6 kinds of hay, it will
weigh greatly against him in applying
the formula. That shows that this is
not something that is so sacrosanct that
we may not even look at it.

I am a friend of conservation. I have
stood on the floor of the Senate when
the ACP had been eliminated com-
pletely on the other side of the Capi-
tol, and have fought here at a time
when it looked as though it would be
overwhelmed and it would be Impossible
to keep the program alive. I believe in
conservation today, but I do not believe
in this kind of reckless, foolish spending
of the tax dollars of the American people
in some isolated cases. I do not say
that this applies everywhere, but I say
that if we do not show a willingness to
bring some realism into this program,
we will not be doing the farmers a serv-
ice; instead, we will be doing them a
disservice, because these things will come
out and they will be made issues, not
only within parties, but on the Congres-
sional District level £uid in the State
campaigns.

Mr. President, it is going pretty far
afield when farmers can get such sub-
stantial sums for a practice. I daresay
that in some cases, before the law was
passed, some farmers would have been
glad to get that much for the land, in-
stead of only for the practice.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed in the Rxcord at
this point the tables which appear on

•all'

\

u

1

8816

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

pa?e 135 and page 130 In the memoran-
dum on the amendments.

There "jeing no objection, the tables
uere ordered to be printed in the Rxc-
ORO, as follows:

Conservation reserve program — Approved
State annual payment rates per acre and
average rates on contracts reported signed
OJ c/ Apr. IS, 1957

COTiservation reserve proffram — Approved
State annual pajfment rates per acre and
average rates on contracts reported signed
as of Apr. 15. 1957 — Continued

6Ute

.\pi>rr)TWl

Anniml
payuunt
TjXe i»et

A TV mm

anniiiU
pajrnK nt

P«M- IMTt' >ia

ODQ tract*

A!.iNinia

« i»
liiTO
n II)

um)
8. 11)
H It)

11 nil
lini
um

12 in
in ID

ID III

10 IW

It IX)
12 n)

1.1 ID

11 ID
11 ID
ID. i«

r a

Antoiiit. .......... .........

l.J 47

.VrH.-m.vrt

7 Mt

r ilihtnviA,

B ^

("iiinrmlo

T iV

< 'on iirrl l«jt

I >vUwikr><

KWi.ls

Udirfia

lluho

IUlim».

IlKlUUlk

low J

K in«».i

Kenturlcv

IX)U1.SIIU1« ........... .

M.ui)»'

M:ir>hiivil

N( tTwchatelts

Muiilnin

11 i«
11 4]

T 3»
7 m
7 HI

II na

III 4i
11 .w
11' 33

K W

i -a

m r:

s ni

7 .^2

M I'liKwita . . ..

McaUsipiil

B iW

ApprorM

A7«rac«

luinual

annua]

SUtP

pa/nirat

P«yTTi«>nt

riOi^ (wr

per MTV uo

men

^leni'il
(onimcts

>fl<w>'n-1

9 no
» i»

a. uo

7 ID

It SB

Montjuiu

8. &3

NebrunkA.

K. 13

Nrvmt*. .

7 39

Nfw H«innshir«

la no

a 10

Nrw Jonev

U n)

Ki H)

.Nmi» .\fo\lco

K ID

K ra

N>w \ark

11 no
1*1 uu

B. M

North Canillnj

• .VI

North DiUoU

tt ID

B rn

Ohio

li l»)

111 i*

«)klnhoraa

tt in

1.' ID

«l 77

Oii'icun

10 a

)'".\ii'<\ l\ una

It ID

&»•

KhmV Ml,in<l

li no

W lU

.*^(Mjlh (";kniiin«

8.74

.•"ouih l>i«k jLa

9 mi

R M

T i>iin»vii« ,

11) ni

B IH

TftJi.*

111 ID

B .U

1 t.Jh

11 ID

& KB

\>rmon t

m iD

a «

\ lr»inl«

111 ID

8 30

^^ ii.<h!";t'>n

1:1 iD

11 117

WmI \ I"-'.'!!!!*

111 'D

7 i>3

\\ i-icon.ilii

11 ID

\ ID

8 77

\S >oniiiig

7 JB

ToUil

' la u

8.M

' L ii.t»il .sui,., ivfi 140 wb«n weljliieil by :?tatn<Mli.

E»li

matrd JuhHs rrqutrfd for rontrnrts s,ift}<«i hy farmers through Apr. /.;. l^o7, by contract
prnoti ami Jisvdl ymr « (»uh3,,ju€nt to Jinai y<.ar lit^S)

Fl'<r*l y*«r

1<MI
I '.Ml
1 KVi
IWVt
l'»i»
1 lO

1M7.

Totkl.

AnniMl rrnlaj |i«j-nMi|iU

UM\3 »

>."•, *»»V IDI)

aiw).uiw

m iin i^D
41 imviDO

41 |ID IMX)
41, I<XI («D

7. 3ID, nmi I IM. «K), 000

I

liWwitr f«>o.

\n PDntnw^t.t,

tl «> u •

»Ul>l>'l4i

S

4

tIA :»n i*D

9^\ 44n rmn

K :«i. HI)

M «»I),IDI1

I'i, ri»i laiii

ir. sdi (1(1

1« T>«i mi)

,^7 >«*i i»D

K TlniHD

K:ui.m)

!•> .III. fill

I'l. rui. mil

\<\ 'HI. i«»l

1\ "im, UK)

lfV.7l«l.i«D

l-^llD, i»D

\\ IID. IID

1^. HD, l«D

rn»pHr«

tuhli>l«l

$7 n\ nmi

WD,UUI

Onn<i lull]

>M Mfvnro

(O. 3«). mD
i7. oaii. IID
,17 >«»V iHD
in, 7Ql> IDO
iK ;iai,ijiu

]''<. TV. IDO
K Tim IID
l.V liD,i>U

14K. 7H0, 1)00 I 331). 3M), IDO

8. son, (HO I J2H, fV><0. 000

»i;.^u!i!n;CA' rv:;;^;!,::::'^'^ '^^^^ '^^^ ^j"^'-' "'^ '•^"-^'■•" ^^--ri-.m.^ o, r.p..t. ^,, ^r^t,^

• K'T-iiis.' ihc la.'* iir'Kriin w i.-< '>(T*r>><l too Utf for mnipl
i-}")r "i>l ID-yi'iir O'liti « i>. -imi'-'J m Ij.'ij «rrv .»ut.>n:4t.o

|>l.-:in» r'i-*^tiit's iluniiK IV»,'«, lUJ i-y«u- contracts, uiJ most
.0.1. ly cit.'n.l.'.l hy 1 ye.xr.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Will the Senator
plea.'e restate the proposition of payin?
$88. ttrst. fcr the planting of trees, and
th'^n the subsequent payments?

Mr. RUSSELL. I think the rental
pavmenLs in the area to wh»ch I referred
would be on 13 acres, so $130 would be
p ud over a 10-year period. Then at the
end of that period of time the farmer
will Kct his land back greatly improved.

Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield. I said that
that wa.s m the highest case.

Mr. AIKEN. I su=.;gest that if certain
land IS planted to trees, the farmers do
not get th.e full value. They get 30 per-
cent of the rental value for 10 years.

Mr RUSSELL. That vanes within the
States under this forrrula. The Senator
frum Vermont has very low rental in
h'.s State, becau.se the farmers m hi.s
State have not been planting the right

kind of grasses. They did not produce
a great deal of corn that had a corn
value in arriving at this formula. But
the arrangement varies withm the sev-
eral State.s.

Mr. AIKEN. We get 30 percent over
a 10-year period.

Mr. RUSSEU.. That Ls what the
farmer pets in Vermont. I do not want
to go into all the States, because com-
pari.^ons are mi.^leading. Where the
payment was $11 an acre for the land in
the fishpond, the farmer got $1,062 to
build the pond. That was. more than
that State had for its average rental
payment.

Mr. AIKEN. If the farmer plants
corn or tobacco or wheat land to trees,
he would get the full value. If he plant.s
sras.'Iand, he gets only 30 percent of the
rental value.

Mr. RUSSELL. If he does it for the
feed value equivalent of oats, barley, or
sorchum pram, he gets more than' 30
percent of the value. The Senators

State happens to be one of the States
which receives the lowest payments.

Mr. AIKEN. Where grassland exists,
we tielleve a good grassland farm is en-
titled to as much consideration as the
farm of a man who raises barley and
oats.

Mr. RUSSELL. He does not vet it
under this formula.

Mr. AIKEN. He has not cot it so
far.

Mr. RUSSELL. No.

Mr. President, no one can tell me amy
program will be wrecked when we are
proposing only a very modeet reduction
of 8 or 10 percent In the annual rental
payments to be made. We are not
touching practice payments or reducing
them in any way. I would be less than
frank if I did not say I thought these
payments ought to be reduced much
more than the amendment envisions.

Let us say a farmer does not put any
land in the conservation reserve.
Therefore. It is not attractive to him.
The truth is that everyone was dealing
with the acreage reserve; they were not
considering the conservation reserve.
The farmers were so busy working out
their acreage reserve programs that
they did not get around to the conserva-
tion reserve program.

But, Mr. President, do not doubt that
they will come Into that program this
year. When they do get the 10-year
contracts, we will h%vt that increase in
the budget for the next 10 years as an
obligaUon of the United States Gov.
emment which will be Just as sacred as
the payment of the interest on the pub-
lic debt.

To anyone who sajrs we should not
even adopt this limited, modest reduc-
tion. I say that, in my opinion. It does
not go nearly far enough, without wreck-
ing the whole conservation program,
and without paying an income to the
farmer.

I am perfectly willing to leave for
the record the effect that this program
will have on future farm legislation, as
to whom was the real friend of the
farmer: whether we want to grasp
everything we can get now In the new
program, and bring the whole farm
program Into disrepute, or whether we
want to put up a slowdown sign, a very
modest slowdown si^n, to the Depart-
ment of Agriculture in allocating these
tremendous sums.

Mr. ALLOTT. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. ALLOTT. I wish to take l«?sue
with the statement the Senator from
Georgia has just made, although he has
made it in complete candor, about peo-
ple grasping for every penny they can
get. Actually we are engaged in pro-
moting a false farm economy anyway.
We will never get a true farm economy
so long as we are trying to build a farm
economy on six basic commodities.

With respect to the soil conservation
program as it applies to the farm econ-
omy, the truth of the matter Is that ap-
proximately 76 or 77 percent of the
farmers of the United States are left
completely out of the program unless
tiiey can participate in the acreage re-
serve. Some 23 or 24 percent of the

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8817

farmers of the United States can par-
ticipate In the acreage reserve.

Mr. RUSSEUi. Let me point out to
the Senator from Colorado tbat we have
cut down the acreage reserve proexam
for next year by a much higher per-
centage than It is propoaed to cut this
program. We have cut back the acreage
reserve program from $612 million to
$500 million. Iliere will be more of a
reduction in acreage reserve payments
next year than this amendment con-
templates there will be in the oonserva-
tlon reserve.

Mr. ALLOTT. In mj optnlon. the
amount should be cut and evened out
more than that.

Mr. RUSSELL. I hope the Senator
from Colorado will not. in my limited
time, place me in the posltian of defend-
ing the acreage reserve program. I do
not believe in it.

Mr. ALLOTT. If I am eneroachiixg
upon the Senator's time. I apok>giae. I
will procure time from another Senator.

Mr. RUSSELL. I will yield to the
Senator. I find I have more time avail-
able than I thought I had.

Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. CAPEHART. I would much pre-
fer to take 10. 15. or 20 percent of the
amount it is planned to spend for the
acreage reserve and the consenratlon
reserve and to put it into research, to
find new uses for farm products, so that
the farmer oould build up his iwodueUoQ
of commodities as much as he oould
build up his crop of grass. That Is what
we ought to be doing. At least, we ought
to be trying to do it. because then we
would be trying to do something worth-
while.

Mr. RUSSELL. The Senator from In-
diana has a theory with which I have
considerable sympathy. But we are now
confronted with a fact In the form of an
actual item in an appropriation bill.

I find I have more time than I thought
I had, so I shall be glad to yield further
to the Senator from Colorado.

Mr. ALLOTT. I appreciate the kind-
ness of the Senator from Georgia. I
think there has been too much emphasis
on the acreage reserve.

Mr. RUSSELL. I agree.

Mr. ALLOTT. Not enough emphasis
has been placed upon the conservr.tion
re erve. In most Western Sutes, if we
exclude wheat, there is no basic com-
modity; therefore, there is no acreage
reserve. We still have only 23 'i per-
cent.

But, by the same token, we eliminate
everybody who has irrigated land, who
cannot enter into the conservation re-
s:'rve on the basis of $6.50, $7, or $7.50
an acre. That is the point I wish to
make. I appreciate the Senator's
yielding to me. because I think this is an
important consideration.

Mr. RUSSELL. It is tremendously
important. I am perfectly willing to
agree that there is a disparity between
basic commodities and other commodi-
ties in the two programs. I assume there
is an even greater disparity between
."^ome of the basics within the acreage-
reserve program. Some commodities get

cm 555

a great deal more than others In that
program.

For the first time, I have been placed
tax the light of being an enemy of the
tarmer. I am perfectly willing to make
a record. I hope there will be a record
vote, even if I am the only Member of
the Senate who votes for the amoid-
ment, because I want the Racou to show
that, within my limitations as a mem-
ber of the Committee on Approprlatlans.
I did aU within my power to try to put
Congrenon notlee that If this program
were allowed to run on as it is today,
without any interest being shown In re-
dooing the payments, the program
would, in the long run, be very detri-
mental to the Interests of Amolcan
agriculture.

Mr. HUMPHREY and Mr. THTB ad-
dressed the Chair.

The PRESmma OFFICER. Does
the Senator from Georgia yield; and if
so. to whom?

Mr. RUSSELL. I have only about 5
minutes left, and I should like to reserve
most of that time. But I wHl 3rield
briefly to the Junior Senator from
Minnesota.

Mr. HUMPHRET. M^. President, I
want the Riookb to be perfectly dear
that the senior Senatw from Georgia
not only Is a friend of the farmer,
rather than his enemy, but that he has
been a stalwart soldier for American ag-
riculture.

I want It perfectly clear, moreover,
that In the disagreement we may hav«
over these funds, many of us are learn-
ing a great deal from the argument being
made by the Senator from Georgia. My
only Interest in the matter was to see
to It that we do not get ourselves Into a
straitjacket in terms of the fixed fee in
the bill, which would in any way limit
the effectiveness of the program.

Mr. RUSSELL. It does not fix the
fee on a single acre of land in the United
States.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Except as a flat
fee for the national average.

Mr. RUSSELL. The highest fee can
be paid now; but on the marginal and
submarglnal land less will have to be
paid to bring the average down.

Mr. HUMPHREY. It is fair to say
that we are at the exploratory stage in
the program, and the argument made by
the Senator from Georgia, to my mind,
is a constructive argument.

Since I have taken a point of view
different from that of the Senator from
Georgia, I would not want the Recokd
to indicate for a minute that I have not
been one who thoroughly appreciates his
generous and great contributions to ag-
riculture and agricultural legislation.

Mr. RUSSELL. I appreciate the Sena-
tor's comments.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, if the Sen-
ator from Georgia will yield briefly to me,
let me say that no Member has a higher
regard for him than I have. If ever there
was a friend of agriculture, the Senator
from Georgia has demonstrated year
after year that he is a friend of agri-
culture.

If any Senator has any misgivings,
they are on the basis of a fear that the
program will be In bad repute unless

some oeiUng Is imposed on tibe acreage
allotment.

I cannot fully agree with the Senator
in regard to the tree-planting program,
however, because if a tree-planting con-
tract is stened, the farmer will be putting
the acres planted to trees under a long-
term contract, one applying for not less
than 15 years, and the farmer will not
receive the maximum annual rental on
thatacreage. Instead, he will receive the
minimum annual rental, which might
amount to as little as $3 or $4 an acre.
Tei on that acreage he will grow a crop
of trees which will be very beneficial to
future generations.

Mr. RUSSEUi. Mr. President, that is
quite correct, but the average paid for
tree rentals in my State Is somewhat
higher than the amount the Senator
from Minnesota has indicated. Al-
though such use is beneOeial to future
generations, and on that basis I have
supported all conservation measures. let
us not lose sight of the fact that it is
very beneficial to the man who owns the
land and who places it under the pro-
gram and receives the payments for
rentaL This is a conservation program
which really can be profitable to the
farmer. The modest overall reduction <tf
$1.34 an acre will not hurt the program.
Any figures which would show that it
would be necessary to make a reduction
of more than $1.34 an acre merely indi-
cate that for some reason the Depart-
ment of Agriculture has decided to make
more than the average out in the par-
tlottlar State eonowned. But if the De«
partment decides to make a fair appUoa-
tl(m across the board, the reduetton
oannot be more than $1.34 an acre.

It is my Judgment that sound govern-
ment and prudent expenditure of public
funds, as well as avoidance of depletion
of what little reserve the farmer has in
the bemk of good soil in the Nation, dic-
tates that the Senate, if it be wise, adopt
the committee amendment.

Mr. President, I reserve the remainder
of the time available to me.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER (Mr. Tai-
MAOGE in the chair) . The Senator from
Georgia has 4 minutes remaining, and
the Senator from South Dakota has 10
minutes remaining.

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President. I yield 3
minutes of my time to the Senator from
Illinois [Mr. Dirksen].

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Illinois is recognized for 3
minutes.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, both
the pending committee amendment and
the amendment submitted to it by the
Senator from South Dakota [Mr.
MuNDT] were roundly discussed In the
Appropriations Committee.

I certainly respect and admire the con-
viction the distinguished Senator from
Georgia brings to this cause. I am fully
sensible of the zeal and devotion he has
given to the entire cause of agriculture;
and I speak from a wealth of experience,
dating back to the days when he and
I sat across the conference table from
one another, during the consideration of
agricultural appropriation bills. How-
ever, I believe the arithmetic of this
case is against him, and is in favor of

Si

8818

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

the position taken by the Senator from
South Dakota.

The approved rental would be $12 an
acre: but for every acre on which $12
would be paid, it would be necessary to
find another acre on which $3 would be
paid; that would be necessary in order
to arrive at the average of $7.50.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, the
Senator from Illinois knows that the
national average is $7.50: that figure is
not based on the situation in Illinois.

Mr. DIRKSEN. That is correct. I am
saying that for every acre on which $12
was paid, in the case of my State, it
would be necessary to find another acre
on which $3 was paid. Under those cir-
cumstances, I cannot see any incentive
for a farmer to engage in the program.
If that is so. why have the program?
In that case, we might just as well
delete the $350 million from the bill, and
forget about the conservation reserve.

I am also afraid that so much rigidity
would be imposed on the program.
that the Secretary of Agriculture
would find It very difficult to administer.
How would he be able to know how many
acres and what kind of acres would be
placed under the program, let us say,
next year? He would have no idea.
Then when he found he had to operate
under an average limitation, perhaps he
would be able to make only tentative
contracts with the farmers, until he was
able to discover whether one average
limitation for the entire country was to
be applied. That would be a difficult
piece of administrative work to under-
take. I would prefer to see this run for
at least 1 year, and then, on the basis of
experience, and if these fears are con-
firmed, perhaps a limitation of this kind
could be established.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 3
minutes yielded to the Senator from
Illinois have expired.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President
the Senator from South Dakota
to me 1 additional minute:*

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, I
1 additional minute to the Senator from
Illinois.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Illinois is recognized for
1 additional minute.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I thank the Senator
from South Dakota.

Mr. President, in summary let me say
that, at one end of the scale, some very
good land might come in: but at the
other end of the scale, some very bad
land might come in. and that would not
improve the con.servation reserve and the
attainment of its objectives.

Therefore, I hope the amendment of
the Senator from South Dakota to delete
the limitation provided by the committee
amendment will be agreed to by the
Senate

Mr MUNDT. Mr. President, I yield 2
minutes to the distinguished ranking
minority member of the Senate Commit-
tee on Agriculture and Forestry, the Sen-
ator from Vermont I Mr. Aiken I.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Vermont is recognized for 2
minutes.

Mr AIKEN. Mr President, although
this appropriation bill as a whole is a
good one, and received a great deal of

TVill
yield

yield

study and thought on the part of the
Appropriations Committee, and particu-
larly on the part of its chairman, yet I
believe that if the Senate adopts the
committee amendment restricting the
payment on land put into the conserva-
tion reserve, it will be going a long way
toward defeating the purpose of that part
of the soil-bank program.

I believe that the amendment of the
Senator from South Dakota to the com-
mittee amendment should be agreed to.
If it is agreed to. I believe it will result
in the withdrawal of a great deal more
land from production, and the placing of
that much more land into forests, recre-
ational areas, sodded land, and land
planted to clover or soil -conserving
crops: and In that way the purpose for
which the soil bank was established will
be effected.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator from Vermont has
expired.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, how
much time remains?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Georgia has 4 minutes remain-
ing, and the Senator from South Dakota
has 4 minutes remaining.

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, Inasmuch
as no other Senators on this side wish
me to yield time, I shall sum up the case
for my ameniment.

First of all, in regard to what the Sen-
ator from Georgia said about the reduc-
tion from $8.44 to $7.50, which would
now become the legislative mandate, let
me say that those figures are not the
comparable ones. Instead, we must com-
pare the $7 50 proposed legislative man-
date with the $10.11 national average
used by the Department of Agriculture
In connection with the allocations. That
IS the ca.^e. because in every State of the
Union, there are a number of nondiverted
acres. Actually, 400.000 acres of the 700
million acres thus far in the con-servation
reserve are the-^e nondiverted acres,
which are paid for at 30 percent of the
prevaihns: State rates. So if the Sena-
tors from Washington or the Senators
from Missouri, or the Senators from Ore-
gon intend to vote to deprive the farm-
ers of their States of an opoprtunity to
participate in the program, at least such
Senators .should let the Record show that
they will be voting to .scuttle the program
in their area and to deprive the farmers
of their States of tho.se benefits, in view
of the record as it now stands, as shown
by a study of this debate, because the
figures to which I have Just referred are
tlie comparable ones, and the committee
proposes that they be cut .some $2 75 an
acre, on the average, rather than the
8 or 9 percent referred to by the Senator
from Georgia.

Somethini: w.is .said about fishponds,
by Senator Russell. I am nt^ver re-
luctant to ar^ue in favor of fishponds.
I was in favor of placing fishponds and
marshes into the con.servation program.
I am m favor of that. I made the mo-
tion and lead the successful flsht in our
Aq;riculture Committee when we incor-
porated inundated acres m the basic soil
bank legislation. I can ihmk of no bet-
ter use for idle acres than Impounding;
water and providing nesting places for
ducks and providing breeding places for

fish and recreational areas for children.
We have provided for it In this soU
bank program and I am happy to re-
affirm my support of it despite the re-
marks of the distinguished Senator
from Georgia.

If the farmers are being paid a spe-
cific amount per acre, that is being
done because the land which was taken
out of cultivation resulted In a de-
crease to the farmer of that much In-
come before the land was put under
water Had that not been unculti-
vated land, the farmer would be getting
30 percent less than that rate of in-
come. I am proud that the Izaak Wal-
ton League, the sportsmen's clubs and
the American Wildlife Federation favor
the use of part of the soil bank pro-
gram for wildlife purposes to restore
wet lands and recreational opportuni-
ties.

As to putting a halt to the program.
all the committee proposal would do
would be to halt it in SUtes like Wash-
ington. Kansas, Oregon, Ohio. Indiana.
Illinois, and other similar States, be-
cause we would still be spending the
same $350 million we would otherwise
spend. In the coming years it does not
make any difference whether we di-
vide the $350 million among all the
States of the Union, as I propose to do,
or place quarantines on States like
Washington, Oregon, Indiana, Ohio, and
Illinois.

I suggest that, having a program
which is national in scope, it should be
nationally supported. To do that we
should adopt my amendment and place
economic factors above political fa-
voritism.

Mr. President. I ask for the yeas and
nays on my amendment.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr MAGNUSON. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Georgia yield 1 minute
to me'

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield to the Senator
from Washington.

Mr MAGNUSON. The Senator from
South Dakota has mentioned the States
of Washington and Oregon, in which
payments have been above the national
average of $8.84. As the Senator from
Georgia knows. In my State the pay-
ments run between $10 and $16. There
was some fear that an express limitation
of $7 50 an acre would shut off States
like Washington, or similar States — some
30 States — from the possibility of receiv-
ing payments within tho.se amounts.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
minute of the Senator from Washington
has expired.

Mr MAGNUSON. I .should like to ask
the Senator from Georgia thus question:
De.spite the fact that the average Ls $8 84,
and that the payments in .some States,
such as the State of Washington, are
higher, under the amendment submitted
by the Senator from Siuth Dakota the
same amounts now paid could still be
paid, could they not? If the Depart-
ment of Agriculture administers thus
protrram in the same way it has. trying to
equalize the payments, it is still possible
that It will pay the same amounts for
the land that is sot aside in the State of
Washington. Is that correct?

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8819

Mr. RUSSELL. The Department
could make the same maxlimim iMiy-
ment, but I must be (rank and say that
it would be necessary, on the poorer type
lands, to make lower payments. I would
say It would not be necessary to reduce
the payments made in the State of
Washington, but the national average
would have to come down about $1.34
an acre.

Mr. MAGNUSON. It would not dis-
courage those who really wanted to put
the highly cultivated land, or the top
land, into the conserratlon reserve.

Mr. RUSSELL. I should like to think
the Department of As:riculture will have
enough judgment to maintain the pay-
ments on the productive land.

Mr. MAGNUSON. That is the whole
purpose of the prox'teion.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President. I wish
to address myself to the pending amend-
ment. We hear much about economy.
We now have an amendment before us
that affords a real test as to how Sena-
tors feel about economy.

I wish to point out again that when
one dollar is obligated under this pro-
gram, we are coounltting ourselves,
under the program, to pay $10 In a $350-
million program. If it is obligated at
$10, over a 10-year period, we have obli-
gated ourselves to that extent. We
have a chance to vote not only to save
$1.34 an acre this year, and bring some
measure of realism into this program.
but to save it over a period of 10 years.
We are not going to do any good by
piddling around with some minor ad-
justments in the program when we vote
for a program on which we shall have
to pay year after year.

If Senators are for economy in Gov-
ernment, if they are interested in dem-
onstrating that they have an interest in
it other than a mere bookkeeping or
arithmetical interest, this is a mighty
fme chance to show it. Senators can
effect real economy without injuring any
part of the conservation reserve pro-
gram. Indeed, in my opinion. Senators
will strengthen It.

I hope the committee will be sus-
tained.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator from Georgia has
expired.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll,
and the following Senators answered to
their names;

AUra

Dwonhak

Kerr

Allott

E&stland

Knowland

Anderson

Ellender

Kuchel

B«rrett

Errln

L«uscbe

Beall

Flanden

Long

B-nnett

rrear

Magnuson

Bible

Oold water

Uananetd

Bficker

Gore

Martin. Iow»

Bush

Hayden

Martin. P&.

Butler

HennlngB

McNamani

Byrd

Blc^nlooper

Monronef

Capeh&rt

mu

Morw

Carlson

Hclland

Morton

CurroU

Humphrey

Mundt

Case. N J.

ITM

Mumy

Coiie. S. DcJl.

Jaciuon

Neuberger

Church

Javlta

CMahoney

Cooper

Jenner

Paatorv

Curtis

Jolmaaii, Tbl

Potter

Dlrkaen

JohjiBtoa. S. C.

PurteU

DoilglU

Kennedy

Bevercomb

Botwrtaon

Smith, M. J.

Thrs

KuueU

WatkUia

SaltonEUU

Btennls

WUey

Schoeppel

Bymln^ton

WUliams

Soott

Talmmilga

Taitxmnisli

amltb. lialna

Thunnond

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. A quo-
nmi Is present. The question Is on
agreeng to the amendment offered by
the Senator from South Dakota [Mr.
MtnnrrL

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, a par-
liamentary inquiry.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator will state It.

Mr. MUNDT. Does the vote now come
on the so-called Mundt amendment, and
will an affirmative vote be a vote to
strike out the $7.50 limitation?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator is correct.

On the amendment of the Senator
from South Dakota the yeas and nays
have been ordered, and the clerk will
call the roU.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call
therolL

Mr. MANSFIELD. I announce that
the Senator from New Mexico [Mr.
Chavez 1, the Senator from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Class], the Senator from Arkan-
sas [Mr. PuLBRiGHT], the Senator from
Rhode Island [Mr. Grexn], the Senator
from Tennessee [Mr. Kxfaitvxr], the
Senator from West Virginia [Mr.
Neely], the Senator from Wyoming [Mr.
CMahohet] , and the Senator from Flor-
ida [Mr. Smazhixs] are absent on olBdal
business.

The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Mc-
Clellan], is absent by leave of the Sen-
ate on official business.

I further announce, if present and vot-
ing, the Senator from New Mexico [Mr.
Chavez] , the Senator from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Clakx], the Senator from Arkansas
[Mr. FuLBRiGHT], the Senator from
Rhode Island [Mr. GrkeitI, the Senator
from West Virginia [Mr. Neklt], and
the Senator from Wyoming [Mr.
O'Mahohkt] would each vote "nay.**

Mr. DIRKSEN. I announce that the
Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Cot-
Toif], the Senator from Nebraska [Mr.
Hrttska], the Senator from Nevada [Mr.
Malone], and the Senator frcxn North
Dakota [Mr. Yoxmcl are absent on offi-
cial business.

The Senator from New Hampshire
[Mr. BRracEs] and the Senator frcxn
North Dakota [Mr. Langeb] are absent
because of illness.

The Senator from Maine [Mr. Patkk]
is necessarily absent, and if present and
voting, he would vote "yea."

On this vote the Senator from New
Hampshire [Mr. CottokI is paired with
the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Hrtt-
ska]. If present and voting, ttie Senator
from New Hampshire would vote "nay,"
and the Senator from Nebra^a would
vote "yea."

Mr. BARRETT (after having voted
In the negative). Mr. President, how
am I recorded?

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
Is recorded as having voted In the nega-
tive.

Mr. BARRETT. I wish to change lay
vote to "yea."

Mr. SALTONSTALL (after having
voted tn Uie negative). Mr. President,
how am I recorded?

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
is recorded as having voted in tiie nega-
tive.

Mr. SALTONSTALL. I vote *'yea."

Mr. 3hCK30H (after having voted
hi the affirmative) . Mr. President, how
am I recorded?

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
Is recorded as having voted in the affirm-
ative.

Mr. JACECSON. I vote "nay."

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, I ask for
the regular order.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President. I
demand the regular order.

The VIC:e PRESIDENT. The clei*
must have time to tally the vote.

Mr. MORSE (after having voted in the
affirmative). Mr. Presiden.;, how am I
recorded?

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
is recorded as having voted in the affirm-
ative.

Mr. MORSE. I vote "nay."

Mr. NEUBERGER (after having voted
In the affirmative). Mr. President, how
am I recorded?

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
Is recorded as having voted in the af-
firmative.

Mr. NEUBERGER. On this vote I
have a pair with the Senator from
Arkansas [Mr. McC^ellaw]. If he were
present and voting he would vote "nay."
If I were at liberty to vote I would vote
"yea." I therefore withhold my vote.

Mrs. SMITH of Maine (after having
voted in the negative). Mr. President,
how am I recorded?

The VICJE PRESIDENT. The Senator
Is recorded as having voted in the nega-
tive.

Mrs. SMITH of Maine. I vote "yea."
The result was anjoounced — yeas 40.
nays 38. as follows:

TKAS-40

Aiken

Curtis

Morton

AlioU

Dlrlcsed

Mundt

Barrett

Flanders

Potter

Beall

Goldwater

PurteU

Bennett

Heunlngs

Revercomb

Brlcker

Hlclcenlooper

SaltonstaU

Biish

Holland

Bchoeppel

Butler

Humphrey

Smith, Maine

Oapehart

ITSS

Smith. N. J.

Carlaon

JSTltS

Thye

Carroll

Jenner

Watkins

Case. N. J.

Knovland

Wiley

Cvte. 6. Dftk.

Kiirh^

Cooper

Martin. lows
NATS— S«

Andenon

Jackson

Murrey

Bible

Jnhnimn. Tex.

Pastore

Byrd

Bobertsoo

Church

Kennedy

Russen

Douglas

Kerr

Scott

Dworshak

LauBctaa

Sparkman

EastlAnd

Ijong

Btennls

Ellender

Magnuson

Symington
"ntlmadge

Ervln

Mansfield

Freor

Martin. Pa.

Thurmond

Gore

McNamara

WlUlams

Hayden

Monroney

Tarborough

HUl

Morse

NOT vormo— 17

Bridges

Hruska

Neuberger

Chavez

Kelatrver

O'Mahoney

CUrk

Langer

Payne

Cotton

Malone

Smathen

Pulbrlght

MoClellAn

Toung

Oreen

Neely

So Mr.

agreed to.

I .1

QQOn

rnMr.RF<;<^inNAT RFroRD — sfnatf

.J]n)p. 11

tn^y

/"r*XT/^T>r:CCT/^XT A T t>T7^r\T5TV

CTri^.T A T'T?

OOO-i

8820

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President. I move
that the Senate reconsider the vote by
which the amendment was adopted.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I
move to lay that motion on the table.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The question
is on agreeing to the motion of the Sen-
ator from California to lay on the table
the motion of the Senator from South
Dakota.

The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President. I sup-
pose I shall have to offer an amendment
in order to get a little time.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Sen-
ator is correct.

Mr. RUSSELL. Therefore. Mr. Presi-
dent. I move on page 28. in line 14. to
strike out the figure "$350 million" and
Insert in lieu thereof the figure "$250
million."

The VICE PRESIDENT. How much
time does the Senator desire to yield to
himself?

Mr. RUSSELL. I have 30 minutes,
I believe, on the amendment. I shall
consume only a few minutes, and then
yield back the remainder of my time.

First, I wish to say that the amend-
ment which has just been adopted was
adopted by a strictly party vote. We
have not had a great many true econ-
omists— with the exception of the dis-
tinguished Senator from Delaware [Mr.
Williams), who is a true economist —
but we have had a great deal of talk
about economy, but do not always vote
for it. I believe there were 1 or 2 affir-
mative votes on this side of the aisle,
but aside from that, I believe this is
one of the few times when we have had a
strictly party vote on an agricultural
issue. I would have much preferred to
have the amendment disposed of strictly
on its merits, even though it had lost
by a much larger vote, than to have
it determined as a party issue.

I believe the Senate has made a great
mistake. However, that is one of the
benefits of serving in the Senate: that is.
we can always question the wisdom of
the majority.

Mr. President. I have offered an
amendment, and I hor>e the Senate will
give me a yea-and-nay vote on it. I
wish to say to my colleagues on this side
of the aisle that I do not ask any of them
to vote for the amendment for any rea-
son on earth except on its merits, cer-
tainly not for personal reasons. I am
offering the amendment because in com-
mittee, when the motion was made to
increa.<^e the total amount which would
be available for the conservation-reserve
payments above the House figure by $100
million, I voted for it, with the under-
standing that there would be at least
some effort made to show that there was
some concern on the part of the Senate
about the payments which were being
made. I therefore reoffer the amend-
ment now to give economy advocates a
chance to cast an economy vote, which
is spelled out in terms of dollars and
cents, rather than in terms of trying to
clean up a program and to save a few
hundred million dollars from it.

Leaving aside all that I have said. If
we are to maintain these high payments,
and iX we art to permit fishponds to

be constructed at a cost of $1,062 and
then pay the farmer who built the pond
$11 an acre for 10 years with money
taken from the Federal Treasury, and
In addition permit him to enjoy the
benefits of the fish which are in the
pond — and incidentally he would get the
fish free from the Government — then it
seems to me that we should hold this
program down and have a chance to
evaluate it.

The expenditures for this year for this
program were about $172 million. Even
if the amendment is adopted, it will give
leeway for an increase of about $70 mil-
lion during the next year. It will be pos-
sible to build a great many dams or fish
ponds, and to make a great many prac-
tice and rental payments with $172 mil-
lion.

I do not offer the amendment face-
tiously. I certainly do not offer it out of
resentment because the last amendment
was adopted. I do so because I voted to
increase this amount in committee, and
because I thought that some effort was
going to be made to put some little
economy into the program.

Certainly if the rates of payment are
to remain as high as they are. there will
be a heavy obligation on the part of the
Government, because the money will be
paid out 3. and 5. and 10 times over. If
we look at it from the standpoint of 10-
year contracts, it will mean $2,500.-
000.000. even at the lower figure.

I do not wish to labor the point. I
merely wish to have a yea-and-nay vote
on the amendment.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr. Pres-
ident, will the Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Is the
Senators amendment offered to the
figure that deals with the dam-building
program or with the conservation-re-
serve program''

Mr. RUSSELL. The dam-building
program is a part of it. We pay for
dams under ACP and in the soil bank.
The two programs run along together.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I did not
catch the Senator's statement with ref-
erence to where the amendment would
come in the bill. Is it directed to the
program that deals with the soil conser-
vation program or is it to be a part of
the new soil bank program?

Mr. RUSSELL. It is directed to the
soil bank program. It does not touch
the ACP program. A great deal has
been made here of the fact that this pro-
gram is in its infancy; that it Is being
tried out.

The Senate has decided in its wis-
dom— and the decision may be right —
not to disturb the scale of payments
now being made. It amounts to having
the Government committed to another
billion dollars of expenditures, whether
the payments are proper or not. The
amendment will allow a reasonable in-
crease in this program ever the next
year of about $70 million. It will give us
time to evaluate and study and recheck
the practice payments and rental pay-
ments. They appeared to me as being a
little high, and also to the distinguished
Senator from North Dakota, who offered
the amendment in the committee. How-
ever, Lf we want to keep the high pay-

ments, let us not embark on such a large
program, but hold the program to $250
million, because it can cost a billion dol-
lars before it is over.

I do not wish to labor the point. I
wish to go on record myself on this
amendment. Therefore I ask for the
yeas and nays on the amendment.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The yeas
and nays have been requested. Is the
request sufficiently seconded?

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, I re-
serve the remainder of my time.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield, only for the purpose
of refreshing my memory and that of
other members of the committee?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I believe the Senator
from Georgia proposed to make the
amount $350 million.

Mr. RUSSELL. That Is completely In
error. The Senator from South Dakota
(Mr. MuNDT] offered the $350 million
amendment. I stated I thought that
amount was too high. I leave it to the
conscience and integrity of the Senator
from South Dakota to say If that is not
a fair statement. I want the Record to
show that the Senator from South Da-
kota not only nodded his head but also
said that my statement was correct.

Mr. DIRKSEN. But did not the Sen-
ator from Georgia say that $325 million
was agreeable to him?

Mr. RUSSELL. I said I thought we
should not go higher than that amount,
in any event; but $300 million was as
high as I thought we should go.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Am I correct in my
recollection that that was deleted by the
Mundt amendment, and that the vote
was actually 11 to 8 in the full Commit-
tee on Appropriations, although after
the total amount was first written into
the bill, and we had a long discussion
about the $7 50 limitation, all members
of the committee were fully informed
about that, and still there was an almost
even division in the committee on this
limitation?

Mr. RUSSELL. I do not remember
the exact vote; I think it was 13 to 9.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I think it was 11 to 8.

Mr. RUSSELL. Anyway, the margin
was strongly in favor of the position I
took. But I do not see what light that
throws on the matter. I am not here
representing the committee. I stated I
was not. I am here in my individual ca-
pacity as a Senator from Georgia, offer-
ing an amendment which I believe in
good con.science should be agreed to.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, a
parliamentary inquiry.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
from California will state It.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Under the unani-
mous con.sent agreement, in which the
time is divided on this and other amend-
ments. I should like to inquire about the
provision as to the control of the time.

The Senator from Qecrgia has offered
an amendment. He cbviously would
have control of the time of the propo-
nents of the amendment. I wanted to
clarify the situation, because there have
been some requests for time on this side
of the aisle.

' /

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8821

The VICE PRESIDENT. Under the
agreement on the Mundt amendment,
which applies to this and other amend-
ments, the majority leader would con-
trol the time, unless he took the other
position on the amendment.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. As I under-
stand the unanimous-consent agree-
ment. I control the time in opposition,
but I should be glad to yield to whom-
ever the Senator from California sug-
gested I should yield to.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, I hope
this hiatus is not coming out of my time.
[Laughter]

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Under the
agreement which has been entered into,
the majority leader would control the
time in opposition to the amendment.
According to our practice, when the ma-
jority leader is in favor of an amend-
ment, the time is controlled by the mi-
nority leader. Since I am in favor of
amendment, I ask unanimous consent
of the Senate that I be permitted to
yield the control of the time in opposi-
tion to the amendment to the minority
leader.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The minor-
ity leader will control the time in op-
position.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President. I
yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Ver-
mont.

Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, the
amount of $200 million, which the Sen-
ator from Georgia would allow for carry-
ing on the conservation reserve program
this year, is $50 million less than the
amount allowed in the House bill.

Mr. RUSSELL. Oh, no; it is identi-
cally the same. I said $250 million.

Mr. AIKEN. I understood the Senator
to say $200 million.

Mr. RUSSELL. It is Identically the
same.

Mr. AIKEN. But if the amendment
shall be agreed to. it will mean break-
ing commitments to the farmers of the
country next year. This year, with the
program only getting partially started,
more than $177 million is being spent,
II is expected that the program will ap-
proximately double next year, provided
there is no change in the rate paid for
land put into the conservation reserve.
The Senate has voted that there will
be no change.

Therefore. $350 million will be needed
next year. If It is not provided. It will
be necessary to go to the farmers of
Montana, Washington. Missouri. New
York, and other States, and to say. "We
have broken our faith with you. We are
not going to pay you what we said we
would pay."

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. AIKEN. I have no time to yield.
If the Senator will give me time, I will
yield.

Mr. RUSSELL. I will yield 1 minute
to the Senator. Certainly th^t should
be sufficient.

When we know that the contracts in
force required only about $80 million
for rental payments, and the other con-
tracts were for practice payments, we
are breaking commitments with nobody
in the amendment.

Mr. AIKEN. The Department of
Agriculture tells me they expect the con-
servation-reserve program to be about
doubled next year, and that will require
about $350 million. They cannot pos-
sibly operate the program with $250 mil-
lion. If that is all we will appropriate,
it would be necessary to say, "We are
not going to give you the amount which
we said we would give you."

We can go to the people of those States
and say, "We are not going ahead with
the forestry program which we had
planned so as to put the United States
in a self-sufficient position in the in-
terest of national security."

We can say, "We are not going to let
you set this land aside for wildlife
refuges."

We can say. "We have decided not to
pay you for putting some of the land into
recreational areas, of which we are so
desperately short in this counti-y. and
which all city people are anxious to
have."

We can say. "We are not going to pay
you the full amount we said we would
pay you for taking land out of poor
crops and putting it into cover crops, so
that at the end of 5 years' time it will
be much better than it is now."

We can say, "We have simply lost in-
terest in building up the soil under the
conservation reserve."

Also, we can go to many States of the
Union — I think more than half of
them — and say, "The proposal we made
to you last year, under which we gave
you money to expand the State nurseries
by 400, 500, or 600 percent, is all off now.
You can throw those trees away, because
we are not going to let you have any
more of a program than you had during
the last year."

Mr. President. I do not think we want
to do that. I consider that when we
have made a commitment, we should
provide the means for keeping that com-
mitment. If the objective or the pur-
pose Is to destroy the conservation-re-
serve program, we have a good chance
to do It. But I do not think we want to
do that. We have made a commitment
which should run for 2 years more — or
for 1 year more at least. We are just
beginning to try out that program this
year. Certainly we do not want to go
back on our commitments at the first
opportunity we have.

It Is unthinkable that the Senate
should commit Itself to a program, and
then deliberately undertake to destroy
the program or to cripple it by not ap-
propriating the amounts of money
necessary to carry it on.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I
yield 4 minutes to the senior Senator
from Minnesota.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, the only
reason why a soil bank provision was
enacted as a part of the farm program
was to endeavor to reduce the overall
number of acres which are harvested
every year. There is no way in the
world by which crop production can be
reduced except by curtailing the number
of acres on which crops are grown or
from which they are harvested. The
most economical phase of the entire
farm program last year was that In-
volved in crop reducUoo.

If a farmer goes into the acreage re-
serve program, he is paid up to $47 or
$50 an acre to place productive acres
under the contract. But under the con-
servation phase of the soil bank, acreages
are being contracted for at the rate of
$3, $4, and $5 an acre, although in a few
instances in my State the rate has gone
above $11 an acre.

If a farmer plants trees, he enters into
a 10-year contract. He ties his land
up for 10 years. He takes it out of pro-
duction for that number of years. He
gets $3. $4, or not to exceed $5 an acre
xmder that long-term contract.

Trees are being grown on that land
which will benefit future generations.
Not only is the countryside being beauti-
fied, but the fertility of the land is being
built up, because if it is planted 25 or 30
years from now, it will lie virgin land
from which crops may be harvested.
Therefore, the conservation aspect of
the soil bank is the most economical
phase of the entire farm program.

Mr. President, we should consider the
money which is being poured out imder
Public Law 480 in order to dispose of
surplus commodities in foreign coun-
tries. Consider the billions of dollars
which are going into that program.
What is happening? We are taking the
fertility out of our land and are putting
it into giveaway programs for the bene-
fit of foreign countries.

I regret that my distinguished friend
from Georgia saw fit to offer this
amendment. He is one of the greatest
friends agriculture has ever had. But
in this instance he is acting against the
interests of agriculture. He is denying
to agriculture the conservation aspect
of this program, which is the cheapest,
the most economical and the most bene-
ficial to American agriculture.

For these reasons, I most sincerely
hope that the Senate will reject the
amendment. To adopt it will be taking
a backward step, rather than a step for-
ward with a constructive, sound farm
program.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President. wiU
the Senator from California yield to
me?

Mr. KNOWLAND. I yield 3 minutes
to the Senator from Minesota.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
from Minnesota is recognized for 3 min-
utes.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, It
appears to me that the amendment
would have been more properly offered
if the proposed limitation had been
placed on the national average payment
per acre, because if the national aver-
age payment had been reduced to not to
exceed $7.50 an acre, the sum total of
the appropriation carried at this point
in the bill might well have been reduced.

However, since the Senate has taken
a contrary view, and has overridden the
committee amendment, and has sus-
tained the present position of the De-
partment in regard to the payments
imder the conservation program, which
average approximately $8.84, it seems
imwise to strike $100 million from this
appropriation item.

It has been made perfectly clear here
that the conservation program was slow

m

m

!

8822

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

In getting started. That occurred be-
cause during the first year of the soil
bank, the emphasis was upon the acre-
a!?e reserve section. Some of the delay
occurred because of politics, and some of
it occurred because of the lack of incen-
tive. Regardless of that, we realize that
the acreage reserve program is at best a
temporary expedient for the purpose of
reducing production. I say it has not
worked well — but even the acreage re-
serve should be continued. The action of
the House in eliminating the acreage re-
serve program in 1958 is unwise.

But the conservation reserve program
Is dedicated to getting marginal lands
out of production and to storing fertility
in the soil, rather than to storing the
products of the soil in bins. The con-
servation reserve program is for refor-
estation, wildlife refugees, recreational
areas, and building up the fertility of soil
which has had its fertility depleted.

Therefore, if we were now to reduce
the appropriation for the program, we
would be lurning back on what we began
In a very sfiQrmative way. If we were to
reduce the appropriation, it might be
possible to get by for 1 year. But if the
appropriation for the program is cut
now. we shall be saying to the farmers
of the Nation that the conservation re-
serve program is to be limited and is in
retreat, and that they cannot depend on
It. We must remember that under the
conservation reserve program there is a
plan for long-range programing. In-
stead, those contracts are for 3. 5. 10, or
15 years. This is the kind of program
that Is needed in order to prevent certain
areas of the country from becoming
desert areas. This is the kind of pro-
gram thai is needed in the Great Plains
and in cutover sections and in sections
where the productive capacity of the soil
has be3n depleted. This program must
not be sacrificed. I am willing to take
the gamble of having the Govermnent
spend a httle too much for the conser-
vation reserve, rather than to have it
spend too little. Therefore. Mr. Presi-
dent. V. ith all deference to Senators who
believe to the contrary. I plead with my
colleagues on this side of the aisle to vote
for the appropriation necessary to put
this proi;ram into operation.

We must remember that this will be
the maximum, and there will be no man-
date that all of the appropriation be
spent. Since the Senate has voted to
strike out the limitation proposed by the
committee — and by my vote I helped the
Senate take that action, because I
thought that was the right thing to do —
It seems to me that the full $350 million
will be needed, now that the Senate has
said there will be no limitation per acre
on the payments on the conservation
reserve contracts.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The time of
the Senator from Minnesota has expired.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President. I
yield 5 minutes to the Senator from
South Dakota I Mr. MundtI.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
from South Dakota is recognized for 5
minutes.

Mr. MLTTOT. Mr. President. I sin-
cerely hope that our good friends on the
Democratic side of the aisle uill give
cool and calm con.«:lderation to the pres-

entation they have Just heard from my
friend and neighbor, the Senator from
Minnesota [Mr. HtTMPHRrvl.

I was no less disappointed than was
the distinguished Senator from Georgia
at the distinctly partisan vote taken on
the previous amendment, when, almost
without exception, our friends on the
Democratic side of the aisle voted against
my amendment removing the restric-
tion in the payment, as proposed by the
committee. Since that was a partisan
position, and a partisan vote, however, I
am proud to be able to say that there
wore exceptions, and that the Senator
from Minnesota [Mr. Humphrey 1, the
Senator from Florida TMr. Holl.andI,
and one or two other Senators on the
Democratic side of the aisle voted as I
am sure they would, namely, In con-
formity with the position taken by our
agricultural committee and in favor of
my amendment to sustain that position.

Since the vote was a partisan one, Mr.
President, I was never more proud than
I was of the position taken by Senators
on the Republican side of the aisle, the
Senators who belong to our party. Mr.
Pres'dent, the farmers of the Nation will
study that rollcall vote and will study
the record of this debate in that con-
nection, and they will observe that, al-
most Without exception, the Senators on
the Republican side of the aisle voted
to stand by the commitments made to
agriculture, and refused to shortchange
the American farmer. Every Republican
in America can be proud of the record
made by the Senators of his party to-
n:;;ht.

In fact, Mr. President, I plead with my
D'"'mccratic friends not to permit petu-
lance or disappointment because of the
defeat they had on the other amendment
to induce them to vote for the proposed
slash of $100 million in the appropria-
tion needed in order to comply with the
.'^oil-bank promises made to the Ameri-
can frrmers. K Senators wish to see the
incjme of the farmers in their States
really drop, let Senators vote for the
pending amendment, which would re-
duce the appropriation by $100 million,
taking that amount directly away from
ihe American farmer, who has been
promised it by legislation enacted by his
Congress.

If Senators wish to penalize the farm-
ers who have entered into such contracts
witii the Government, and if Senators
v;ant to see such farmers have to throw
up their hands in despair at the action
of a Government which, one year, prom-
ises them a $450 million program, and the
next year reneges, let Senators vote for
the pending amendment. Let the roll-
call tell the story. Certainly, our farm-
ers have a right to expect some kind of
assisi-ance and some kind of helpful revi-
sion in the program the Congress pre-
sents on agricultural problems.

No other program operates for the
benefit of the farmer in this area today.
Certainly, if the Senate votes to roll a
stone up the hill one day. and then to
roll it down the next day. like Sisyphus,
the farmers will have nothing on which
to rely. I certainly hope that all Demo-
cratic Senators will vote unanimously
this time, as they almost did on the other
amendment; but in this case I hope all

Democratic Senators will vote in favor of
the $350 million Item and not to cripple
our soil-bank program before It is even
given a fair trial.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President. I
yield 2 minutes to the Senator from
Kansas [Mr. Carlson 1.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
from Kansas is recognized for 2 minutes.

Mr. CARLSON. Mr. FTesident, I think
the Senate acted wisely -n voting against
the $7 50 per acre limi'at<on, on a na-
tional average: and I believe It would be
unwise for the Senate to vote to reduce
by $100 million this $3.iO million Item.

As I stated regarding the ether amend-
ment, if a cut is to t>e made, as proposed
by the committee amendment, we might
just as well eliminate all of the $350
million.

I firmly believe tbj t If the other
amendment had been adopted, even
more than the proposed $350 million
might have been neede<l.

I do not have a great deal of faith in
the acreage reserve, even though some
others do. But in the present case we
are dealing with the conservation reserve
program, which might well have an ap-
propriation of $500 mi lien. We have
131 9 million acres of cla.ss 4 land, some
of which should be in glass, and some of
it should be in trees. Let us get the
land back to grass and to trees, and let
us increase by a small r umber of dollars
the per acre payments to be made, in-
stead of trying to maintain a program
calling for payments of JIO, $15, $30, $40,
or $50 an acre.

So I urge the Senatf to vote for the
full amount of $350 million, which was
the amount called for In the committee
amendment as reported by the Senator
from Georgia I Mr. Russell 1.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I
yield 5 minutes to the Senator from
Florida [Mr. Holland 1.

The VTCE PRESIDENT. The Senator
from Florida Is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, I have
been somewhat disapi)ointed to hear
Senators speak of the last vote as if it
were purely a party vde. So far as I
am concerned, I do not take a party po-
sition on matters gravely affecting the
agricultural life of the Nation. That has
been my position on the issue of price
controls and in matters in the field of
conservation, as well as other matters,
and that was my position in regard to
the vote taken recently.

On the contrary, both In the Appro-
priations Committee ard on the floor of
the Senate I have voted my convictions,
which were to the effC'-t that the limi-
tation sought to be imposed would be
very hurtful in parts of the Nation. We
must remember that Liis Is a national
question, not a State question.

On this particular pirt of the argu-
ment, I a^ree completely with the posi-
tion already taken by my able friend,
the junior*Scnator froni Minnesota IMr.

HCMPHREY 1 .

I think that this program, the con-
.servation reserve program, Ls the very
heart of this whole soi. bank approach-
Conservation reserve rr.eans we are go-
ing to be planting tree; and we are go-
ing to be building soil and we are going

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8823

to be building up the fertility of culti-
vated acres, many of which are worn
cut. If there is anything in the soil
bank that appeals to people who want
to build up fertility in the soil and re-
store fertility to wornout soil, it is the
conservation reserve program. My only
point is that the approach under the
committee proposal is too timid, because
it allows only $350 million for that which
is the heart of the program, whereas the
authorization last year set up a $450
million program for the consei'vation re-
serve for the year 1958.

I do not like to see us march right back
down the hill when an issue of this kind
comes before us. Particularly. I do not
like to see any approach to this question
on a partisan basis. I decline to follow
anyone on a partisan basis on this kind
of issue.

As I recall the vote. I heard several
votes on this side of the aisle in sup-
port of the recent action taken on the
amendment of the Senator from South
Dakota — the Senator from Missouri
IMr. Hennincs], the Senator from Min-
nesota IMr. Humphrey], the senior
Senator from Florida, myself, and others
whose vote I perhaps did not hear. I
am sure the reason why most of the
votes on this side were cast the other
way was due more to the fact that they
were trying to stand by the committee
action and back up a very popular and
effective subcommittee chairman. It
happened that the Senator from Florida
had taken a different position in the
committee, and he took it in voting on
the floor, although he did not say any-
thing about it.

I hope we shall not approach this kind
of question from a partisan standpoint.
I hope we shall not be cutting the heart
out of the conservation reserve program
for this approaching year by reducing
the appropriation $200 million below
that which we authorized for fiscal 1958
when we passed the bill a little over a
year ago. I hop'- the amendment of
the Senator from Georgia will be de-
feated.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I wonder
If the proponents will allow me 1
minute?

Mr. RUSSELL. I gladly yield 1 min-
ute to the Senator from Oregon.

Mr. MORSE. I shall be frank in my
explanation of why I shall vote against
the amendment. I have checked it with
conservation and forestry groups In my
State. They all point out that, so far
as my State is concerned, this program
Is highly to be desired from the stand-
point of conservation and wildlife ref-
uges, as mentioned by the Senator from
Minnesota. Therefore, while I am dis-
appointed whenever I do not vote with
the Senator from Georgia, In the inter-
ests of conservation In my State. I shall
vote against the amendment.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
President, will the Senator from Illinois
yield 2 minutes to me?

Mr. DIRKSEN. I yield 2 minutes to
the Senator from South Dakota.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Person-
ally, it is difficult for me to understand
the purpose of the amendment. If there
is anything to conservation. I should
think we would want to offer the maxi-

mum opportunity for achieving conser-
vation. If the money is not contracted
for. it will not be spent; but if the pur-
poses of conservation, for which the con-
servation reserve program was estab-
lished, are to be accomplished, money
has got to be appropriated In order to
make the program effective. If the
acres are not signed up, the money will
not be spent.

On pages 684 and 685 of the hearings
there appears a table showing the pay-
ment an acre, and the extent, under the
conservation practices carried out under
the 1956 conservation reserve program.
This table is followed by footnotes which
describe the practices for which pay-
ments are allowed. From these I read:

The first column is A-2, "Planting a
permanent cover of grasses and legumes
for soil protection."

The next is A-4 for "Treatment of
cropland with lime to permit the 'j£,e of
grasses and legimaes, soil improvement,
and protection."

The next — A-7 is "Planting trees or
shrubs for erosion control, watershed
protection, shelter belts, or forestry
purposes."

I may say that the A-7 practice was
the only one used in my State last year.

Next — B-7 is "Dams, pits, or ponds to
permit the protection of educated cover."

C-14 is "Dams, pits, or ponds for irri-
gation water."

D-1 Ls "Planting grasses or legumes
for winter cover."

D-2 is "Planting grasses or legiimes
for summer cover."

G-1 is "Establishing and managing
cover for wildlife."

The VICE PRESIDENT. The time of
the Senator from South Dakota has
expired.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I yield 1 additional
minute to the Senator from South
Dakota.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Senators
as you can see. they are all for conserva-
tion purposes. If the acres are not
signed up, the money will not be spent.
Why should we not let the program go
forward at least at three-fourths the
rate which was envisioned when the soU-
conservation program was adopted?
Why not approve the $350 million as the
bill is presented? The authorization
originally was $450 million.

Under the next paragraph which deals
with the acreage reserve, the amount of
program is limited to $500 million.
Thus, If the pending amendment should
prevail, instead of the soil -bank program
being permitted to carry on at the au-
thorized rate of $1,250 million. It will be
funded at the rate of only $750 million.
That will be a reduction of $500,000,000,
for the operation of the soil bank under
what was authorized when adopted by
the Congress last year.

If the purposes of the conservation
practices are not good, kill the program
outright. But if the conservation prac-
tices are desirable, we should provide the
funds. If the signup does not require
this amount, the money will not be spent.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I yield
2 minutes to the Senator from Louisiana.

Mr. ET .LENDER. Mr. President, I
shall vote against the pending amend-
ment. I wish to point out that U there

Is provided only $250 million to carry on
the program. $165 million of that will be
necessary to carry out existing contracts,
and there will remain only $85 million
for new contracts.

It is my belief that the soil-bank pro-
gram should be given a fair trial. I
am rather disappointed that the dis-
tinguished Senator from Georgia Is seek-
ing to reduce the appropriation relative
to the conservation reserve acres portion
of the soil bank. As the Senator from
Florida pointed out. the authorization
amounts to $450 million per year for
that part of the soil bank. Even if the
Senate goes along with the recommenda-
tions of the Appropriations Committee,
we shall be short $100 million of the
amount authorized In the law.

I wish to say I voted against the Mundt
amendment when it was up for consid-
eration, although I favored it. I made
a strenuous effort before the committee,
to defeat the committee amendment, to
limit acreage payments, as the Senator
from South Dakota knows. Having lost
my fight before the committee, I resolved
to follow the committee bill as reported.
Such a course is in keeping with my
policy of standing with the committee on
which I am privileged to serve. Only
in a few instances have I violated that
policy.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The time of
the Senator from Louisiana has expired.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President. I wish
to make a few brief observations with
respect to some of the arguments which
have been made against my amendment.
Some Senators have sought to make it a
test of whether or not a Senator is in
favor of conservation If he votes in favor
of the amendment. I shall have to leave
that to time.

The bill contains a program of conser-
vation, under the agricultural conserva-
tion provision, of $250 million, in addi-
tion to the $250 million proposed by the
amendment, which will provide. In the
next year, a half billion dollars' worth of
coi&ervation activities in the United
States, which will be just twice what we
have had in any year for the past 8 or 10
years. So there is no dearth of funds
for conservation. The soil conservation
program Is here; it Is working; It is In
operation,

I am somewhat amazed to hear the
argument which is made here that, be-
cause the Soil Bank Act authorized $450
million for a conservation reserve pro-
gram, we could not decrease that pro-
gram next year and be consistent with
the provisions of the act.

I am surprised to hear that argument
come from Senators who say they are all
for the soil bank program. They rise on
the floor of the Senate and say, "We
must have at least a $350 million pro-
gram next year, an Increase of approxi-
mately $175 million over what we have
today." Yet nobody has proposed to
touch the acreage reserve program,
which has been cut back $250 million
from the amount authorized this year.

Talk about consistency. We are
spending $612 mlUion this year on the
acreage reserve program. There ts a
limitation here of a $500 million program
for next year. Nobody has talked about
that. That is a cutback.

4iJ

8824

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8825

The amendment I have offered allows
for a substantial increase in the con-
servation reserve program for the next
year.

Then comes the attempt to make a test
of supporting the soil bank, based upon
v.hether or not the Senators vote down
the amendment I have proposed. If a
Senator Is consistent in supporting the
soil banJc all he has to do Is strike out
all these limitations and restore a $750
million program next year for the acre-
age reserve.

We hear about the $350 million. Un-
der the basic act the limitation on the
acreage reserve program is $750 million
a year.

I wish to put all Senators on notice.
If they desire to be consistent, there is a
limitation in this bill of $500 million on
next j'ear's acreage reserve program, and
that is a cutback of $112 million from
what we are spending on it this year. So
If Senators are consistently supporting
the whole soil bank program, they have to
authorize expenditures totaling $1.2 bil-
lion next year for the conservation re-
serve and the acreage reserve programs.

Talk about consistency. Some say I
am not consistent although I provided
an Increase for the conservation reserve.
Senators stand calmly by and see a re-
duction made in the acreage reserve
program, which was supposed to be the
part of the program which would get
us out of the surplus surfeit that has
been harassing and bedeviling us for
so many years.

I am as strongly committed to the
cause of soil conservation as any Mem-
ber of the Senate, but, Mr. President,
that does not mean I am willing to
throw away money — paying, for in-
stance. $1,000 for a fishpond, and then
paying the farmer $11 an acre for the
land in the fishpond covered by the
water. Senators can go ahead and
adopt that kind of practice if they want
to do it — and they apparently do. I am
in favor of conservation, but I am not
in favor of paying as high as $88.50 an
acre for the practice of planting trees,
and then paying the man who owns the
land and to whom we have given $88 50
an acre for the practice, a rental of
$16.50 a year, for 10 years, while the
trees he planted at Government ex-
pense are making him rich, and can be
garnered after the program is ended.

Senators can call that conservation if
they wish. I think some farmers will
find it pretty good business, and it is
practiced at the expense of the Ameri-
can taxpayer.

The amendment merely proposes to
limit this program to $250 million next
year. That will provide an increase of
about $75 million. It would allow much
more than that by way of Increase, If
the practice payments, were reduced,
because the rental paid this year is only
$61 million.

We can make good every contract we
have m.fl.de.

I was surprised to hear the distin-
guished Senator from Vermont [Mr.
Aiken 1 say that we are breaking our
commitment to the American farmers
if we do not double the conservation
reserve program, when he is breaking
that commitment by supporting a $500

million acreage reserve program, which
is a cutback of $112 million from what
we are paying this year.

I am not under any illusion, Mr. Presi-
dent, as to what will happen to this
amendment. I was not under any illu-
sion when I offered it.

I have heard a great deal said here
about economy. I want the Record to
show that the dollars we speak of so
glibly will have to be paid, under the
very loose program which has been
adopted by the Department of Agricul-
ture, for a period of 10 years. When
Senators vote for $1 they are voting for
$10. I hope the American taxpayers
know that. These bills have to be paid
for the next 9 years.

Senators may call that partisariship. if
they wish. I do not care what they call
it. It is my philosophy that conserva-
tion is a good thing, but I do not believe
in strewing money around needlessly.

We have a srreat conservation program.
We have the ACP program, calling for
$250 million a year in this bill. That is
one conservation program which has not
been touched or reduced by the soil-bank
program; indeed, the soil-bank program
has been pyramided on top of it.

I want to relieve any Member of the
Senate who would be willing to risk being
called my friend of any obligation to vote
for this amendment. The Senator from
Florida I Mr. Holl.\nd1 referred to that
su^^esticn in his remarks. Senators
should vote their consciences as they see
them, because I am not offering the
amendment as chairman of the commit-
tee. I am not appealing to Senators for
ti^e sake of any friendship. I am offer-
ing the amendment because I feel It la
my duty to try to hold this program In
seme kind of a check and not let It ex-
pand too m.uch under the present loose
administration, when I know that the
payments under contracts entered into
so gaily have to be paid year after year
over tlie period of the next 10 years.

We are only planting the seed when
we enlar^ie this program, but there will
result flourishing trees which we will
have to supply with water at the expense
of the American taxpayer for the next
10 years.

Mr. CHAVEZ. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield for a moment?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. CHAVEZ. I had to go to New
Mexico over the weekend, and I was told
about what the Senator is now discuss-
ing, I believe. Mr. McDonald, a dairy-
man farmer living near Clovis. N. Mex..
told me, personally, that owners of land
which was not worth more than $20 came
under this program and were paid $75.
Thereafter, when the owners received
the $75 under the program, they would
put the land up for sale, and go to work
at the airbase.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President. I do not
doubt that this program has been abused.
I have not had the staff or the facilities
to run down all the rumors I have heard
as to land which has been sold and title
transferred, with no obligation on the
buyer to pay for the land except through
the soil-bank payments. I do not say that
practice Is widespread, but if one case
happened in the name of conservation
It la one caae too many. This Is a pro-

I have never made

I dill not say the Sen-

gram we ought to believe In. certainly
when we permit this much of an in-
crease, when we know he payments have
to be multiplied by 10 In the long run.
we must add the exi)ense of a billion
dollars which would be involved if we
increase this appropriation $100 million.

Mr. President, I res<rve the remainder
of my time.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, how
much time do I have left?

The VICE PRESIDI:nt. The Senator
from California has 4 minutes.

Mr. KNOWLAND. I yield 3 min-
utes to the Senator !rom Illinois IMr.
Dirksen].

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mi. President, there
is no element of conjistency or incon-
sLstency involved in this matter.

Mr. RUSSELL. I am glad the Senator
makes that confession, because It has
been argued here tha- I was not con-
sistent.

Mr. DIRKSEN.
that argument.

Mr. RUSSELL,
ator had.

Mr DIRKSEN. I sinply submit to the
Senate this program is exactly what the
name implies: it is a con.servation acre-
age-reserve program, and it is meant to
conserve the acres of this Republic on
a 3-year contract, or a 5-year contract,
or a 10-year contract, or in some cases
on a 15-year contract. We do not make
a commitment cntirelj over a 10-year
period.

This whole matter \7as promulgated
in the flr.st instance ir the Committee
on Agriculture and Pon'?try of the Sen-
ate. The distinguished i:hairman of that
committee, the Senator from Louisiana
IMr. Ellenderl, stood today in the Sen-
ate and said he was opposed to the
amendment offered by the Senator from
Georgia. The distinguished Senator
from Florida IMr. Holland 1, a memb.'r
of the Committee on Agr.culture and Foi '
estry, and one thoroughly devoted to the
cause of agriculture, stands in his place
in the Senate and opposes the amend-
ment offered by the Senator from Geor-
gia. The distinguished Senator from
Minnesota is a membe • of the Senate
Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.
He helped to fashion an 1 shape the pro-
gram. He stands in hi.s place tonight
and opposes the amendrient of the Sen-
ator from Georgia.

Is it necessary to marshal any more
testunony? Is it necesjary to summon
any more witnesses acainst the very
thing which the distinguished chairman
of the subcommittee proptjses to do;
namely, to cut this progiam by $100 mil-
lion? If we Intend to cripple it. let us
eliminate it altogether. But If we are
to have a conservation program, if we
are to have a program to which Member
after Member in Uie Seiate Appropria-
tions Committee has acdressed himself
with vigor, let us support it. On the
other hand, there was l.ttle enthusiasm
for the acreage reserve program. It
must l>e apparent to those who have
followed the destinies of agriculture that
this is the one thing uiton which those
leaders have set their hearts as the hope
of the American farmer and the hope of
the country in conserving the rich nat-
ural resources of our soil.

Mr. President. I do not think It is nec-
essary to say anj^hing further so far as
those who brought this program before
the Senate in the first instance last year
are concerned. If we are to have a pro-
gram, let us not stand it on one leg.
Let us give it a fair chance, and vote the
entire $350 million. In doing so we shall
still be $100 million under the authoriza-
tion brought in by the legislative Com-
mittee on Agriculture and Forestry.

I therefore trust that the amendment
of my very distinguished friend from
Georgia will be roundly rejected.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The ques-
tion Is on agreeing to the amendment
offered by the Senator from Georgia
[Mr. Russell! .

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, have
I any further time?

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
has 11 minutes remaining.

Mr. RUSSELL. I shall use about 2
minutes to inject a somewhate lights
note into this argument.

I must express to the Senator from
Illinois my deep appreciation for the
high compliment he has paid the distin-
guished Senator from Louisiana [Mr.
EllenderI and the distinguished senior
Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Httm-
phreyJ. I regret that the light did not
strike him when the farm bill was before
us last year. It has Just now come to
his attention that they are men who are
worthy of being praised.

This l.ssue is merely a matter of de-
gree. The overall authorization in the
bill of which the distinguished Senators
to whom I have referred were architects
is. over a 4 -year period, $450 million in
any 1 year.

It is but natural that the fathers of
the soil bank — godfathers as well as
putative fathers — should look upon it
with more favor than those of us who
have the annual chore of appropriating
funds for It. It is all a question of de-
gree. The total authorization under the
law, over a 4-year period, is $450 million
in any 1 year. The farmers signed con-
tracts for about $172 million for this
year. So if they have $350 million, they
will have as much again next year. If
they have $250 million, they will not
have quite as much as they have.

The question of the nurseries, raised
by the Senator from Vermont [Mr.
Aiken 1. is not involved in the slightest
degree in the amendment. The nurs-
eries are In operation, and the money ia
in the bill for them.

No Senator likes to think that he Is
a slave to consistency. We know that
consistency is the hobgoblin of small
minds. Therefore, no Senator would
admit that he had to be bothered with
consistency. I express the hope that
the Senator from Illinois will recognize
the leadership of the Senator from
Louisiana and the Senator from Minne-
sota when we bring a real soil-bank bill
to the floor of the Senate.

Mr. DIRKSEN. II a real bill comes
to the floor of the Senate. I shall be more
than delighted to follow in the footsteps
of those distinguished Senators.

Mr. RUSSELL. The Senator from
Illinois did not share the views expressed
by them.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Only because one
item was not included in the bill.

The VICE PRESIDEINT. The ques-
tion is on agreeing to the amendment
offered by the Senator from Georgia
[Mr. RussxLLl.

Mr. RUSSET J. Mr. President. I am
ready for a vote. I yield back any time
remaining to me.

Mr, KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I
yield back the remainder of my time
and suggest the absence of a quorum.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Tlie cleric
will call the roll.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I
withdraw the suggestion of the absence
of a quonmi.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The ques-
tion is on agreeing to the amendment
offered by the Senator from Georgia
(liCr. RussxLLl. On this question the
yeas and nays have been ordered, and
the clerk will call the roll.

The Chief Clerk called the roll.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I announce that
the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr.
Clark], the Senator from Illinois [Mr.
Douglas] , the Senator from Arkansas
(Mr. Pm.B»icHT], the Senator from
Rhode Island [Mr. Green], the Senator
from Tennessee, [Mr. Kbtauves], the
Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Neely],
and the Senator from Florida [Mr.
Smathers] are absent on official busi-
ness.

The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Mc-
Clellan] is absent on official business
by leave of the Senate.

On this vote, the Senator from Illi-
nois [Mr. Douglas] is paired with the
Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. Green].
If present and voting, the Senator from
Illinois would vote "nay" and the Sena-
tor from Rhode Island would vote "yea."

I further announce, if present and
voting, the Senator from Tennessee [Mr.
Ketattver] and the Senator from West
Virginia [Mr. Neelt] would each vote
"nay."

Mr. DIRKSEN. I announce the
Senator from New Hampshire [Mi-. Cot-
ton], that the Senator from Nebraska
[Mr. Hruska], the Senator from Nevada
[Mr. Malone], and the Senator from
North Dakota [Mr. Young] are absent
on official business.

The Senator from New Hampshire
[Mr. Bridges] and the Senator from
North Dakota [Mr. Lancer] are absent
becaiise of illness.

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr.
Bush] and the Senator from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. Martin] are absent on official
business.

The Senator from Maine [Mr. Fatnx]
is necessarily absent.

If present and voting, the Senator
from Connecticut [Mr. Bush], the Sena-
tor from Nebraska [Mr. Hruska], and
the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr.
Mastin], and the Senator from Maine
[Mr. Payne] would each vote "nay."

The result was announced — yeas 26,
nays 52, as follows:

TEAS— 26

Andenoa Brrlix Kerr

Barrett Frear Ii»iMchB

Bible Ooldwater Mansflelil

Byrd ELayden Mtonroney

Cbavei Jotmattm, 8. 0. OlfahoEiey

DwonliAk Kannady Fwlac*

Purtcn
Revercomb

Bobertsoa

Aiken

Allott

Beall

Bennett

Brlcker

Butler

Capehart

Carlson

Carroll

Case, N. J.

Case. 8. Dak.

Church

Cooper

Curtis

Dirksen

Xastland

Blender

Flanders

Ruaaell Thurmond

Saltonetall Williams

Smith. Maine

KAYS— 53

Gore

Hennings

Hickenlooper

HUl

Holland

Humphrey

Ives

Jackson

Javiu

Jenner

Johnson, Ter.

Knowland

Kuchel

Long

Magnuson

Martin, Iowa

McNanuura

Morse

Morton

Mundt

Murray

Neuberger

Potter

Schoeppel

Scott

Smith, N. J.

Sparkman

Stennls

Symington

Talmadg*

Thye

Watklns

Wiley

Tar borough

NOT VOTING— 17

Bridges Oreen McCleUan

Bush Hruska Neely

Clark Kefaurer Payne

Cotton Langer Smathcra

Douglas Malone Young

F\ilbrlght Martin. Pa.

8o Mr. Russell's amendment was re*

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
send to the desk an amendment which is
offered on behalf of the Senatcx- from
Missouri [Mr. Symington], the Senator
from Colorado [Mr. Carroll], the Sena-
tor from Oregon [Mr. Morse] and my-
self. I ask that the amendment be
stated.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Secre-
tary will state the amendment.

The Legislative Clerk. Cte page 4,
line 17, it is proposed to strilce out the
figure "$16,586,000." and insert in lieu
thereof the figure '• $18 JiS8, 000"

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, the
amendment deals with the section of
the appropriation bill which refers to the
Federal Meat Inspection Service. The
committee provided for $16,586,000. The
administration budget request was for
$18,718,000. The amendment submitted
by us provides for $18,388,000. an in-
crease of $1,802,000.

The amount will take care of the ad-
ditional inspectors who are recommend-
ed by the Department of Agriculture,
plus the increase in funds which will be
necessary to put into effect tlie reclassi-
fication program which has been ordered
by the Civil Service Commission.

I would have the Record note that the
Meat Inspection Service is obligated to
put into effect a reclassification program
during fiscal year 1958, at a cost of
$590,000. It is also obligated to supply
imiforms to inspectors, at a cost of $230,-
000. The amendment does not take into
consideration the $230,000 for imiforms.
It was the feeling of the sponsors of the
amendment that this amount could be
absorbed in the appropriations which
would be made available to the Service.

It should be crystal clear that if the
$590,000 is not supplied for the additional
increment in salaries, due to reclassifica-
tion, it will have to be supplied at a later
date tn a supplemental appropriation
bill. If an amendment is c^ered to our
amendment, or a substitute is offered
to the amendment, as I have heard it
indicated, the Senate will be required at
a later date to pay the bill for the re-
classification. It Is merely a matter of
whether we wish to do It now in the
appropriation bill before us or whetber

few

k !*5

m

8826

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8827

we want the Record to indicate for the
moment that we were a little economy
minded, and then within a few months
take care of It in a supplemental bill.

One other point I should like to make
Is this: During the past 9 months meat
inspection had to be temporarily cur-
tailed in the meat packing plants in 18
cities throughout the Nation, because
replacements were not available when
the regularly assigned inspectors were
unable to work.

It should be further noted that the
meat packing industry is being decen-
tralized. There is a reason for that. Let
me say to my friends in the areas where
beef cattle have become an imp>ortant
part of the economy, that the packint?
houses have become decentralized so that
they will be closer to the sources of sup-
ply of cattle, because it is cheaper to ship
dressed beef than it is to ship cattle. The
packers prefer to be closer to the source
of supply and also prefer to be closer to
the market for the processed product.
The facts I have indicate that during
the past 5 years the number of meat
packing plants covered by the Federal
Meat Inspection Service has increased
from approximately 900 to 1.300.

That is an increase of 407 plants. In
servicing those plants, the inspectors
have ha 1 to be assigned to 500 cities and
towns in 1957. in contrast to 400 cities
and towns in 1953.

The number of animals iaspected has
Increased from 90 million in 1953 to 110
million in 1957.

The manning of the meat Inspection
organization has simply not kept pace
with this increase, either in the number
of packing plants, the number of loca-
tions or communities, or the numbers of
cattle which had to be handled in the
packing operations.

We all know that a meat inspector
stands right along the production man
In a packing plant. If there is not an
adequate number of meat inspectors to
handle the production, there is only one
thing to do. and that is to cut down the
production. When the production i3.
cut down, it means a tightened supply.
When there is a tightened supply, the
price is raised. So when production is
cut down, not only is there a tightened
supply, but the price is raised, and the
farmer is denied a readily available mar-
ket for his livestock.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Is it not
true that this is one amendment which
will benefit both the consumer and the
producer, in that it will protect the
consumer and will aid the producer?

Mr. HUMPHREY. It is my feeling
that it will surely do that. I cannot
imagine that we would want to have less
than adequate inspection of meat.

I am certain the argument also will
be made that under the amount recom-
mended, with payment by the packers of
overtime, they can get adequate Federal
in.«:pection. But I would have the Rec-
ord further show that when overtime is
paid, that amount is included in the cost
of the product which goes to the con-
sumer.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
President, would the Senator from Min-
nesota object to my asking unanimous
consent to have telegrams I have re-
ceived on this subject printed in the
Record following his remarks?

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President. I
ask unanimous consent that the Senator
from South Dakota may have the tele-
grams printed in the Record following
the conclusion of my remarks.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit 1 >

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President. I
ask unanimous consent that I may have
the same privilege of having a series of
telegrams printed in the Record follow-
ing the conclusion of the remarks of the
Senator from Minnesota.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit 2.>

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
bring to the attention of the Senate the
fact that the Civil Service Commission
has spent almost 2 years working out
schedules of compensation to become ef-
fective July 1. 1957. In other words, in
about 15 or 16 days an entirely new com-
pensation schedule will go into effect for
veterinarians and others engaged in the
Federal meat inspection service. Con-
gress will have to provide the money. If
it does not provide the money now. it
will be necessary to provide it when Con-
gress returns next January.

I feel that that states my case. I hope
the Senate will agree to my amendment.

Mr. CARROLL. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.

Mr. CARROLL. Tlie correspondence
I have received from Colorado corrobo-
rates everything the distinguished Sen-
ator from Minnesota has said on the
floor. That is why I am so happy to
join with him in offering the amendment.
As the Senator from South Dakota has
said, the amendment will benefit and
protect both the consumer and the pro-
ducer.

I congratulate the Senator from Min-
nesota on the clear and concise presen-
tation of his statement.

Mr. McNAMARA. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.

Mr. McNAMARA. I wish to compli-
ment the Senator from Minnesota for
his excellent, concise statement. I join
with him wholeheartedly in offering the
amendment.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
have used as much time as I need, I
yield the floor.

Exhibit 1

Mitchell, S. Dak., June 3, 1937.
Francis Case.

Senate Office Building.

Washington, D C :
On June 5. Senate Subcommittee on Agri-
cultural Appropriations will act on providing
funds for Federal meat Inspection during
ensuing year. Theoretically Inadequate ap-
propriation will undoubtedly result in the
ultimate reduction of Government Inspec-
tion personnel, thus resulting In the curtail-
ment of handling of llvestoclc. We sincerely
\irge passage of proper appropriation for ade-
quate meat inspection.

George A. Hormkl & Co.,

Davis W. Corkt, General Manager.

Sioux Falls, S. Dak.
Hon. Francis Casz,

Washington, D. C:
Urgent please use Influrnce provide addi-
tional funds over this year's budget for agri-
culture research service. United States De-
partment of Agriculture ind avoid serloua
Interference with Important Inspection con-
trol and research activities and Injury to
livestock and meat lndustr.es and consumers.
J. B. Slgrist, Cathryn J. Cammack, Wal-
ter O. Wachob. Francis J. Barron,
W. John Duhon, 0'.K)rge Casady. Carl
a. Nash. Philip A. Ray, B. A. Jacoby.

Belle Foctrchx, S. Dak.
Senator Francis Ca.se.

Washington. D C:
Please support aggrlct Itural appropria-
tions bill retaining the t2 nilllon for utiliza-
tion research.

Western Sooth Dakota Sheep

Growers AsKxriATioN,
John Wiodoss Secretary.

Watertown, S. Dai., June 4, 1957.
Hon. Francis Case.

Senate Office Building.

Washington, D C.

Dear Senator Case: I am writing this
letter to urge you to support the President's
budget proposal for the Meat Inspection
Service, that is. a total appropriation of
• 18.718.000 and especiallj the •1.212,000
earmarked fur the hiring ol the new Inspec-
tors.

I have worked In the packing Industry
for over 20 years, and I fear very much the
danger of relaxing to the vtry least on strict
Government lnsp>ectlon. I sincerely urge
you to back this program with all your
power, for better health a id sanitation in
tlie packing plants of these United Sutes.

Thanking yuu fur your p.ist support,

I remain,

William J. Fox.

Washington, D. C, ^'une 11, 1957.
Hon Francis Case.

Senate Office Building,
Washington, D, C:
Please support amendmen'. restoring Meat
Inspection Service funds tlurlng Agricul-
ture budget debate today-tc morrow. Addl«
tlonal inspectors desperately needed. Tem-
porary curtailments in meat production be-
cause Inspector shortage already occurred in
18 cities. Higher meat prices for consum-
ers, unemployment among workers, lower
cattle prices for farmers will result unless
cuts restored.

Amalgamated Meat CtrrrERS and
Butcher Workmen, AFL-CIO,
Earl W. Jimerson, President,
Patrick E. Gorman,

Secretary^Treasurer,

Washington, D. C, June 11, 1957.
Hon. Francis Case.

Senate Office Building.
Washington, D. C.:
Unless amount requested by USDA for es-
sential meat Inspection services Is restored
by the Senate it will mean layoflf of Federal
meat inspectors and curtailment of produc-
tion In packing industry to the detriment
of both livestock producers and consumers.
Urge you to support restoration of USDA
budget request when meat appropriation
comes before Senate for vote today or to-
morrow.

American Meat Instiiuix,
Also P. Davizs.

E:xhibit 2

June 6, 1957.
Senator Warren O. Magnttson.

United States Senate Building,
Washington. D. C:
Please support the President's budget pro-
posals for the Meat Inspection Service that

la a total spproprlstlon of $18,718,000 and
especially the •IJIS.OOO earmarked for the
hiring of the new Inspectors. We wish to
point out the dangers to consamers, pack-
inghouse workers and fanners If additional
Inspectors are not added to the Meat Inq>ec-
tlon Service. Thank you for your full coop-
eration.

Amaloamatd Mkat Cttttxxs akd

BUTCHXS WOKKMXN or NOCTH

Amxuca,
CuAsuEs J. MBimnr,

Intematioiml Vice President.

Skattlk. Wash.. June 8. 10S7.
Senator Waxxen G. Magkttson.

Senate Office BuiUUng,
Washington, D. C:
Please support the President's budget pro-
posals for the Meat Inspection Service that
is a total appropriation of $18,718,000 and
especially the $1,212,000 earmarked for the
hiring of the new Inspectors. We wish to
point out the dangers to consumers, packing-
house workers, and farmers If additional In-
spectors are not added to the Meat Inspection
Service. Thank you for your full cooperation,

Washington Pedkxation or BuTCBXsa,

George Cobxt, President,

CHAXI.XS J. MxNTRiN, SecretaTjf.

Oltmpia. Wash.. June 10, 1957.
Hon Warren O. MAOirpsoif,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C-
Request your support for additional funds
for this year's budget for United States De-
partment of Agriculture, Agricultural Re-
search Service, to eliminate reduction which
will seriously Interfere with Important in-
Fpectlon, control, and research activities and
do serious Injury to livestock and meat In-
dustries and consumers.

National Association Pzdxxal

Vktxxinaxiahs.
Ibwin Esickson.

Resident Secretary.

Oltmma, Wash., June 10, 1957.
Hon. Waxxxn G. Magnttson,
Senate Office Building,
Wathingtom,, D. C:
Urge favorable consideration budget
needs Agricultural Research Service for vi-
tally needed research and disease eradication
work. Such action necessary to economy ag-
riculture interest and for protection consum-
ing public. We are grateful for your past
support and trust this matter will receive
your full attention.

Washington Statx Vktkbinakt Medical

Association,
William P. Harris. Secretary.

Washthotow. D. C, June 11. 191/.
Hon. Warkxh G. Magituson,

Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C:
Please support amendment restoring
meat Inspection service funds during Ag-
riculture budget debate today, tomorrow.
Additional Inspectors desperately needed.
Temporary curtailments In meat production
because Inspector shortage already occurred
in 18 cities. Higher meat prices for con-
sumers, unemployment among workers,
lower cattle prices for farmers will result
unless cuts restored.

Amalgamated Mxat Cuitxm and

BtrrcHEB WosKMCR, AFL-CIO,
Eaxl W. Jimxbson, President.
Patrick E. Gorman, Secretary-
Treasurer.

Washthctow, D. C, June 11, 1957.
Hon. Waxxxn O. Macndson,
Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C:
Unless amount requested by USDA for
essential meat Inspection services la re-
stored b; the Senate It will mean layoff ot

Federal meat Inspeetora and curtailment of
production In packing Industry to the detri-
ment of both liTsstock producers and con-
sumers. Urge you to support restoralion of
USDA budget request when meat appropria-
tion comea before Senate for vote today or
tomorrow.

Amzxican Mkat IWBTirurx,

Alxo p. Daviks.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, I de-
sire to say a few words In opposition to
the amendment. However, in Uie at-
mosphere which prevails here, I have no
strong feeling that I may be able to
influence the Members of the Senate.
But I ought, at least, to give the views
of the committee as to why the amend-
ment should not be approved.

This is not a new issue. Every year
we have a a fight over the meat inspec-
tion item. Historically, Ck)ngress has
appropriated some money for meat in-
spection. If it was not enough to go
around, the packers are compelled to
call in the inspectors and pay them for
the overtime during which they inspect
beyond time for which they were paid
from appropriated funds. As a matter
of fact, I have certain figures which were
supplied to me by one of those urging
the amendment. I may say the amend-
ment has been well urged. All the
packers have Joined together this year,
and that is quite a powerful force to
strike at Congress, because mighty few
States do not have a few packing plants
within them. I know there are quite
a few in my own State, I am glad to
say. The packers have urged — ^they have
always urged — that all of this cost be
placed upon the taxpayers, instead of
having the packers bear any of the cost.
This year is as good a year as any to urge
that philosophy, although I am very
much opposed to it. I do not believe
the proposed increase can be Justified.

It is admitted by the proponents of
the amendment that the cost of the
overtime to be paid by the packers in
1957 will be less than it was in 1956.
There will be no great increase. It sim-
ply comes down to a question of whether
or not the taxpayers should bear the
entire cost of the inspection, or whether
we believe the packers should continue
to pay the part they have paid histori-
cally.

I realize that a pay Increase is in-
volved in the appropriation. I do not
approve of pay increases which are made
in this fashion. I am somewhat old
fashioned in my approach to this budget.
In this case the Department of Agricul-
ture asked the Civil Service Commission
for the authority to reclassify meat in-
spectors. The Civil Service Commission
granted the authority, and the Depart-
ment of Agriculture reclassified the meat
Inspectors and resubmitted the reclassi-
fication to the Civil Service Commission.
The Civil Service Commission approved
it, and that may be binding on Congress.
If it is, it ought not to be, because it is
not a good system of appropriating
money to give departments and the Civil
Service Commission the right to raise
the salaries of Federal employees, when
Congress Is thereby committed unalter-
ably to paying them. For my part, I do
not propose to be required to approve

appropriations under any such practice
as that.

Of course, Senators will vote as they
see fit. Undoubtedly the proposal will
appeal to many Senators. But I do not
believe in being placed in a position, my-
self, in which I must vote for an increase
whether I like It or not, due to adminis-
trative action in the executive branch of
the Government.

There has been a slight increase in the
number of packing plants due to the
decentralization process. Contrarywlse,
this has somewhat reduced the size and
capacity of each of those plants, so that
there is not quite so much inspection
now. The estimate I have for 1957 as
to the approximate number of livestock
to be slaughtered, which was furnished
me by the Western States Meat Packers
Association, Inc., which strongly sup-
ports the amendment, states that the
estimated slaughter for 1957 is 104 mil-
lion and not 110 million or 111 million,
as related by the Senator from Minne-
sota.

In my opinion, an increase of some 25
or 30 meat inspectors might be Justified.
I do not want to advise the Senate on
this matter, but I could justify an in-
crease of that number to take care of
the decentralization of the meatpacking
plants.

But so far as I am concerned, I In-
tend to vote against any proposition by
which I am tied, string haltered, and
delivered, so that I cannot do other than
to vote for salary increases which are
instituted, as this one is, by the execu-
tive department.

I certainly do not think there is any
commitment, as the Senator from Min-
nesota said there was, concerning the
uniforms which were Included in the
budget this year. There has been meat
inspection in the United States for about
40 years or longer. I have forgotten ex-
actly when it was that Dr. Wiley's ad-
monition was finally recognized.

The Government has never pedd for
the uniforms up to now. I have been un-
able to find any act of Congress which
authorized the appropriation of the tax-
I>ayers' money to buy all these white
uniforms. Supplying the uniforms has
always been a part of the Job.

When it came to the mail carriers.
Congress said it was necessary to pass an
act to authorize an appropriaticm to buy
their uniforms. But in this case the
Department has asked for an appropria-
tion to buy the clothing which the in-
spectors wear, although they have been
buying their own clothing for many
years.

I have great sympathy with the In-
spectors and anyone else who Is not
drawing a salary which is regarded by
them as adequate. I think It would be
appropriate for the proper committees
of Congress to consider proposing legis-
lation dealing with increases in salaries.
But so far as this amendment is con-
cerned, I think it increases the figure in
the House bill too much. I shall vote
against the amendment.

I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from
Illinois.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, when
the House dealt with this iton, tbey toolc

m

III!

f'f

8828

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8829]

the 1957 appropriation and added $936,-

000 for the necessary retirement money.
That was the way the bill came to the
Senate. The restoration requested was
$2,132,000. It Included $220,000 for uni-
forms, the authority for which I think
is doubtful; and I quite agree with the
chairman of the committee on that
point. It embraces also $590,000 for pay
increases which are expected to become
due in July. I am not sure it is manda-
tory; but if it is mandatory, then of
course the Department can easily get a
supplemental estimate and can send it to
the Bureau of the Budget, and it can be
messaged to the Congress before the ses-
sion ends.

The remainder of the lunendment.
$112,000, was for 190 extra positions. I
am inclined to agree with the chairman
of the committee on that point, and I
had hoped we could reach a compromise
amount. At the pay levels of GS-4 and
GS-5, we could make provision for 45
additional inspectors at a cost of $240.-
000. So I thought I would submit a sub-
stitute for the amendment offered by the
Senator from Minnesota: and I should
like to have the substitute reported, in
the hope that the distinguished chair-
man of the committee will be able to
accept the substitute, in order to meet
the need for some additional inspectors.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, be-
fore the substitute is offered. I should
like to make 1 or 2 corrections, so there
will be no misunderstanding of the
figures I presented in connection with the
amendment. I did not include the
$220,000 for uniforms.

Mr. DIRKSEN. That is correct.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I think there Is
doubt as to any obligation on the part
of the Congress to provide uniforms. My
amendment does not include them.

Mr. RUSSELL. I am glad the Senator
from Minnesota clarified that point, for

1 thought he said something about an
obligation to provide uniforms.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I said the Depart-
ment stated there was such an obligation,
but I do not believe there is such a legis-
lative obligation.

The counsel for the Department feels
that Congress Is obligated to make $590.-
000 of salary adjustments. Regardless
of whether there is such a legal obliga-
tion, certainly veterinarians do not have
to work for the Federal Government at
peasant salaries. Instead, they can
work at a living wage for Parke-Davis &
Co. or other private companies.
^. The truth is that veterinarians are In
short supply; and if they are to work for
the Federal Government, some salary ad-
justments must be made.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Minnesota yield to
me?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.

Mr. RUSSELL. Whose time is being
used at present?

Mr. HUMPHREY. My time ; and I am
glad to yield to the Senator from
Georgia.

Mr. RUSSELL. Very well.

The Senator from Minnesota has re-
ferred to veterinarians, but these em-
ployees do not have to t)e graduate
veterinarians.

Mr. HUMPHREY. No; not all of
them.

Mr. RUSSELL. We have made sev-
eral increases in the pay of the meat in-
spectors; that has been done during the
last several years, and there has never
been any deficiency In the number of
meat inspectors, because of the salary
paid.

Last year we provided for a fifty or
sixty increase, and the jobs were snapped
up at once. Higher salaries were not
required, as in this case.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, a par-
liamentary inquiry.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
from Illinois will state it.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Can tht> substitute be
offered before the Senator from Minne-
sota has used or yielded back the re-
mainder of his time?

The VICE PRESIDENT. Not under
the unanimous-consent agreement.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, a point
of order.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator
from Georgia will state it.

Mr. RUSSELL. Did the Chair rule
that an amendment to the amendment of
the Senator from Minnesota is not in
order?

The VICE PRESIDENT. Under the
unanimous-consent agreement, as such
agreements have been construed, when
the time is limited, such an amendment
would have to be considered at the con-
clusion of action on the pending amend-
ment.

Mr. RUSSELL. But after the time on
the first amendment has been consumed,
an amendment to it will be in order; is
that correct'

The VICE PRESIDENT. Yes.

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
President, would an amendment in the
nature of a perfecting amendment be in
order?

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, as
I understand, we can accomplish the pur-
pose by a modification of the amend-
ment; and tlie author of an amendment
has the privilege of modifying it. as I
understand.

The VICE PRESIDENT. That is cor-
rect.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
wish to say most respectfully to the
chairman of the subcommittee and to
the Senator from Illinois i Mr. Dirksen I
that there may be an argument as to
whether all 192 of these inspectors are
required. The Department of Agricul-
ture made the request. The Meat In-
spection Service has had a very honor-
able and enviable record. I do not know
of any time when anyone has been able
to accuse it of padding the payroll.
Furthermore, the Meat Inspection Serv-
ice has a fine professional record, and it
should be maintained.

The amount I have requested on be-
half of my colleagues and myself Is
$1,802,000, composed of $1,212,000 for
the inspectors, and $590,000 for the in-
creased salaries.

The Senator from Illinois Is proposing
an amendment of approximately $240,-
000. It seems to me that we should face
the obligation of paying the bill for the
compensation of Federal employees.
Therefore, if the Senator from Illinois

has no objection, I shall modify my own
amendment, so as to reduce the figure
from the maximum amount of $1,802,-
000, as an increase, to the amount of $1
million, which would change the commit-
tee amendment to $17,586,000. That will
provide $590,000 for pay increases, and
will provide $410,000 for additional
inspectors.

I submit that the Department could
make a legitimate request for 192 inspec-
tors, and I submit It Is not presumptuous
to assume that it might well be in line to
provide for 50 or 60 inspectors. I be-
lieve this is a fair compromise, and can be
worked out with the House of Repre-
sentatives, which voted a much smaller
amount; but this compromise will pro-
vide some leeway, so as to enable Mem-
bers of the Senate of competent and
expert knowledge, who will be the con-
ferees on the part of the Senate, to
work out the matter in conference.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Minnesota yield to me?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I wish to state that I
feel obligated to go along with the chair-
man of the subcommittee on this item,
becau.se in the subcommittee and in the
full committee we accepted it. and we so
reported it to the Senate. Before I un-
dertook to act on the matter, I discussed
it this morning with the Senator from
Georgia. When I first proposed an
amendment of $500,000, he said he would
accept it and take it to conference. We
then thought that $240,000 was enough
to add. and the Senator from Georgia
agreed to accept that sunount. I cannot
go beyond that figure.

But the Senator from Minnesota now
suggests that we add $1 million. I mu.';t
stay with the figure we discussed this
morning ; and on that basis I mast neces-
sarily support my distinguished friend,
the Senator from Georgia.

Mr. HUMPHREY. What do we Intend
to do about the funds for the compensa-
tion of Federal employees? The Civil
Service Commission really sets up the
pay schedules; and unless we are pre-
pared to overrule the Civil Service Com-
mission by act of Congress, the bill will
come due.. I must confess that there
have been times when I myself have
been compelled to delay paying some of
my bills, but one's bills generally catch
up with him.

Mr. DIRKSEN. The advice I have re-
ceived Is that the order will not be re-
leased until July.

Mr. HUMPHREY. That is only about
16 days from now.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I refer to the order
regarding pay increa.ses. and in that con-
nection there Is actually no authority
before us at the present time. But if
the authority exists. It will be easy to
.send up a supplemental estimate for
$590,000, to cover the pay increases
Involved.

Mr. HUMPHREY. But when that
comes to us, the Federal employees who
are supposed to receive the pay increases
will have already been on the Job at the
lower pay schedule^^ Instead, we should
deal with Federal employees in the same
way that the employees of private firms
are dealt with. In other words, when

they are told that they will receive a pay
increase, the pay increase should be
made.

Mr. DIRKSEN. A rather nice ques-
tion is involved when the Department
goes to the Civil Service Commission, and
the Civil Service Ccmimission allegedly
issues an order to be effective in July of
1957. But that does not provide the
authority, in my Judgment at the mo-
ment, to embrace a $590,000 pay increase.

Mr. RUSSELL, Mr. President, I wish
to make only one or two observations.

Although the committee held rather
exhaustive hearings, the committee was
not told that this finding was as immu-
table as the law of the Medes and the
Persians. A certain amount was asked
for. just as additional inspectors were
asked for. The committee was not told
it was absolutely binding on us. I do
not say it is or it Is not ; I only say I op-
pose appropriating the money before the
urder has been actually issued.

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. RUSSELL. I yield.

Mr. ANDERSON. Have not the Sena-
tor from Georgia and other Senators
many times agreed that if a certain raise
in .<:chedule came about and an emer-
t;ency appropriation was neces.sary, they
would grant it immediately? I can tes-
tify, from having been in the Depart-
ment of Agriculture, that the Congress
can act quickly. It so happens that the
able Senator from Illinois was referring
to a particular responsibility of the De-
partment. I am attracted to what the
Senator from Illinois has said, that if a
request for the $590,000 is made, the
Senator from Georgia will act upxin it.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President. I do
not want to be committing myself before
the question is considered. I will deal
with it fairly, but I do not want to be put
in a false position.

Mr. ANDERSON. I said if a request
Is made, the Senator from Georgia will
act promptly. He might turn it down.

Mr. RUSSEXL. I certainly would give
it every fair consideration.

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President, has
the amendment been offered?

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
have visited with the Senator from Illi-
nois. We can expedite action. We need
not quibble over how or when we are
^Toing to pay the extra sum for the re-
\ is3d compensation schedule. I think we
shall all act in good faith when the re-
quest comes before us. In order to get
on with the program and give the De-
partment much needed extra inspectors
and give the conferees an opportunity
to use their good judgment on the final
figure for the service if there is no ob-
jection. I further modify my amend-
ment to the figure suggested by the Sen-
ator from Illinois. The distinguished
chairman of the subcommittee has indi-
cated his willingness to accept the pro-
posal.

Mr. RUSSELL. Does the Senator
from Minnesota modify his amendment
accordingly?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I modify my
amendment accordingly.

Mr. RUSSELL. If he does, I am will-
ing to take the amendment to confer-
ence, and do the best I can.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The ques-
tion is on agreeing to the amendment
of the Senator from Minnesota LMr.
Humphrey], as modified.

The amendment was agreed to.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The bUl is
open to further amendment.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, I offer
an amendment, which I ask to have
stated.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The amend-
ment of the Senator from Ohio will be
stated.

The Legislative Clerk. It Is pro-
posed, on page 29, beginning with the
word "Provided" in line 6, to strike out
down through line 15, and insert in lieu
thereof the folljwing:

Provided. That no part of this appropria-
tion shall be used to formulate and ad-
minister an acreage reserve program with
respect to the 1958 crops, or in total com-
pensation being paid to any one producer
in excess of $2,500 with respect to the 1958
crops.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, Mem-
bers of the Senate, my amendment, if
adopted, will restore the bill to the
status it occupied when it left the House,
as relates to the acreage reserve program.

I confess to my colleagues that I had
some hesitancy about submitting this
amendment. My conviction that it
ought to be acted upon has grown pri-
marily as a result of repeated state-
ments made in the Senate this evening
concerning the doubtful validity of that
part of the soil program dealing with
the acreage reserve.

The purpose of the program when
originally adopted was to reduce pro-
duction so as to diminish the surplus
products of farmers. Admittedly, that
objective has not been attained. The
contrary is the fact. Surpluses have in-
creased. I recognize that, for the pur-
pose of enjoying political tranquility, it
would be far better if I did not offer this
amendment.

I should like further to state that In
the casting of my vote on the amend-
ment proposed by the Senator from
South Dakota [Mr. Mundt], I did not do
so on a political basis. I further want
to state that I did not change my vot«
on a political basis. If there is to be a
tolling by the citizenry of the votes cast,
it will not be said that I cast my vote
on the basis of party dictation. It was
cast because I believed in the soundness
of the presentation made by the Senator
from Georgia.

For 6 months I have listened to the
arguments about what has happened
with the soil-bank program, especially in
relation to the acreage reserve. It has
been uniformly stated that surpluses are
increasing. Now, my query is. Why are
we putting $500 million into a program
which we know does not achieve the ob-
jective which was contemplated when
the program was originally adopted?

I have my own belief why we are ap-
propriating the $500 million. From my
standpoint, I owe an obligation to prac-
tice the virtues that are being preached
today, and that is to put the fiscal con-
dition of the country on a soiind basis.
To achieve that end, we cannot be giv-
ing away money.

My proposition Is simple. I propose to
restore the bill to the status it occupied, I
with regard to the reserve acreage pro-!
gram, when it came to the Senate from!
the House. I propose to do that because
I have learned, in my experience as a
lawyer and as a judge, that when a rea-
son is the predicate for the adoption of
measures in law, and it is found that the
reason no longer exists, the law fails.

I wonder if there is anyone within the
Senate Chamber who can feel with con-
viction that the acreage reserve phase
of the soil-bank program is diminishing
the surplus products, as was contem-
plated when the bill was originally
passed.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. LAUSCHE. I yield to the Senator
from Minnesota.

Mr. THYE. Whether I be rather bold
in rising to the occasion, or to the re-
mark of my distinguished friend, the
Senator from Ohio, or not, I can say
that the acreage reserve program was
not put into operation until late in the
calendar year 1956. It did cause quite
a number of acres to lie idle.

Neither the Senator from Ohio nor I
could, with any great degree of cer-
tainty, state the number of bushels of
grain or the number of bales of fiber
by which our overall crop was reduced,
but we do know a sizable number of
acres were withdrawn from production.

In the present year we know that a
number of very fertile acres are under
contract. In that category are some
fertile acres in the western part of ths
great State of Ohio. That is one of the
large producing areas, or, to state it
another way. the yield per acre of com
and soybeans in the fertile field of Ohio
is tremendous. Every acre that has gone
into the acreage reserve program has
been removed from the possibility of
producing corn or soybeans as the case
may be. Every acre under contract in
the acreage reserve in Illinois, Iowa,
Wisconsin, Missouri, and Nebraska will
not produce com or soybeans. Every
acre taken out of production has re-
duced our surpluses by that much.

It is the surpluses that have brought
about the ruinous, low prices for agri-
cultural commodities. We are today
si>ending more than a billion dollars
under Public Law 480 to try to barter
away our farm surpluses, because it is a
known fact that such surpluses are
weighing down the national market and
have brought to the agricultural econ-
omy not a recession but an actual de-
pression. A depression is now existing
in the agricultural economy. In yearly
income the agricultural economy has
dropped from around $16 billion to
around $11.6 billion. We do not wish to
have any greater strain placed upon the
farm economy than such a drop has
entailed.

In only one way can we effect a re-
duction in the overall crops produced in
America, and that is by a reduction of
acreage. We cannot induce the farm-
ers to let their acres lie idle iinless we
in some manner compensate them, be-
cause the farmers are paying, for good
fertile land, from~ $3 to $4 an acre in
taxes. The farmer has to pay insurance,

8830

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8831

and he has his Investment in all the
chattel properties on his land. He must
maintain his fire insurance, and pay up-
keep on the buildings. All of that is a
plant cost. We cannot ask him to per-
mit his acres to lie Idle, unless we com-
pensate him In some way.

There was wisdom behind the acreage
reserve program and the plan to com-
pensate the farmer for permitting his
acres to lie Idle. Once we get produc-
tion down, the surpluses will dimini-sh,
and the farm prices in our very high na-
tional economy, with the full employ-
ment we are enjoying, will come up to a
level of equality. That is what we are
striving for.

If we place a $2,500 limitation on the
acreage-reserve program, many, many
fertile acres will not go under contract in
the State of Ohio, as well as in the States
of Illinol.s, Nebraska. Iowa, or southern
Minnesota, where there are so many pro-
ductive corn and soybean acres. That is
the situation we face.

If the Senator from Ohio wishes to
take the responsibility of trying to repre-
sent agriculture and to provide the nec-
essary appropriations to finance Public
Law 480. and to provide a program for
fcurplus milk and giveaway programs for
various other commodities, he will, in the
future years, have to be much more bold
than most of us have been on the floor of
the Senate. But if we proceed with the
soil bank in a reasonable, intelligent
manner, as provided in the bill as now
written, and as amended this afternoon.
I honestly believe that we will bring the
aericultural economy into balance w.fh
the economy of the other segments of the
Nation, which today is at the highest
level recorded in history.

That IS why I say I believe the amend-
ment offered by the Senator from Ohio
approaches the subject in the wTong way.
In its wisdom the Committee on Appro-
priations put In a limitation of $5,000
which anyone can draw on the acreasre
reserve phase of the soil-bank procram.

I say to the Senator from Oluo. frank-
ly. I know he is an exceedingly intelligent
man. and he is a very courageous man.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I thank the Senator
very much.

Mr. THYE. I believe the Senator is
approaching this subject in the wrong
way. The Senator proposes a limitation
which would deny farmers a reasonable
participation in the program. If we do
not obtain a reasonable participation, we
will not hfve a program, but we will
have .i lot of men in the field actin? as
if they are administering a program,
when, in reality, they have nothing to
admin [."Jfr except a lot of office space.
They will do a lot of marking of time in
aitempting to carry out a partial acre-
aye reserve program and to reduce the
overall crop harvest which wo mipht
have If all the acres In a given county
thould be harvested.

So, T say to the Senator from Ohio. I
believe the proposed amendment is the
wrong approach. I believe the Senator
w.ll be doing a disservice to himself and
to the farmers of the State of Ohio by
endeavorin,' to have such an amc-ndment
adopted.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I appreciate very
much the sincerity of the statement

made by the Senator from Minnesota,
I do not hesitate in stating to him that
he has given expression to the most opti-
m.istic interpretation of the results of
tUis law that I have heard here or any-
where else. I know that the practical
results thus far obtained do not support
tho argument made by the Senator from
Minnesota.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, will my
fncnd, the Senator from Ohio, yield
again?

Mr. LAUSCHE. If the Senator will
permit me. I will yield to him later.

Mr. THYE. The Senator is very kind.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Moreover I should
l;ke to express definitely the judgment
that from tl:e standpoint of the farmers
of Ohio, the fact is that the lulle 80-acre
or 100-acre farmer has not been helped
by thi3 law.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield at that point?

Mr. L.AUSCHE. I will yield later.

I have been through the farm area of
Ohio. Repeatedly the statement has
been made "Our acreage is too small to
be ticnefited by tiiis law. '

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, will the
Ecaator yield at that point? As an at-
torney. I think l;e has answered his own
argument.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Will the Senator per-
mit n;e to continue my own argument?
I n.ay say that I do not take exception,
but tiie Senator from Minnesota spoke
longer on the subject than I did. yet I am
the mover of the amendment. If tiie
Senator will permit me. for the moment,
I should like to conclude my statement.

In other words, the Senator tried to
take the ball out of my hands. I hope
lie will mdulge me while I try to re-
tovt-r it.

The VTCE PRESIDENT. The Sena-
tor from Ohio declines to yield.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I desire to repeat that
♦ onight. in tins Chamber, there must
l;r.\e been at loa.-^t 10 statements made by
Senators who spoke on the former
amendment that th.. law was i.ot achiev-
ing its objective. It is on that basis that
I OiTor thi.s amendment. In my judg-
yv-nt it Is a giveaway program. In my
judgment the purpose is to offer balm,
and I do not contemplate doing so. It
is on that basis that I submit the amend-
ment.

I now yield to the Senator from Min-
ne.^ota.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, the dis-
thiKUished Senator from Ohio was most
ccrijidera'e and very, very tolerant, I
will say. becau.se I did speak at som.e
length, and it was actually bv way of re-
buttal to the argument advanced by
the distinguished Senator. However,
th? Senator from Ohio threw out a chal-
lenge: and whether I was bold or other-
wise. I accepted the challenge.

The Senator from Ohio actually an-
swered his own argument, because the
Senator from Ohio said that the small
farmer was not being benefited. Mr.
President, we do not want to reduce the
number of acres of the small farmer's
operation, because a man on an 80-acre
farm or a 160-acr'' farm is in need of the
80 acres or the 160 acres of land In his
operation in this modern age. He has
hiS tractor and other equipment.

Whether he operates the farm as a 1-
man operation, or with a man and a boy
as an operator, he requires that land.

What we are endeavoring to do is to
reduce the acreage which ts productive;
and the reserve phase of the soil bank is
the program which will reduce the num-
ber of acres. If we can take 50 acres
from a 500-acre farm and place them In
the reserve program, we are reducing
the potential for developing or producing
a surplus. If we can get the surplus
down, we need not worrv about the man
on the 80-acre farm, because If there
were not a surplus overhanging the na-
tional markets today, with the high con-
sumer buying power, with the national
economy at an all-time high, we would
have a market which would pay more
than 100 percent of parity. If we did
not have surplu.ses overhanging the mar-
ket, wheat would be selling at full par-
ity; corn would be selling at full parity;
beef would be selling at luli parity, and
so would eggs.

That is the question. If we can get
the surplus down, we need not worry
about the good farmers on the 80-acre
or 160-acrc farms in Olilo. The market
place will give them fu'l parity on any
commodity they grow. That is the pm-
po.se of the soil bank.

If we establish a ceiling of $2,500 in
the bill on the acreage -reserve program,
we foreclose the opportunity to bring
some of the productive land on the large
farms under contract, thus reducing the
ix>tential production In harvest of a
given year.

Therein lies the basic foundation of
the entire soil-l>ank program. We are
trying to get acres out of production,
whether they be used in the production
of cotton, soybeans, sorghum grains, or
other crops. Under the old acreage-
control program, when we allotted a
farmer a certain number of acres of
wheat, a certain number of acres of
corn, or a certain number of acres of
cotton, we had no soil bank. All the
farmer did was to comply with his
wheat-acreace allotment or his corn-
acreage allotment. What did he do with
the diverted acres? In the Southwest
they were planted to sorghum grains.
Tlicy were producing feed crops in com-
petition with com. In the Northwest,
in Washington. Idaho, and Montana,
they were planted to barley, another
feed crop competitive with corn.

In the South the cotton acreage was
reduced, but the acres were planted to
soybeans or to com. as was the ca.se in
Mi.ssouri. Such crops were competitive
with the feed grains of the North.

When the time for harvest came, there
were harvested as many bushel-s of feed
grains as were ever harvested before.
The former wheat acreage was converted
into feed grains, and the cotton acreage
into feed grains.

We then conceived the idea of the soil
bank, and we enacted it. We wrote a
con.servation feature into the soil bank,
to encourage taking acres out of pro-
duction and putung them under a long-
term contract, or planting them to trees
if the land wa.s not suited for the pro-
duction of corn, wheat, or cotton.

All this was designed to reduce the
overall surplus; but before we had an

opportunity to have 1 year's history or
1 year's trial we commenced to chop
down the program. It was as though
we had planted a seedling 1 day, but be-
fore the seedling took root we chopped
it down. That is what the Senator from
Ohio is trying to do by his amendment.
He would not permit the conservation
or the acreage reserve aspect of the pro-
gram to operate. He would cripple the
procram before it had an opportunity to
prove its ability to reduce the overall
crop.

The pending amendment would defeat
the very purpose we wrote into the law,
and the very purpose the distinguished
Senator from Ohio is endeavoring to ac-
complish, namely, to help the small
farmer.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The ques-
tion is on agreeing to the amendment
offered by the Senator from Ohio I Mr.
Lausche ] .

Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President. I ask
for the yeas and nays on my amendment.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President. I hope
we may have the yeas and nays on this
amendment.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President. I wish
to make a brief observation. I am sure
Senators clearly understand that the
effect of the amendment proposed by the
distinguished Senator from Ohio would
be to place the bill in exactly the same
position it was in when it came to us
from the House.

In the House of Representatives the
Hou.se voted to appropriate funds to dis-
charge all contrsicts which had been en-
tered into with respect to the calendar
year 1957. These programs operate on
a calendar-year basis.

The House action prohibited any acre-
age reserve soil bank program in 1958.
That is the issue presented to us in the
amendment offered by the distinguished
Senator from Ohio. If the amendment
prevails, there will be no acreage reserve
program In 1958.

Of course, no one can say with cer-
tainty whether the soil bank acreage
resei-ve program will bring about the re-
duction in production which it was de-
signed to accomplish. We do know that
the program was applied to corn last
year, and It did not prove very effective
in reducing the production of com. We
had a bumper com crop.

It Is undoubtedly true that In many
Instances the farmer will put a part of
his acreage In the acreage reserve pro-
gram, and then, with the payments
which he receives, he will fertilize more
heavily, cultivate more Intensively, and
produce more on fewer acres than he
had theretofore produced on his entire
acreage.

If I were to cast my vote on thla
amendment guided solely by the stand-
ard which the bill sets up, as to whether
or not it would reduce or control pro-
duction, I would support the amendment
offered by the Senator from Ohio. How-
ever, I shall vote against the amendment
for a different reason.

We have In this country no active farm
program to help the fanner except the
acreage reserve program. Whether it is
effective or ineffective, it does get som%
money into the hands of the fanner.

Our people are enjoying the greatest
national income our country has ever
known. Every segment of American life
save and except the farmer enjoys today
a greater income, whether on an Indi-
vidual basis, or an average, across-the-
board basis, than It has ever enjoyed
before.

In other words, all our people except
the farmer are eating at the table of
Dives, the rich man. That is a very rich
diet. Our people are living upon a high
standard, with a high income.

The poor old farmer occupies the posi-
tion of Lazarus. He is sitting down near
the table, his body covered with sores.
He is beaten down, squeezed almost to
death in a cost squeeze, with the price
of what he sells going down and the cost
of what he must buy gomg up. He is
covered with sores, crippled, ill, and bat-
tle worn. He is sitting there waiting for
this little crumb.

I do not think this Is a very good law.
It has many defects; but I cannot vote
to deny poor Lazarus, the farmer, the lit-
tle crumb he gets from the soil bank pro-
gram. For that reason I shall vote
against the amendment offered by the
distinguished Senator from Ohio.

Mr. President, I yield back the re-
mainder of my time.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President,
will the Senator from Ohio yield, that I
may ask him a question on his amend-
ment?

Mr. LAUSCHE. I yield.

Mr. NEUBERGER. As I understand,
the amendment offered by the Senator
from Ohio is in two parts. It has not
been printed, so we have had to rely on
its being read by the clerk. Am I cor-
rect in presuming that these are the two
parts of the amendment offered by the
Senator from Ohio: One part forbids the
Government from entering Into acreage
reserve contracts for any crops that are
grown during 1958; is that correct?

Mr. LAUSCHE. That Is correct.

Mr. NEUBERGER. The second part
of the amendment places a $2,500 ceiling
on any payments which can be made to
any one farm unit under this program.
Is that correct?

Mr. LAUSCHE. The Senator is cor-
rect. The language is a restoration of
the language contained In the House
provision, and the $2,500 would be limited
to the payment of those obligations in
1958 that were Incurred in 1957.

Mr. NEUBERGER. I understand that
is approximately the language of the bill
as It came from the House.

Mr. LAUSCHE. It is the exact lan-
guage.

Mr. NEUBERGER, I personally be-
lieve that there is a great deal of merit
In the $2,500 limitation on what can be
paid to any one farm unit. My principal
criticism of the operation of the pro-
gram, certainly in the Pacific Northwest,
has been that it has proved of some ad-
vantage to the great ranching opera-
tions, but, with very few exceptions, has
been of no advantage to the small-size
farms.

The one objection I have to the
amendment is that it completely elimi-
nates the program after 1958. I have
not fully decided how I shall vote on the
amendment, but I wish to say for the

A parlisonentary
OFFICER. The

Is It within the

Recokd that there is a great deal of merit
and a great deal of commonsense and a
great deal of wisdom in applying a $2,500
ceiling to any payments which can be
made to any one farm operation.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I may say that those
who feel that there should be a program
will have an opportunity to develop it.
If the program for 1958 is repealed, it
will put pressure upon us to evolve a
program that will achieve the results
described by the Senator from Mirme-
sota.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, a
parliamentary inquiry.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Mor-
ton in the chair) . The time of the Sen-
ator from Ohio has expired. All time
for debate has expired.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, it is
very difiBcult to hear from this side of the
Chamber, but the Senate should be ad-
vised that the impact of the amendment
is to kill the acreage-reserve program for
the crop year 1958. In addition to that
it would put a $2,500 limitation on pay-
ments to the producers. In other words,
there will be no acreage-reserve program
in the crop year 1958 imder the amend-
ment.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President

The PRESIDING OFFICER. AU time
for debate has expired.

Mr. HUMPHREY,
inquiry.

The PRESIDING
Senator will state it.

Mr. HUMPHREY,
rules of the Senate for an appropriation
bill to contain a proviso to the effect that
before programing the 1958 agricultiu-al
program with respect to the soil bank,
the appropriate committees of the Sen-
ate and the House shall undertake a com-
plete investigation of the soil bank and

its operation?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair rules that that is not a parlia-
mentary inquiry.
Mr. HUMPHREY. What is it?
Several Senators. Vote! Vote!
Mr. HUMPHREY. I sdggest that that
be done.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time
for debate has expired.

The yeas and nays have been ordered.
The question is on agreeing to the
amendment of the Senator from Ohio.
Mr. DIRB:SEN. Mr. President. I sug-
gest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Secretary will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll,
and the following Senators answered to
their names:

Ellender

Ervln

Flanders

Prear

Gold water

Gore

Green

Hayden

Hennlngs

Hlckenlooper

HIU

Holland

Humphrey

Ives

Jackson

JavlU

Jenner

Johnaon, Tez.

Johnaton, 8. C. Revercomb

Kennedy Robertson

Kerr Busseli

Aiken

AUott

Anderson

Barrett

Beall

Bennett

Bible

Butler

Byrd

Capehart

Carlson

Carroll

Case, N. J.

Case, 8. Dak.

Chaves

Church

Cooper

Curtis

Dlrksen

Dworshak

Eastland

Knowland

Kucbel

Lausche

Long

Magnuson

Mansfield

Martin, Iowa

McNamaiA

Monroney

Morse

Morton

Mundt

Murray

Neuberger

O'Mahouey

Pastors

Potter

Purtell

.?j

8832

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8833

Saltonstall Bparkman

Schoeppel Btennl*

Scott Symington

Smith. Maine Talmadge

Smith. N J. Thunnond

Thyc

Watklns

Wiley

Wllllarafl

Tarborough

The PRESIDING OFFICER. A quo-
rum is present.

Mr BYRD. Mr. President. I ask unan-
imous consent to have printed at this
point in the Ricord a statement of my
reasons for supporting the amendment
offered by the Senator from Oliio I Mr.
LahscheI.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Rkcord. as follows :

ACKEAGK RKSinivi: Pbogram
(Statement by Senator Btrd)

I hope the Senate will reject the commit-
tee amendment relative to the boU bank
acreage reserve program, and restore lan-
guage adopted by the House of Representa-
tives.

The Senate Committee amendment pro-
vides that up to $600 million can be paid to
producers with respect to 1053 crops, under
this program, and allocs any one producer
to receive up to $5,000.

The Unguage In the bUl as It was passed
by the House provides no funds appropriated
in this bill "shall be used to formulate and
administer the acreage reserve program with
respect to the 1958 crops, or In total com-
pensHtion being paid to any producer In ex-
cess of «2,500 with respect to 1958 crops."

The proposition Is a simple one.

i"he Seriate conunlttee amendment would
continue the acreage reserve program of the
BoU b.'.nk uninterrupted at the rate of a
half-bllUon dollars next year and allow
»5.000 for each recipient. This la twice the
$2,500 allowed under the soil-conservation
program.

The House language would stop the pro-
gram even with contracts already entered
into. Insofar as the new money Is concerned.
and limit Individual payments to an amount
not exceeding those pjild under the soil-
conservation program.

To reject the Senate amendment wou'.d
provide no new money for new soil bank
acreage program contracts. That Is what I
hope the Senate will do.

This multl-blUlon-dollar soil bank pr'"'-
gram la In two principal parts: (1) the
acrea'je reserve pros^ram. and ('-) the con-
servation reserve program.

Under the acreage reserve program, the
Secretary of Agriculture determines wh.il Is
to be paid producers for reducing acreage In
basic commodities. The rates vary between
commodities.

Under the conservation reserve program,
the t;eoretary atcrees to share tlie cost of
estab'.lshln:; conservation practices on land
placed In conservation reserve ai;d pay the
producer an annual rental on the land.

Rejectln:^ the Senate committee amend-
ment would not affect the conservation re-
serve program. It would net affect contracts
In force on the acreage reserve pro:;ram.
It wou'.d preclude new contracts with new
money under the acreage reserve urogram.

Frankly, the more I see of this soil bank
operation, the more I am convinced the
conservation program Is belnz exploited as
badly as the acreage reserve program is being
i'.bu"5fd: that both programs are helping a
m'nr^.ura of farmers who need assistance;
and 'J\it the who'.e program ha.s f.iiled by
far to lustiXy the cost to taxpayers.

Unfortunately the conservation reserve
prot;ram Is tied to lon«r contract.'^, and It Is
impractical to knock out appropriations for
It at this time.

But the acrea;^e reserve program works on
annual contracts with each crop year. For
Xtu& ret\aon this part of the program can be

stopped so far as new contracts with new
money are concerned.

That Is what I hope the Senate will do.

The President himself has pointed up the
disappointment in the program In the most
tangible way possible. He reduced his re-
quest for appropriations. In his January
budget document he requested a total of
$1,254,000.00 J. In April the request was
revised down to $1 billion.

The acreage-reserve program started out
with a January budget request of more than
$750 million. It was later revised down to
about »7U0 million. The House Appropria-
tions Committee reduced It still further to
$<J00 million. And the House Itself provided
that none of this should be obligated against
1S<58 crop contracts.

A good word for this program Is hard to
find

The only Justlflratlon for the so-called soli
bvnk was to reduce production by llmitlrg
acres planted to a crop.

The Secretary ut Agriculture admits It will
r.ot work, and he has pointed out that pro-
duction Unutations based on acres do nut
result In lower production of crops.

It Is a documented fact that this program
Is a national scandal. There is a printed re-
port by the surveys and investigations staff
to the Hou.se .Appropriations Committee con-
taining 100 printed pages on the subject. It
Is dev.LstatlnR. with case after case of ex-
travagance. abu.<;e. and inequity. It cannot
be denied that the program has operated with
great Injustice to t!-.e farmers who need as-
sistance, as a windfall to persons not entitled
to It. and as a uj^el^ss drain on taxpayers.

Not only h.ive the President and the Sec-
retary of Agriculture demonftrated their
disaf'polntnrent In the soil bank, but Chair-
man CooLEY, of the Hi)use Agriculture Com-
mittee has described it as follows.

• We have had evidence of many abuses of
the program. It has not only restilted In
plowing under farmers, but farm communi-
ties and the people In those communities.
We had evidence to the effect that It is a
very wasteful program, that it actually costs
more than twice as much to put a bale of
cotton Into the soil bank as it does to put
It into foreign markets on a subsidized pro-
gram."

Following Mr Cooley In the Hou.«e debate
oi\ this provision. Congressman J\mix Whit-
xrw. chairman of the House Appropriations
Subcomrrrittee on Agriculture said:

••• • • here Is what Is Involved: this is
a payment to farmers to leave land out of
cultivation. • • • The chief tragedy of
this approach Is that the farmer loses his
production on his acres; but to the public
It looks like he Is getting something for
nothing If this pr^y^^ram Is continued, the
farmer will lose much more In public good
wilt which will be reflected In votes of Mem-
bers if Congress against sound farm legis-
lation."

Virginia Is one of the majority of States
suffering discrimination under this pru-
gr.im but. ab>.:ut the time this bill was to
come before the House, a member of the
Vir:;inia dc'.egatlin'. was met by a constituent
who said cut the budget, but save tliat st .1
bank He gave this as a reason not to cut
the soil bank: "I had a little patch that I
couid put wheat In, and I put it In the soil
bank. The Government paid me mt-re
money for It than If I had planted the
wheat, done the work, ar.d sold the wheat."

So on th'" record to date we have the dis-
appointment of the President and the Sec-
retary of Agriculture In this program, and
we have the criticism of both the chai.-man
oi" the .Agriculture Committee and the Agri-
culture Appropriations Subcomxniiee In the
House of Representatives.

Here Is what the House report on this
bin says "The soil bank was offered last
year as another answer to the farm prob-
lem. It la based on the phiiosophy that

the way to help American agriculture is to
reduce American production.

"It was offered as a temjx)rary stop-gap
measure, In view of the fact that the pres-
ent program of reduced-price supports, acre-
age reductions. Increased research and edu-
cation, and other measures ad' anced by the
Secretary had failed and the firmers' plight
had gotten worse and worse In fact, a
careful reading of the law clearly shows
that one of the principal purposes of the
prof^am was to get some mc ncy Into the
farmers' hands last fall.

"While there may be som.e value to the
conservation reserve portion ol the program,
findings developed by a special Investigation
conducted by the committee, and Infor-
mation received from various sources
throughout the country, raise serious ques-
tions concerning the acreage-reserve pro-
gram. Despite the signup of some 12 million
acres at an estimated cost c; $260 million
under the 1956 acreage resiirve program,
production for most crops ^.as higher in

1956 than In previous years.

•Most farmers who placed a portion of
their land In the acreage resei ve stepped up
production on the balance of their land.
Further, much of the land placed In the
acreage reserve was droughi land which
would not have produced a good crop In any
event

•Offlclals of the Department feel that the

1957 acreace reserve program will show better
results. However, only 75 percent of the
part.ctpatlon expected has niaterlallzed to
date, and If conditions Irr prove In the
drought areas participation will be even less
than now Indicated"

The House committee contlrued by assert-
ing that If the program w«re pushed. It
would have a damaging effect on local busi-
ness, and It referenced Its In' estlgatlons by
saying:

"Instances are cited and others have later
appeared where the amount of rental paid
Ui remove land from productl m exceeds the
total value (>f the land. Instances are also
reported where land removed from produc-
tion from one crop, for whlcli Federal pay-
ment Is made la so-called basic commodity),
h.is been put Into other crop?, thereby cre-
ating double Income on such land Numer-
ous in.'tances also have been -eportcd where
nonfarm people have Investec; In land, with
the expectation that acreage reserve pay-
ments from the Government will more than
repay their full Investment In a few years.
Also stime cases have been cited where In-
dividuals have leased land from the Federal
Government and have placed It In the acre-
a<^e reserve program at rat^s higher than
those p.ald under the Federal lease."

The report might have goae on to show
that while the soil bank hat failed to pro-
duce any constructive results In Its appli-
cation to the so-called basic crops. It is in-
creasing surpluses and prol lems in other
apiculture areas.

Barley plantings, for example, are sub-
stantially up In the spring cf 1957.

The poultry Industry has !ind Its difficul-
ties, and now soil-bank depositors are taking
fliers In poultry, to cite another example of
the grief this program Is causing.

The Senate committee in Its report docs
not attempt to defend the program. In fact.
It says: "There Is some doubt that the
acreage reserve program will achieve Its ob-
jective of reducing surpluses • • • The
committee rec( mmendatlon 'v'.ll provide au-
thority to plan a 1958 pr<jg-am but unless
the 1957 program proves tc be more fuc-
cessful than anticipated It l» doubtful that
the authorization will be g ven for a 1U59
program."

With such a lack of enthusiasm for the
program — with such a nega Ive approach—
as the com.mlttee demonstrates. I suspect
that It would not object too strenuously If
the Senate rejected its amei.dment.

Let's look at this program another way
for Just a moment. Using relatively recent,
but Incompiete. reports of acreage and con-
servation reserve soil bank signups for this
crop year, it will be found that 1 State
with population of 2,060,000 stood to reoeivs
$86,800,000. This was more than the pay-
ments accruing to 25 other States combined,
with a total population In excess of 70 mlllon.
One- third al the States were listed to receive
75 percent at the money.

Looking at the conservation reserve alone,
an April report by the Elepartment of Agri-
culture showed that 1 State with a popu-
lation of 7.700.000 wss signed up to get
$27,277,000. This was more than the con-
btned amounts going to 37 other States with
a total population of 121 million.

But more Important than this kind ot
consideration is the fact that we are dealing
here with a program which admittedly la a
failure. We are proposing to finance It fur-
ther in this bill. The only excuse given for
the Senate amendment is the contention
that If this program Is not continued, there
is not another program ready to take its
place.

I earnestly submit to the Senate the propo-
sition that:

I believe the patriotic farmers of this coun-
try would prefer to reduce the Federal budget
by a half -billion dollars under current con-
ditions, than to waste it on a bad agriculture
program.

I sincerely hope the Senate committee
amendment will be rejected. When a better
agriculture program Is presented we will
consider It. and If It has merit we wUl appro-
priate lor It.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing; to the amend-
ment of the Senator from Ohio tMr.
LauscheI. On this question the yeas and
nays having been ordered, and the clerk
will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I announce that
the Senator from Pennsylvania I Mr.
Clark], the Senator from Illinois [Mr.
Douglas], the Senator from Arkansas
(Mr. FuLBRiGHTl, the Senator from Ten-
nessee [Mr. Kefauvir], the Senator
from West Virginia [Mr. Neely], and
the Senator from Florida [Mr. Smath-
iRs] are absent on ofllcial business.

The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Mc-
ClellamJ is absent by leave cA the Senate
on official business.

I further announce, if present and vot-
ing, the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr,
Clark], the Senator from Illinois [Mr.
Douglas], the Senator from Arkansas
[Mr. PuLBRicHT], the Senator from Ten-
nessee [Mr. Ketauvek], the Senator from
West Virginia [Mr. Nkely], and the Sen-
ator from Florida [Mr. Smathers] would
each vote "nay."

Mr. DIRKSEN. I announce that the
Senator from Ohio [Mr. BaiCKcaJ, the
Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Cot-
ton], the Senator from Nebraska IMr.
Hhuska], Uie Senator from Nevada [Mr.
MaloneI, and the Senator from North
Dakota [Mr. Yoimo] are abeent on offl-
cial business.

The Senator from New Hampshire
[Mr. Bridges] and the Senator from
North Dakota [Mr. Lancer J are abeent
because of illness.

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr.
Bush] and the Senator from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. Martin] are absent on offi-
cial business.

If present and voting, the Senator
from Connecticut LMr. Bcsul , the Sena-
cui 556

tor from Nebraska {Mr. Hrttska], the
Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Mar-
tin], and the Senator from Maine [Mr.
Payne] would each vote "nay."

The Senator from Maine [Mr. Payne]
is necessarily absent.

The result was announced — yeas 7,
nays 71, as follows:

TEAS— 7

Byrd

Lausche

Williams

Prear

Weuberger

Goidwater

Robertson
NATS— 71

Alken

Green

Morton

Allott

Hayden

Mundt

Anderson

Hennlngs

Murray

Barrett

Hlckenlooper

O'Mahoney

BeaU

Hill

Pastore

Bennett

Holland

Potter

Bible

Humphrey

PurteU

Butler

Ives

Bevercomb

Capebart

Jackscn

RtiBsell

Oartson

Jsvlts

Beltonstall

CkTTOU

Jenner

Schoeppel

Case, N.J.

Johnson, Tex.

Scott

Catie. S. Dak.

Johnston, S. C.

Smith, Maine

Chavez

Kennedy

Smith. N. J.

Church

Kerr

Sparkman

Cooper

Knowland

Stennls

Curtis

Kuchel

Symington

Dlrksen

Long

Talmadge

Dwonhsk

liagnuson

Thumiond

EasUand

Mansfield

Thye

EUender

Martin, Iowa

Watklns

Ervln

McNamara

WUey

Flanders

Monroney

Tarborough

Gore

Morse

NOT Vai'INO— 17

Bricker

FiU bright

McClellan

Bridges

HruBka

Kecly

Bush

Kefauver

Payne

Clark

Langer

Smathers

Cotton

Malone

Young

Douglas

Martm. Pa.

So Mr. Lausche's amendment was re-
jected.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill
is open to further amendment. If there
be no further amendment to be pro-
posed, the question is on the engross-
ment of the amendments and the third
reading of the bill.

The amendments were ordered to be
engrossed and the bill to be read a third
time.

The bill was read the third time.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask for the yeas and nays on the
passage of the bill.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I desire
to place two matters in the Record be-
fore the vote is taken on the passage of
the bill. Earher today I participated In
a very helpful colloquy, for legislative
history purposes, with the Senator from
Georgia [Mr. Russell], in regard to the
cut by the House of $4,500,000 for pay-
ments to State experiment stations.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
Chair wishes to state that time has been
allotted for debate on the bill.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. How much
time does the Senator from Oregon
desire?

Mr. MORSE. Three or four minutes.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield 4
minutes to the Senator from Oregon.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I had a
colloquy with the Senator from Georgia
concerning the $4,500,000 cut on the
House side for payments to State experi-
ment stations. The Senator from Geor-
gia pointed out that the Senate bill re-
stores $ 1 million of that cut. He frankly
stated to me on the floor ot the Senate

that he considered that to be the maxi-
mum amount which we could vote in the
Senate and have any hope of holding in
conference, so I yielded to his judgment,
because I know that the Senator from
Georgia, as chairman of the subcommit-
tee, has no peer in the Senate when it
comes to giving us advice in regard to
what is likely to happen in conference.

However, as I said earlier, I have many
representations from the Forestry Serv-
ice in the State of Oregon, the Oregon
State College, the Klamath County
Court, and many other organizations in
Oregon, asking for the restoration of the
$4,500,000.

In view of the earlier discussion, I
think it is only fair to them that I place
their statements in the Record, so that
they can appear with the explanation
which has been made conoeming the
cut,

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the telegrams and letters be
printed at this point in the Record,

There being no objection, the com-
munications were ordered to be printed
in the Record, as follows:

CoRVALLis, Oasc, May 21, 2557.
Senator Watne Mokse,
Senate Office BuUding,

Washington, D. C:
Urge restoration House cuts agricultural
research budget. Oregon needs research.

W. P. McCOLLOCH,

School of Forestry, Oregon State
College.

Klamath Falls, Orec, June 7, 1957.
Hon. Watnz Mossk,

United States Senator,

Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C:
Request that you do everything possible
to restore to the budget the recommended
funds for support tor agricultural research
work at the land-grant colleges. This is
necessary to forestall a curtailment of agri-
cultural experimental work which Is of great
value to our agricultural development.
Respectfully yoiua,

Klamath County Ccokt.
C. Mack. County Judge.
E. W. GowEW, Commisstoner.
JnucT BosJNTJB, Commissioner.

Ntsxa, Obzg., June 10, 1957.
Senator Watkx Mokss,

Senate Offloe Building,
Washington. D. C:
We strongly urge restoration of 4 million
for agricultural research. Our agricultural
economy Is more dependent now than ever
before on research.

Paul Hoose,
President, Oregon Reclamation CongresM.

Orisham, Okec., June 10, 1957.
Hon. Watitz Mobse,

Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C:
We urge your assistance in reinstating at
least 4^2 million In agrtcnltural reaearcb
grants to States. Oxegons $80,000 share
vitally needed for research on Oregon's agri-
cultural crops. Curtailment of productlTe
expenditure is false tcanomy In both busi-
ness and Oovenunent.

OniatwAii l^ESST Osowns,
Lbow V. Htjbbabb.

Klakath Falls, One., June 10, 1957.
Senator Wam Moasx ,
Senate Office BuiULinff,
Washington, £). C:
Urgently request restoration at $4^ mll-
Uon In cturent budget Xor agrloUtural zc-

i"

8834 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE June 11

srorch vitally Important to the future wel- Friday. Your aid Is earnestly solicited. M.OOO of this amount for r« search on l.it«

fare of our farmers. Letter follows. blight of potatoes. Late blifht has a habit

FaANTC O How\RD. Marvin Van Cleave. of appearing suddenly and c estructlvely in

P'enident. Klamath Batm Wa'.er U':er$ prendent. O'cgon Straube^'y Council. regioas where it had not j revlously been

l*rotectire Ai^ociation. , considered a factor. The Senator from Lou-

^ Isiana [Mr Ei.lendek|. who knows how to

r'r..«»TTic Obit M/iu '' / J957 . ^ ^ ^ ' ' ''.•tlse such excellent potatoes, will renaemt>er

»^.^,^,^« Co.vALLi^.OREG. Afay.i. 19^7. Hon Richard B Rt-ssEU,. ^^^^ ,,^^ epidemic in the southern potato

wY.^.r^on D r • CHa^r^nan. Agr.cuUur. and Related ^„ ^^^ ^,„^„ ^^^ ^,, ^^3^^

Recent Hfuse'a^uon eliminated Drooosed >»9enc,^. SubcommUtee. Spate Ap- ^.^^^ed heavy losses where the disease had

Recent House action eliminated proposea propnation^ Commntee. Washington. J; . ' „„

Increases in grants to States for research un- • ^ r >ears or more,

der Hatch Act. Budget office recommenda- ^^ Dear yrNAToR It Is our understanding ,. Jf,!"/" "i\ ""'^^1' "f 'V.r'^ln'* thuTn'

tions included $4', million, from which Ore- ^^^^ ^.,^^^ subcommittee is about to mark up '/''''l^ ™ rh.^^ '?Ao Irll tn li, ;

ann «tafnn uinniri rprpivp «4? 40fi of rpeiilar ^ ^ ,. , . . . crease. I Urge the Senate coiiferees to insist

gon stat.on wouia receive ^'jj.-tuo 01 reKuiar ^^ appropriations bi 1 relative to approprl- ^ ,..„,.,i«„ ,v,i. .,„^ .♦ ,,o.,„„» „w^,^ .v,«

Hfitrh fiirrt nnrt about i.'iO (XX) of regional re- ^ v_ ,, . • ,- on retaining this item — it cannot aflord the

rearch'fun?f"orrS'arc'h'<rde1e?o!,rn^^^^ "w^a :\er:- nr-rc'^c^rned^^n"; t -»^— ^ '^P''^ ^^» '^'«"'"-" "'^^ ^^«

hardy winter barley varieties, control of per- ^^ ^ Hou^e ;edV-;:;i t^elud.et request format, hi^^'frj: f^om ^h ! abater" "''^

ptinlai weed ranee nran leement efflclent use ._ .. _. _. . r-. - . the matching funds from tn-s states.

emimi wceu. range iiraMisciuciit, riui,iriiL use j ^j. ^j^^ item designated Piivments to "

of water, soil fertility, soil cl-issirication. yr^^tes State Experiment Statiims" from UNrrtD Statts Department or AcRicuLTtmE.

control of plant diseases, livestock produc- ^33 503 708 to last \ears figure of $29 003.708. State Experiment Stations. Agricultural

ton. and utilization of agricultural products^ ^^ ^^^ apprehensive that this cutback Research Sebvice

Senate will act on this legislation soe^n. I ^.^.j ^ipprive the States of op- ortunlties to The 19:8 budget estimates for the Depart-

presume you will want to e.xplaln to Oregon ^^ ^,^^ agricultural research projects that ment of Agriculture include W4.0O3.70a for

Senators the mportance of these funds to ^^^ ^^ urgency in so manv areas of our the subapproprlation -Payn-ent* to States.

Oregon agriculture, pr E C E.ting^ of the ^^^,,^^ In fact if this appropriation stands Hawaii. Alaska, and Puerto Rico." an in-

State experiment suuion division of ARd can ^^ recommended bv the House, it will actu- create of $4,500,000 over the current appro-

supply you witn aamtionai cietai.s. ^j^. represent a cut in re.search. because the prlation of »2<).503.708. However, the House

Assistant Director. OrTglTAgncul- appropriation has to cover salaries, in -grade bill disallowed this increase.

tural Experiment Station. increases, and other incidental Increased The budget increase was recommended In

costs order to il) meet rising ctsts of research

, It seems to u.s that a restoration of the under this appropriation aid (2) Initiate

w w hALEM. OREC. May -2. ISO/. $4 500,000 ellmln:ired by the House for this new projects and expand some already

Hon. WATNE morse. itpj^ would bring about real economy underway. The fields of research covered by

benate o^.ce ^uuaing through savings of crop losses and Increased the proposed Increased are crop production.

_ . , ^ ^^^-^y^Q'o^- " t.. quality and qu.intlty of prtxluctlon. plant ciiseaacs and Inaects. inimal produc-

Understand «griculural reseirch fund Is luu.tranve of the views of many Oregon uon. animal diseases and panjsites. water use

being leit out of agriculture budget Ore- constituents who have protested the House and conservation, soils and ertlllzers. agrl-

gons share $40,000. $4,000 specifically ear- ^^,,,,,, ^,, ^^e research program is the en- cultural economics, farm mechanization and

marked research on potato d s.-ases We closed copy of a telegram addressed to us by structures, marketing and u.Uizatlon. home

tTif»?^nVJr^^,?,M^^,TrH^.?I^H.T!^! ^'' ^"" Davldson, administrator of the economics, and forest crop production. The

that are of serious nature a though they are oret;on Potato Commission. Salem. Oreg. various States have a heavy backlog of

.\\Lli T^t^ JrtJ^^^^^ ^'* *'>*^' ^^'"^'y ''PP'-ec.ate the subcom- urgent request, for research on SUte and
quality thereby greatly affecting potato mittees consideration of this matter and we local problems in these fields
farmers income. State legislation has no u^^e the restoration of the 14 500,000 elimi- Present research on manv inalor nroblems
way to supplement this fund this session. ^atPd frnm tie budget renuem ',,r th- stuf* present research on many major problemj
Please studv this thorouahlv and see that tie budget request .or the State t^^ln-. the American farmer aj e not adequate'
f lease siuay inis tnorougniy ana see tnat exjjeriment stations program. ,,. ^„, ^i. np#<ia or arru*. At a m^u,t\nn
Oregon gets the $40,000 agricultural research with best ner.onai rAird, needs or arrive at a solution
money. This is urgent to our farm economy. smcereK ^' "" "'^^ ^"'*^- ^*"" '' dlflerlng ell-
Made phone calls for directions. This matter ^mcereij. ^.^jp j^n market outlets, and other local
has specifically been requested by the com- Richard LNET™«n«R conditions, each State has dUtlnct problems
misaioners. kichahd u ^Et;BEHCER. ^f prt^xjuction and marketinj; of crops and
Oregon Potato Commission. Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I also I'^estock which can best be solved by the
Ben Davidson, Administrator. ask tO have printed at this point in the States or cooperatlv-ely by two or more in-

„ . .. _ .. , J terested States. Such research is supplemen-

WAsi^^^GTON May 23 1957 ^ h °^^"' !"*^^"^' dlscUSSing , ,,, ^he national and regional ln?eresU of
M.»v,vv»»r,rYv, '^ ^^'^ "^^"^ ^°^ agricultural re.«earch in the Department of Agriculture. To foster
Pres.ien? Oregon Strauberry CouncU. brucellosis, plant parasites, plant dis- research between these two nterdependent
Salem Orea eases, and animal diseases, groups, Federal-grant funds have been ap-
Retel May 22 Sha-e vour concern over There bemc: no objection, the material proprlated for many years, fnder this pro-
House cut m budget for agriculture appro- wa.s ordered to be printed in the Record. ^J^"" *^«' States provide aboit three times
prlation item designated payments to as follows: the amount of funds provided by Federal

States-State experiment stations. Have ad- r should like to nolnt out that the varlnu, ^"''^^''k. ^ l*.*^* vf'^f l^^ "^ ^°', ^1""^

drp««.d lotnt letter tn Sen«t->r rit^«i . «.ih Should like to point out that the various rnust be matched by States, most of them

dressed Joint letter to Senator Russell, sub- states have a heavy backlog of urgent re- more than match the Federal oortlon

conunittee chairman, urging restoration of „,,„,« for re^eirrh on st«t>. «nd ir^ai nmh . maicn ine reaerai portion.

full S41 million rut We recoc-ntre im ^^^^^^ ^or rebcarch on State and local prob- jj t^ere Is no Increase In -he approprla-

rull $4', million cut. We recognize im- ^^^^ ^^ ji^^^^ j^.j^j^ j^^ increase was tion it will not onlv be imDoasible to con-

portance of agriculture research funds and rernmmended in order to meet ri»in<7 rr.«tR ' iraposeiDie to con-

reffard cut as fal^" eronomv Will do everv- recommended in order to meet rising costs ^uct the additional research which Is needed.

regard cut as raise econom>. will do every- of research and initiate new projects and b„t rising costs of researrh v/lll ner«i«ltate

thing possible a-sslst. Please convey this pmand aome airendv nnderwav The fleid. rising cosis or researcn v/iii necessitate

message to all growers at vour statewide ^^P^'^^ ^ome already underway. The fields a reduction In research at State agrlcul-

m^tinl Regards statewide of research covered by the proposed increase tural experiment stations from present levels,

meeting. Kegaras. include crop production, plant diseases and

Wayne L. Morse. insects, animal production, animal diseases Estimated allotments to Sta'e agricultural

I nited States Senator. ^^^ parasites. Present re-^earch on many experiment stations under the $4,500,000

RicH.ARD L _ Neubehger. ^^^^^^ problems facing the American farmer increase requested for 1958

Lnited 6taus Senator. „ ^^^ adequate Uj meet his needs or arrive Alabama $9S, 855

at a s<jlution at an early date. Because of Alaska 19,708

Salem. Orec, >f ay 23, 1957. differing climate, soil, market outlets, and Arizona 28,400

Senator W\TNE Morse. other local conditions, each Bute has dis- Arkansas 82,872

Senate OUlce Building. tlnct problems of production and marketing California 90,035

Washington. D C • cf crops and livestock which can best be Colorado 37.534

Recent House action eUminated proposed solved by the States, or cooperatively by two Connecticut 30,348

increases to States In grants for research, or more interested States. The States pro- Delaware... 2l!801

Am Informed 'his would cause a $73,000 cut vide about three times the amount of funds Florida 49. OM

lu budget for Oregon experiment station and provided by Federal grants. While the ma- Georgia 103,340

would eliminate vital work on strawberry Jority of grant funds must he matched by Hawaii 26,194

projects. Increasing research investment Is States, most of them more than match the Idaho 32. 68«

essential to Oregons 3,000 growers and $10 Federal portion. I should like to give Just Illinois 96,471

million grower Income. Oregon growers are one example of many In my State of Oregon. Indiana 82,721

trying to raise $-20,000 a year U5 supplement Under the requested Increase of $4,500,000 Iowa 84,105

present research and this cut by the House the formula would have provided for an in- Kansas 58,034

».■« most discouraging. This thln,^ will be crease of $43,406 for the Oregon agricultural Kentucky 103,319

discussed at a statewide growers meeting experiment station. It was planned to Vls* Louisiana . 70,332

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8835

rtftnuifed allotments to State affricultural
experiment stations under the $4^90,000
incretbe requested lor li/5S — Continued

Maine ^33, 225

Maryland 41, 744

Massachusetts _ 37, 335

Michigan 90.392

Minnesota 81. 705

Mls8U.slpp>t. _ 103, 136

Missouri.

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

New Hampshire.

New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina.
North Dakota...

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Puerto Rico

Rhode Lsland

South Carolina.

E.iuth Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia...

Wa.shlnKton

West Virginia ...

Wisconsin

Wyoming

91.C49
SI, 130
61.145

Ifl, 737
24,917

37. 002
11.148
00.883

140.041
S9.346

106.829
67. 085
43.408

116.703
96.263
20,887
79,316

38. 916
104.952
140.116

26. 970
26.595
89.616
49. 374
64.849
82,959
23.429

ToUl S.240.000

Regional research fund 1.126,000

AdmtnlstraUon 135.000

Total 4.500.000

Extracts From the Yearbook of Acricci.-
Tt-RE, 1953

One of the most tragic events In history
led to the beginning of real knowledge about
plant di.seases and to the development of
the science of plant pathology. That was
the Irish famine In the middle of the Idth
century. Two circumstances were respon-
sible. First, the Impoverished popiUatlon
had become almost wholly dependent on
their potato gardens for food. Second, the
potato crop for 2 years. 1845 and 1846, was
almost wholly destroyed by late blight. Ac-
counts of physical misery arul spiritual
anguish suffered because of the devastation
caused by this one disease go far beyond
anything that ordinary experience equips
one to understand. Ireland lost almost a
third of Its population between 1845 and
I860 as a direct result of the outbreak of
late blight. A million people died from star-
vation or from disease following malnutri-
tion. A million and a half more emigrated.

The outbreak In Ireland was part of a
pandemic— that Is, the disease suddenly be-
came widespread and destructive almost
simultaneously In several European coun-
tries and In the United States as well. As
far as can be determined, the disease had ap-
}>eared in these regions not more than 2 or
3 years previously. In tlie meantime, the
pathogen evidently Increased and became
widely distributed, so that when the weather
became generally and extremely favorable, as
happened diirlng the years of the pandemic.
it could attack rapidly and in force over a
wide area at once.

Why did this outbreak overwhelm the
Irish and affect other peoples much less?
The answer is not simple. It lies partly In
agricultural and partly in political history.
But essentially It Is that miserable economic
conditions led to the almost sole reliance of
the Irish peasantry on the easily grown, pro-
ductive, and filling potato for their main
food.

In other places food resources were more
varied so that destruction of the potato crop

did not have anywhere near the same im-
portance.

Even after this grimmest of epldeailcs
abated, Its consequences remained. The dis-
ease had become a fixture In potato culture.
It was more or lees evident almost every
year, and serious outbreaks, although none
again so disastrous as the great pandemic,
occurred from time to time whenerer the
weather was favorable. The tragic drama
of the famine was one of the decisive factors
In subsequent social and economic policy.
Its Influence on British-Irish relations is
still felt.

Of course, circumstances must be unusual
Indeed for such extreme disaster to be caused
by the attack of a plant disease, or. for that
matter, by anything else. There have been
other records of famine due to the sevwe oc-
currence of a plant disease. In 1733. more
than a century before the Irish famine. 12,000
persons on one Jspanese island died because
of failure of the rice crop, caused perhap>s by
stunt, a virus disease. Early settlers in Aus-
tralia are said to have suffered mori; than
once from lack of food because their grain
crops were destroyed by leaf rust. Actually,
howerer, except for the toll of human lives
that make it so terrifying and so impressive,
famine Is comparatively minor as an expres-
Bion of the importance of plant diseases.

Nowadays help can reach victims ciuickly
almost anywhere in the world, and there is
less and less likelihood of famine or excuse
for It.

• • • • •

That last statement is true except In times
of stress and emergency, of disrupted trans-
portation and world tipheaval. Late blight
Is said to have had a place In the defeat of
Germany Ln the First World War. In i917 it
destroyed about a third of the potato crop,
which made up a large part of the wiu-tlme
diet of the Germans. Reduction in the al-
ready scanty food supply contributed to the
breakdown In morale and physical endurance
that led to the end of the war. Here again,
this required a favorable combination of cir-
cumstances; seldom docs a single plant dis-
ease Influence military affairs to that extent.
Plant diseases can cause or aggravate serious
shortages In wartime, however, all the more
Eo because then fewer varieties of crops are
apt to be grown; their products, whether for
food or other consumption, are urgently
needed in greater quantity than usttal; re-
placements or substitutes are hard to get or
are unsatisfactory; diversion of chemicals
necessary in the manufacture of fertilizers
and fungicides to other use hampers control
of parasitic and non-parasitic diseases; and
the overloaded transportation facilities mul-
tiply the effects of all the other factors.

• • • • •

Some of the most dreaded diseases of crops
are of moderate importance or are scarce or
even absent a good part of the time. But
they can attack with great suddenness and
destructiveness in certain seasons, or per-
haps during several consecutive j'ears.
Among them are wheat stem rust and potato
late blight, which are probably the most
famous of plant diseases because of the im-
portance of the hosts almost everywhere
and because of the extraordinary severity of
epidemic outbreaks of either disease.

• • « • ■

Late blight has a habit of appearing sud-
denly and destructively in regions where it
had not previously been considered a factor.
The epidemic in the southern potato crop
In the winter and spring of 1943-1944 Is a
good illustration. Contributing factors in
that outbreak were: The especially abund-
ant supply of inoculum that resulted from
wartime relaxation ot seed requirements;
exceptionally wet weather, favorable temper-
attires; lack of experience with the disease;^
and difficulty of control, the result iJiaUm^

early heavy attack, weather that prevented
efnclent application, aixi scarcity of control
materials. The total result was the most
severe and widespread epidemic ever known
in the South. Losses were heavy in some
States where the disease had not been seen
for 80 years or more.

• • • • •
One cannot study a parasitic plant disease

without talcing Into account the Influence
of temperature and moisture on the path-
ogen, on the reaction of the host, and on
consequent disease development. Obviously,
a connectJon so regular must have great
practical significance.

• • • • •

If we can tell when an outbreak Is likely
to happen, we can prepare for it and reduce
losses. In jjartlcular, we can overcome the
difficulty In the use of expensive chemical
control measures arising from the fact that
routine application is wasted in years when
the disease Is absent, but. on the other haixl.
when It does attack protection must be
prompt and continuous to do any good.
With such a choice farmers are apt to take
a chance and often will sustain severe losses.
Forecasting enables sound Judgment Instead
of wasteful guessing on the need for control
measures.

Prediction does not always help in con-
trol but does enable farmers to reduce their
losses in other ways. For instance, there is
no practicable shorttime control measure
available for wheat leaf rust, but forecasts
issued early In the season allow farmers to
plow up their wheat and plant some other
crop or to pasture their fields If a serious
outbreak is Indicated. Thus they can re-
cover at least part of their season's invest-
ment.

• • • • •
Late blight of potato is a downy mildew

caused by a fungtis, Ptiytophthora infestans.
The mildew, or flour-like spots, usually on
the lower surface of the leaf, distinguishes
the disease from other leaf spots on the
potato plant. Humid conditions favor it.
Despite its name, the first infection often
occurs soon after the plants emerge when
favorable moisture and temperature pre-
vail. At 70« to 75* P. the fungus grows so
fast inside the leaves that within a week
after Infectlosi it causes dead spots one-half
to 1 inch in diameter. The entire plant
may be killed within 2 weeks. The brown
discoloration of the foliage brings to mind
the terms "bUght" and "rust."

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, again I
say to my constituents who have urged
me to offer amendments increasing the
amount that I do not believe in en-
gaging in simple political gestures. I
may say for the Record that I could
oflFer the amendments they suggested
that I offer. But it would be hopeless,
because, as the Senator from Georgia
hsus pointed out to me, the Appropria-
tions Committee would oppose the
amendments. Also, he has given me his
sincere and honest advice that our best
hope of holding the amounts we have
provided by means of the amendments
recommended by the Appropriations
Committee is to support the Senate com-
mittee version of the bill. The Senator
frcmi Georgia has pointed out that the
real danger is that if we try to increase
those amounts, we may wind up in con-
ference with lesser amounts.

Therefore, on the basis of the state-
ments made today, I am not offering the
ameiKlments suggested by these groups,
because, as I have said before on the floor
of the Senate, I think we have obtained,
under the leadership of the Senator from

'■ (|

m

\ I

\

8836

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

<

iMi

Georgia, the best possible bill we have
any hope of having enacted at this ses-
sion of Congresa, in view of what is al-
most a fixation. I may say, regarding
economy this year at the expense, in
item after item of many bills, as I ex-
perienced it early today in connection
with the District of Columbia appropri-
ation bill, of human welfare and human
needs.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr President. I
desire the Record to show that I sup-
ported the amendment offered by the
junior Senator from Ohio Mr Lausche 1
because I believe there must be impo.sed
an extremely rigid ceiling on what can
be paid by the Government to any one
farm unit under the acreage-reserve
program. Unless we do that we shall
be aidmg only relatively largo agricul-
tural operations, and we shall continue
to be unfair and discriminatory to the
family-size farmins; under takini.:.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the
Senator from Texas yield back the re-
mainder of the time under hi.s control'

Mr JOHNSON of Texas. Mi Fre.>i-
dent, I am prepared to do so. if the mi-
nority leader will do likewise

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President. I
yield back the remainder cf my time,
under the same condition

Mr JOHNSON of Texa.s Th^'n. Mr
President, I yield back tlie remainder of
my time

The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time
has been yielded back.

The question i:^. Shall the bill pa-vs""

On this question the yea.s and nays
have been ordered, and the clerk will
call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll

Mr MANSI^EIJD I announce that
the Senator from Penns\lvania 'Mr.
Cl.\rk!, the Senator from Illinois 'Mr.
Douglas!, the Senator from Arkansas
I Mr. FuTBRicHTl. the Senator from Ten-
nessee 1 Mr. Kef.\uver i , the Senator from
West Virginia l Mr. NeclyI, and the
Senator from Florida I Mr SmathersI
are absent on official business.

The Senator from Arkan.'^as I Mr Mc-
Clellan 1 is absent by leave of the Senate
on ofBcial business.

I further announce, if present and
voting, all of the Senators listed above
would have voted yea."

Mr. DIRKSEN. I announce that the
Senator from Ohio I Mr. BrickerI, the
Senator from New Hampshire I Mr.
Cotton 1. the Senator from Nebraska
(Mr. HruskaI, the Senator from Nevada
I Mr. MaloneI, and the Senator from
North Dakota I Mr. Yol'ngj are absent
on official business.

The Senator from New Hampshire
fMr Bridges 1 and the Senator from
North Dakota (Mr. Lancer] are absent
because of illness.

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr.
BusHl and the Senator from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. Martin] are absent on offi-
cial business.

TTie Senator from Maine [Mr.
Payne i is necessarily absent.

If present and voting, the Senator
f.om Ohio iMr. BrickerI, the Senator
from Nebraska (Mr. HruskaI. the Sen-
ator from Connecticut I Mr. BushI, the
t^enator from Nevada IMr. MaloniI,
the Senator from Pennsylvania LMr.

Martini, and the Senator from Maine
LMr. Payne! would each vote 'yea."

The result was announced— yeas 78,
nays 0. as follows:

YEAS— 78

A:ken

CoTf

Morton

Allott

Orpen

Mundt

Anderson

Haydpii

Murray

Barrett

Henningi

Neubergfr

Beall

Hlchfuloopfr

O Mtthoney

Hf nnett

H;il

Pftwtore

Blhle

Holland

Potter

Hutler

Huiisphrpy

P'.jrtell

Bvrd

Iv-s

Reverromb

C.ipt-hart

J«<-<tson

R.ihertiou

Carlson

JiV<.r<

RusneU

C'lirroll

Jf liner

StiltniMtall

ca.-.*. N J

Johnson. Tex

8.hoeppel

Ca»e, S Uttk.

Johnston. S. C

t^t-Ot!,

< "h.ivfa

Kentiedy

^iUlth Maine

Ch'irch

Kerr

.'Jrnlth N J.

f'(>!p«>r

Kr. jwland

S"arknia:i

C'lrtlH

Kir-h.'l

S'enn'.H

Dirk.'jpti

I,a'iHctii>

Hvniinnton

UworshHk

I-on«

T;ilm»d>te

E.v.si,uiicl

Mat(nu«on

Thurmutid

KMeiKler

Mm-n-ld

Thve

Frv. !i

Martin I^w*

\V.itlt;n*

h'^'indprn

M'-Naii;«nt

W'.'.ev

K rea r

\Mnroney

W;ll;xmi

Uo:dwtticr

Mjr,e

Y.irtHjroiiKh

NOT VOTING -

-17

Brirkpr

F'lIbrUht

MrC-.ellan

t.r.iik;f-«

Hruslta

Neely

MuBh

Keuiiiver

pHvne

f'.arK

I-'i'Ker

Mnntiiers

Cottiii

M.\l' 'ne

Y'oung

[Xnigas

M.irt.n Pa.

Fo the bill 'H R 7441' was pa.s.=ed
Mr RUS.SEI L Mr President. I move
that tlie Sennte in.sist upon its amend-
ments, request li cuuference thereon with
the Hnu.se of Representatives, and that
the Chair appoint the conferees on the
part of the S*>nare

The motion w ;i.s agreed to: and the
Presiding,' Officer appo.nted Mr. Russell,
Mr Hayden. M;- Hill. Mr. Robertson.
Mr Ellender. Mr Young. Mr. Mundt,
and Mr DuoRsmK the conferees on the
part of the Senate

THE KHRUSHCHEV'' STATEMENT ON
THE COMMUNIST SYSTEM

Mr KNOWLAND Mr. President, In
the teievi.sion program on Sunday. June
2. Mr. Khruslichev. the First Secretary
of the Communist Party, had an inter-
view which was rebrottdca-st in the
United States. At that time the follow-
in;; question was asked of him by Mr.
Cutler:

Mr Khrxi.shchev. do you h.ive anv fear that
If you withdraw your trijopa from certain
states in Eaatern Europ)*, thu«« countries
Would all remain Communist.'

In reply. Mr Khru.shchev answered in
the following words:

You seem to think that the Ctimmunlst
system in some country can be held up by
cur armed furce.s But I wouldn t defend a
Communist .system of that kind Tt\t Com-
munist system must be based on the will of
the people, and If the people should not
want that systeni. then that people should
establish a difTerent s\stem And for that
reason we have n<i fear of wUhdrswlng our
troops fr^m any c<iuntry of Eastern Europe
or from Eastern Germany, and we are cer-
tain that the people themselves will defend
their system even better without that.

Mr President, as the distinguished
majority leader has spoken on another
aspect of this situation, it seems to me
that Mr. Khrushchev has opened up a

situation of which Ihu country and the

Free World should take full advantage.
Based on that. I addressed a letter to the
Secretary of State, under da'e of June 8,
1957. Because of some misinterpreta-
tions or misunderstandlncrs of the pro-
posal. I desire to read into the Record at
this time the letter I addntssed to the
Secreury of State. I wish to say that
prior to releasing this letter. I personally
discussed the matter with the Secretary
of State and he said he had no objection
to my making the letter i)ublic. The
letter reads:

Dt^■ Ms KtCTirTAST It seems to me that
Mr Khru-shchev m his televlsli n appearance
of aunday, June 2. has given u> an opportu-
nity to call his hand He woild be placed
m the pyisiiion of carrying out his expreaaed
belief or bcm^ cxiJoaed as a dealer In typical
(■>]mmunl.5t propaganda.

When Mr Cutler asked him the question.
"Do yon have .".ny fear that If 70u withdraw
your ir'x ps from certain stati-s in Eastern
Bnrt.'pe th^-.' thoee countries would all remalu
Com:nui.:st ''"

In his reply he said. '■ • • • You s*eTn to
think that the C inimunlat system In some
cinmtry can be held up by our .irmed forces,
nut I wouldn t defend a Communist system
of that kind The Communist system must
l>e based on the will of the p<-ople. and if
the people should not want hat system.
then thiit people should establish a dlllerent
system And for that reason we have no
fear of wuhrirawlng our trtx^ps from any
country of Ea.'tern Europe or f om Eastern
(lermany, and we are certain that the people
themselves w-U defend their sysum even bet-
ter without that ■■

I would s'.ronnly recommend I lat we chal-
leni?e him In this area to dem instrate his
expressed fai'.h In communism and In na
urea where his country already has treaty
and moral commitments to withdraw.

1 Whtn Austria became fre« of 8 )vlet
occupation th" IcRal basis for retaining
triK>ps In Hungary terminated.

2 The Uo-t legal Government or Hungary
under Na :y repudiated the Warsaw Pact
which removed even this doubtful Justifica-
tion for the pre.sence of Soviet forces.

3 The United Nations has passed 10 reao-
lutlons relative to Hungary Inchidlng thoee
relating to .Stivlet tnxjps' withdrawal and the
holding of free elections.

In view of the above and with the con-
sent of our aMoclates In the North Atlantic
Alliance Including, of course. Norway, I
would hope that we would confront Khru-
shchev and the Soviet Union with the chal-
lenge to live up to their prior commit-
ments and obligations and to teat the popu-
larity of 10 years of Communist domination
by giving the people of Hungary the oppor-
tunity of voting for a government of their
choice In secret, free elections under United
Nations sup^ervlslon.

In exchange we and our allies covild agree
that Norway would t>ecome a member of the
Baltic neutral bloc.

If this prop<iflal was not satisfactory, an
alternative would be that the Soviet Union
withdraw from Latvia, Lithuania, and Es-
tonia, live up to their previous treaties of
friendship and nonaggreaslon with tboee
three Baltic Republics, return the thousands
of Latvians, Lithuanians, and Estonians
from Soviet prison camfja and agree to
L'nlted Nations-supervised free elections In
these three Baltic Republics. The Fre«
World and the Soviet Union to thereafter
Jointly agree to guarantee the frontiers of
the Baltic neutral bloc against any aggres-
sion

Khrushchev has given an opening which
should not be Ignored. It would give us
an opportunity to test his words against
Soviet deeds. This is fully in line with
earlier expressions of President EUeohower

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8837

that the Soviet Union should demonstrate
by "deeds and not words" that It was pre-
pared to lay the groundwork for peace with
honor.
With beat personal regards, I remain.
Sincerely yours,

WnxxAU F. Kmowland.

Mr. President, I make this letter pub-
lic because of the misunderstanding,
first, that there was any proposal made
that this be done without full consul-
tation with all our allies, including Nor-
way; secondly, that the opening Khru-
shchev gave us should not be bypassed or
ignored; thirdly, even if Norway and
other NATO nations should agree to it,
we would still not leave them to the
tender mercies of the Communist world,
but with guaranties to a Baltic neutral
bloc.

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Pres-
ident. I desire to express my apprecia-
tion to my colleagues for their coopera-
tion In passing two important appropri-
ation bills today and sending them to
conference. I hope we shall be as suc-
cessful tomorrow in acting on two other
appropriation bills, namely. Order No.
421. H. R. 6070, the Independent ofBces
appropriation bill, and Order No. 423,
H. R. 6287, the Departments of Labor,
and Health. Education, and Welfare ap-
propriation bill.

Mr. President, I now desire to make a
motion.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Texas has the floor.

INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRI-
ATIONS. 1958

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Pres-
ident, I move that the Senate proceed
to the consideration of Order No. 421,
H. R. 6070, making appropriations for
independent oflBces.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The biU
will be stated by title.

The Legislativi Clerk. A bill (H. R.
6070 ) making appropriations for sundry
independent executive bureaus, boards,
commissions, corporations, agencies, and
offices, for the fiscal year ending June
30. 1958. and for other purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion of
the Senator from Texas.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to consider the bill,
which had been reported from the Com-
mittee on Appropriations with amend-
ments. •%

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Pres-
ident, under the previous order, the
Senate will meet tomorrow at 9: 30 a. m.
There will then be a morning hour, a
quorum call, and the consideration of
the independent offices appropriation
bill, provided such procedure Is agree-
able to the chairman and ranking mi-
nority member of the subcommittee. If
by chance that should not be agreeable
to them, we would substitute the
Labor-Health. Education, and Welfare
appropriation bill.

We hope to pass both appropriation
bills tomorrow, and then proceed to the
consideration of the mutual security au-
thorization bill.

ADJOURNMENT TO 9:30 A. M.
TOMORROW

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, if there are no Senators who de-
sire to address the Senate, pursuant to
the order previously entered, I move
that the Senate stand in adjournment
until 9:30 o'clock a. m. tomorrow.

The motion was agreed to; and (at 10
o'clock and 18 minutes p. m.) the Sen-
ate adjourned, the adjournment being,
under the order entered yesterday, June
10. 1957, imtil tomorrow, Wednesday,
June 12, 1957, at 9:30 o'clock a. m.

CONFIRMATIONS

Executive nominations confirmed by
the Senate June 11, 1957:

United Statzs Diamicr Jxtogb
Robert Van Pelt, of Nebraska, to be United
States district Judge for the district of Ne-
braska.

UNirxD States Attormstb

Hartwell Davis, of Alabama, to be United
States attorney for the middle district of
Alabama for a term of 4 years.

Jack Chapler Brown, of Indiana, to be
United States attorney for the southern dis-
trict of Indiana for a term of 4 years.

Clinton O. Richards, of South Dakota, to
be United States attorney for the district of
South Dakota for a term of 4 years.

Untteo States Marshals

James L. May, of Alabama, to be United
States marshal for the southern district of
Alabama for a term of 4 years.

John P. Barr, of West Virginia, to be United
States marshal for the northern district of
West Virginia for a term of 4 years.

nmm

HOU^ OF REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, June 11, 1957

The House met at 12 o'clock noon.
The Chaplain, Rev. Bernard Braskamp,
D. D., offered the following prayer:

Almighty God, Thou art daily calling
and commanding us to enthrone in our
life the spirit of good will and brother-
hood, of kindness and love.

May we manifest in our character and
conduct this spirit which we profess to
believe in our hearts.

Grant that we may be partners with
one smother in the great enterprise of
extending this same spirit throughout
the whole world.

Help us to think and act in terms of
humanity and may the common welfare
of each be the concern of all alike.

Give us a profounder sense of our
kinship and may we seek to strengthen
those ties and bonds which will draw
the members of the human family closer
together.

In Christ's name we pray. Amen.

The Journal of the proceedings of yes-
terday was read and approved.

amendment a bill and a Joint resolution
of the House of the following titles:

H. R. 7143. An act to amend the act of
Augiist 3, 1960, as amended, to continue in
effect the provisions relating to the authcNr-
Ized personnel strengths of the Armed
Forces; and

H. J. Res. 185. Joint resolution to Imple-
ment the convention between the United
States of America and Norway, which entered
Into force on November 9, 1948, for disposi-
tion of the claim against the Government of
the United States of America asserted by the
Government of Norway on behalf of Chris-
toffer Hannevlg.

THE GIRARD TRIAL

Mr. HEMPHILL. Mr. Speaker, I ask
imanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
South Carolina?

There was no objection.

Mr. HEMPHILL. Mr. Speaker. I be-
lieve all veterans are concerned over the
abandonment of William S. Girard by
the present administration. Any man
who has ever worn the uniform of his
country feels proud of it and expects
his uniform to be honored and protected
by his country.

We have no status-of-forces treaty
with Japan so there is no treaty under
which Japan can demand that we do
this. If we have secret agreements to
surrender our men to foreign jurisdic-
tion, it is contrary to everything the
man ih uniform has stood for and fought
for through the years.

We have lost face in the Par East by
our stupid, vacillating foreign policy in
that area. Let us not lose faith with
the men in uniform we are ordering to
foreign soils to protect American free-
dom.

I am vigorously opposed to the sur-
render of Private Girard to the Japanese
Government for trial. I hope the ad-
ministration will heed the voice of the
American people and demand that this
man be tried by an American court or
court-martial.

The American people also demand the
facts. If this man was on a military
reservation, there is no excuse, no au-
thority, and no justification to surrender
him to Japanese civil authorities. Does
our Government mean to admit that
our court-martial would not mean a fait
way of trial? William Girard must not
be sacrificed either for political expedi-
ency or to bolster a weak foreign policy.

Let us not forget that every American
is important and that this country has
survived because It has protected zeal-
ously the rights of the individual.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

A message from the Senate by Mr.
McBride. one of its clerks, annoimced
that the Senate had passed without

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Mr. BURLESON. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the Committee
on Foreign Affairs may sit this afternoon
during the session of the House.

The SPEAKER. The Chair cannot
entertain a request like that. The bill
presently under consideration Is being
read for amendment. A request like
that Is granted only during general
debate.

i

8838

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

\',

i:

hi

Mr. BXJRLKSON. Mr. Speaker, a par-
liamentary lnQuiry.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman will

state it.

Mr. BURLESON. Any committee will
be allowed to sit daring the lessiOD this
afternoon?

The SPEAKER. Not by request.

Mr. BURLESON. Mr. Speaker, a fur-
ther inquiry.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman will

sUte it

Mr. BURLESON. Mr. Speaker, may
I assume that any similar request sub-
sequently made during the 5-minute rule
on the pending bill will not be enter-
tained by the Chair?

The SPEAKER. That is correct.

CALL OF THE HOUSE

Mr. COLMER. Mr. Speaker. I make
the point of order that there is no quo-
rum present.

The SPEAKER Evidently no quorum
Is present.

Mr. McCORMACK. B4r. Speaker. I
move a call of the House.

A call of the House was ordered.

The Clerk called the roU, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to their
names:

JEoU No. 107)

Ealley McCarthy OKonakl

Beamer McCoimeU PoweU

Belcher Machrowlcz Preston

BHtch Mason Prouty

Bowler May Radwan

Dooley Miller. Md. Taylor

Engle Mills Vuraell

Fogarty Montoya WlitgIe*fworth

Gubser Morrison Wolverton

Holtzman Moulder

The SPEAKER. On this roUcall 403
Members have answered to tlieir names,
a quorum.

By unanimous consent, further pro-
ceedings under the call were dispensed
with.

CIVIL RIGHTS ,

Mr. CELLER Mr. Speaker. I move
that the House resolve itself into the
Committee of the Whole House on the
State of tbe Union for the further con-
sideraUon of the bill (H. R. 6127) to pro-
vide means of further securing and pro-
tecting the civil rights of persons within
the jurisdiction of the United States.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly the House resolved itself
into the Conunittee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the fur-
ther consideration of the bill H. R 6127,
with Mr. FoRAND in the chair.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The CHAIRMAN. When the Commit-
tee rose on yesterday, all time for general
debate on the bill had expired.

The Clerk will read the bill for amend-
ment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Be tt enacted, etc. —

PAHT I— BSTABLISHMENT OF TH« COMMISSION
ON CrVH, RIGHTS

Sec 101. (a) There la created In the ex-
ecutive branch of the GoTcmment a Com-
mission on Civil Rlghta (hereinafter called
the "Commission") .

(b) The Commission ahall b« composed of
Btx members who shall be appointed by the
President by and with the advice and coo-

sent of the Senate. Kot mora than three of
the members shall at any one time be at the
same political party.

(c) The President ahall designate ona of
the members of the Commission as Chairman
and one as Vice Chairman. The Vice Chair-
man shall act as Chairman In the absence or
disability of the Chairman, or In the event c*
a vacancy In that olllce.

(d> Any vacancy in tha Commlaalon shall
not affect Its powers and shail be tilled In the
same manner, and subject to the same llml-
taUon with respect to party aflUlationa as the
original appointment was made.

(e) Four members of the Commission shall
constitute a quorum.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man. I move to Btnke out the last word.
Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. SMITH cf Virginia. I yield to
the gentleman from New York.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I ask
unanimous consent that the gentleman
from Virginia have his time extended
for an additional 5 minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?

There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, when I thought of asking for this
time this morning I was of the impres-
sion that those who have been so insist-
ent upon the passage of this bill would
be desirous of speeding its considera-
tion. With that in view. I suggested
that the Chairman ask unanimous con-
sent that the bill might be considered
as read so that we might proceed ex-
peditiously with the consideration of the
matter. However, that request was not
complied with, so we will now have to
begin the reading of the bill and go
through it section by section, which will
probably cause some considerable delay
in the consideration of the bill and we
will not be able to complete it as rapidly
as I had hoped.

Mr. Chairman. In the consideration of
this grotesque monstrosity with which
we have been engaged for this last week
or so, there are a great many defects.
However. I consider that in this bill there
are three fundamental, important things
that everybody in this House who stops
to think and read the bill, and its impli-
cations, would be anxious to have adopt-
ed. I want to discuss them very briefly
in the time given to me as I did not dis-
cuss the matter during general debate.

First, Is the one that has been talked
about a great deal and that is the Jury
trial amendment which should undoubt-
edly be adopted In some form. Then,
there is the question of the States'
rights provisions In this bill under which
the Federal Government takes away
from the jurisdiction of the courts the
law that has been the law since the be-
ginning of this Republic — that a person
could not go into the Federal courts
seeking rehcf until he had first exhausted
those remedies provided for him in his
State. That is a fundamental proposi-
tion of law that this bill, for the first
time in the history of this Republic,
seeks to repeal. The third provision is
that provision found on page 10 begin-
ning on the first line. That provision
provides that the Attorney Qeiveral shall
have dictatorial authority over the civil

rights granted under this bilL In other
words, what it provides, and I think it
would be informative for Members to

look at that as I read it. is as follows:

The Attorney General may Institute for
the United States, or In the name of the
United States, a etvU action or other proper
proceeding for prevsnUve reUef.

What I am trying to say is that that
gives no one but the Attorney General of
the United States power under this bill to
give imyone any protection concerning
civil rights under this act. It protects
only the civil rights of the Attorney Gen-
eral of the United States. No individual
citizen in the United States is entitled to
claim any relief under this act.

Mr. Chairman. I did wanf to discxMS
the Jury-trial amendment briefly. There
has bv?en a great deal of conversation
and debate and argimient about the
Jury -trial amendment. The truth about
the opposition to the Jury-trial amend-
ment is that the proponents of this bill
do not want anybody who Is charged
w ith contempt under this act to have the
opportunity of a trial by Jury of their
case. Is there any doubt about that in
anybody's mind?

Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Chairman. I
make the point of order that the Com-
mittee is not in order. There is a rumble
of talk throughout the entire Chamber
and one cannot hear even in the front
row of seats.

The CHAIRMAN. The point of order
is well taken. The gentleman from Vir-
ginia will suspend. The Conunlttee will
be in order.
The gentleman may proceed
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man. I am fully aware that there are
many Members in this House who are
not going to listen to any reason about
it. and I do not want to detain them, but
I do hope that they will not interfere
with the opportunity of others who are
really serious about this bili and who
want to consider it from a logical stand-
point.

Mr. Chairman, the Attorney General
of the United States in his testimony
before the Senate committee said this —
this is on page 6 of the hearings of the
committee of the other body:

Jurors are reluctant tc Indict and convict
local officials In a crimination prosecution
even though they recognise the lUegallty of
what has been done. As a result, not only
are the election of&clala freed, but also the
Government Is not able to get an authorita-
tive determlratlon regarding the constitu-
tionality of what was done.

Again he said:

In attempting to achieve the constitu-
tional goal with respect to clvU rlghta of
an Individual, It has been a mistake for the
Congress to rely so heavUy on criminal law
and have made so little use of the more
flexible and often more practical and ef-
fective processes of the civil courts.

Which means that the Federal judge
could yank a man in and try him and
send him to jail without a trial by jury.

Now. it Is difficult for me to conceive
why there should be so much argument
about this jury trial amendment. What
the jury trial amendment will do will be
to follow the present law, section 3691
of title 18 of the Criminal Code, and pro-
vide that his jury trial shall not be taken

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8839

away from him by reason of the fact that
the Oovemment. under thia act. be-
comes a party to the litigation. It is
admitted that under the present law if
the Oovemment did not bring this suit
every citizen of the United States,
charged with this offense, would be en-
titled to Jury trial. That is provided in
section 3691, The difference between
that and this is that by this very acute
and devious proposal the Oovemment
of the United States is substituted for
the private individual, and by reason of
that fact and only by reason of that fact
he is thereby deprived of a jury trial
which is given to him iinder existing law,
section 3691 of title XVIII.

I do not know what all the fuss is
about. I want to quote to you what the
chairman of this committee said and
what the ranking minority member,
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
Keating], said during general debate,
when they were berated for having
brought in a bill that was going to de-
prive a citizen of the right of trial by
jury in a case which, but for the presence
of this law he would be entitled to un-
der existing law, if the Oovemment is
not a party he is entitled to a trial by
jury. He is entitled to it today under
existing law. For instance, we have two
sets of civil-rights laws. One is the
criminal provision and the other is the
civil provision, which provides civil rem-
edies for citizens whose rights are in-
vaded. He can proceed either way he
wants to, either under the criminal pro-
vision or the civil provision, but in
either case he gets a trial by jury for
an offense for which he is going to be
tried. If this iniquitous piece of legisla-
tion is enacted he will be deprived of
that right to trial by jury. If anybody
questions that. I would like them to say
so now. No one rises to question my
statement. Nobody can question it. It
is obvious. All you have to do is to read
this bill.

Mr. Keating said, when this ques-
tion was under discussion, at page 8501
of the Record — he interrupted the gen-
tleman from Maryland [Mr. Hyde], who
was making the very point I am making,
and he said:

I will say to the gentleman that I was the
author of this provision as It came to me
trom the Justice Department. I say to the
gentleman categorically that, while It may
be an admission of Ignorance, It never
entered my mind that I was taking away
anybody's right to a Jury trial when I Intro-
duced this measure or when I voted for it
la committee and In the last Congress.

In response to that, the gentleman
from New York [Mr. Celler], chairman
of the committee, rose, and he said, at
page 8502 :

I want to say at the outset I agree with
what the gentleman from New York (Mr.
KrATiNol said with reference to our motives.
As I said before. I am a libertarian —

Now do not get that mixed up with
"libertine"—

I am a libertarian, and I would not want by
any stretch of the imagination to take away
any rights from anyone.

When proponents on the Democratic
side and the Republican side both say
we never had any intention of taking

away any right of trial by Jury, what is
the argument about? If that Is correct,
and I do not doulat their sincerity, why
do you not Just say: "All right, put it In;
that is what we intended"?

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I yield.

Mr. KEATINO. I Just want to say to
the gentleman that it not only was not
in our minds but it was not in the mind
of any Member of this Congress who
voted for this bill the last time it was up.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Today, how-
ever, it is in the mind of every Member
of this Congress and every Memloer of
the body on the other side of the Capitol,
and it Is in the minds deeply — and do
not forget it — of the American people,
that Congress is seeking to deprive a man
of his right to trial by Jury. I do not
care whose mind it was in when it
started; everybody knows about it now.
Do not fool yourself. The American
I)eople are alerted to this assault on their
liberties.

There is another reason I do not think
we ought to have any dispute about this
Jury trial amendment. Over in the
other body the gentleman who has been
most obstreperous, most urgent in his
support of the civil-rights bill, this bilL
if you please, is the senior Senator from
Missouri. He has never given an inch
imtil yesterday, but on yesterday he pro-
posed in the Senate, an amendment in-
tended to be proposed by Mr. Hennings
to the bill S. 83, to provide civil rights,
and so forth. That proposed amend-
ment which is advocated by the chief
proponent of the Senate bill reads as
follows:

Amendment Intended to be proposed by
Mr. Hennings to the bill (S. 83) to provide
means of fxirther securing and protecting
the civil rights of persons within the Juris-
diction of the United States, viz: Amend S.
83, as amended on June 3, 1957, by the Sen-
ate Committee on the Judiciary, by adding
the word "criminal" In that amended part,
section 1, after the words "In all cases of"
BO that the part will now read:

"PART . TO SECXTHE THE UGRT OF TKIAL BT

JUBT TO PERSONS CHARGED WTTH CONTEMPT
or COUBT IN ACTIONS OR PROCEEDINGS INSTI-
TTJTED PtJRBUANT TO THIS ACT

"Section 1. In all cases of criminal con-
tempt arising under the laws of the United
States governing the Issuance of Injunctions
or restraining orders In any action or pro-
ceeding instituted under this act, the ac-
cused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and
public trial by an Impartial jury of the State
and district wherein the contempt shaU have
been committed.

"This section shall not apply to contempts
committed In the presence of the court or
so near thereto as to Interfere directly with
the administration of Justice nor to the mis-
behavior, misconduct, or disobedience of any
officer of the court in respect to the writs,
orders, or process of the covirt."

The proponents in the other body
seem to have recognized what the gen-
tlemen who have been opposing it on
this side refuse to recognize, the obvious
fact that it is taking away from every
American citizen his inalienable consti-
tutional right to trial by jury in a crim-
inal case; and if it were not for this
little ginunick that makes the Govern-
ment the prosecutor there would have

been no question of the right of trial by
jury for every American citizen.

Mr. Chairman, I am sorry to have
taken the extra time, but I did want to
advise the House that in my humble
Judgment the three most vital things in
this bill are: First, the Jury trial; sec-
ond, the civil-rights provision taking
away administrative remedies; and,
third, this inordinate, this extraordi-
nary, imusual, and unprecedented
power given to the Attorney General of
the United States to determine whether
the person shall receive any of his rights
under the civil rights bill, or denied those
rights.

Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in opposition to the pro forma amend-
ment, and ask unanimous consent to
proceed for 5 additional minute.

Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. Chairman, re-
serving the right to object, if we are
going to extend the time of these Mem-
bers now later in the day we will find
we have taken too much time and others
will be deprived of the opportunity to
be heard.

I object to the extension of time.

The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard.

The gentleman from South Carolina
is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, the rea-
son I asked for the additional 5 minutes
was that I was tmable to get an oppor-
tunity to speak on this bill during gei^ral
debate. I did not know I transgressed
anybody's rights by requesting 5 addi-
tional minutes l>efore you hang us.

Mr. Chairman, I have an abundance of
evidence to justify the remarks I am
about to make and since I do not have
the time to take up all of the things I
want to discuss, I will advance my argu-
ment to that provision of the Constitu-
tion, Article HI, which says that every-
body shall be entitled before going to
Jail or staying out of Jail to a trial by
jury.

The distingxiished gentleman from
Virginia [Mr. Poff], the distinguished
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hyde].
and another distinguished member of the
committee, the gentleman from Louisi-
ana [Mr. Willis], gave you three of the
greatest treatises I have ever heard on
the right to trial by jury.

Let us look at this for a moment. I
heard one Member get up yesterday and
say that we have heard the greatest legal
arguments he has ever heard on this
floor. I happen to be a lawyer, although
a lot of you perhaps would not know it.
He said that we have heard many other
arguments. We heard one Member
speak on the morality of this thing. He
gave us a great treatise on the morality.
I address myself to the commonsense
appro£u;h to this matter, any way you
want to take it.

What is the practical application, I ask
you gentlemen who are lawyers? I once
was in the Department of Justice. I am
speaking of trial by Jury. Do you know
how a jury panel is approved before a
jury is impaneled in a criminal case?
And this is a criminal case, I do not care
what they call it. This involves criminal
proceedings. The FBI screens every per-
son whose name is in the Jury box of a
Federal Court. Any of you who have
practiced in the Federal courts know

!

J' '

1

8840

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

that. In Addltton to that, the Treasury
agents, the Alcohol Tax Unit and Its
agents who fo out and 9et these boot-
leggrers do the same thing. So the people
are screened and reecreened. You do
xx>t have a bunch of hoodhuns appearing
In that Jury box. The Jury Is taken from
the other group and that Is the group
that we want to ask you to send these
peojHe before. Of course, I am not for
the Wll, I am Just trying to promote the
guaranties of a fair Anglo-Saxon Amer-
ican way of going to Jail. It is that
group that we ask you to send him to, a
Jury of our peers, befcM'e you send us on
a one-way' ticket to Atlanta, Oa.. or
Leavenworth, Kans.

What is the practical application of
that? Everybody knows who knows
anything about the law that when you
are cited for contempt before a judge, if
the contempt takes place before him.
you do not need any witnesses. He has
sense enough to see to that, if the con-
tempt is sufficiently close to the court
so that you do not need any witnesses.
He can forthwith sentence you. But
when it is out of his sight and at some
other place, It Is not a question of law.
I say to you It is then a question of
fact and if it is a question of fact it has
a right to go to a Jury. That is all the
proponents of the Jury-trial provision
claim. They are asking that that ques-
tion of right be determined by an impar-
tial Jury and that It be tried in the dis-
trict In which It Is alleged to have been
committed. That is all there Is to it. I
do not care what they talk about so far
as proceeding on the civil side or the
criminal side is concerned. When you
are cited for contempt, you are headed
for the Jallhouse. unless you get a trial
by jury.

Now, Mr. Chairman, what is the other
practical application? The Attorney
general is the sole prosecutor in the
name of the United States Government.
He is backed by that seal up there that
the Puerto Ricans almost shot down.
He comes into court with that seal be-
hind him representlni? a figmentary in-
dividual, so to speak. He walks into
court with this thing that both of the
gentlemen have claimed has no parent-
age.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from South Carolina has e.x-
pired.

Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. Chairman, I
withdraw my objection.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I ask
luianimous consent that the gentleman
from South Carolina I Mr. Rivers] may
proceed for 5 additional minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?

There was no objection.

Mr. RIVERS. I thank the distin-
guished gentleman very kindly. As
much as we differ on various things, we
agree on some things: He and I have the
same name.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. RrV'ERS. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.

Mr. CELLER. We do have the same
name, which means 'God be with us."

Mr. RIVERS. Although we have the
same name meaning "Ood be with us."
sometimes it Is "Ood help us."

But. take the practical application.
You have got an KtUxmej Oenerml walk-
ing Into the courthouse before a Federal
Judge, like they did down in Tennessee.
I do not know the facts about the Kas-
per trial. I heard the gentleman from
Georgia talk about it yesterday, but I
am not familiar with Kasper. I would
not know him from Adam's house cat.
But. certainly he is headed for jaiL
They enjoined him at 9 o'clock at night,
and the next morning they sentenced
him. That is what you heard the gen-
tleman say yesterday. Now, he was en-
titled, in my opinion, to a Jury trial. I
do not care where he came from. Some-
body said he came from Brooklyn, but
he was certainly entitled to a Jury triaL
He was in Tennessee at the time.

Now. your Federal judges, they lack a
lot of being without sin. Some Federal
judges are either looking for promotion
to the Supreme Court or looking to the
circuit court of appeals for a promo-
tion. But. if you make them the Judge
and the Jury and give them the keys to
the jail, how many fair trials will you
get with the Attorney General backing
them up?

Now. we are against this bin. You
know how they select these juries, as dis-
tinguished gentlemen as you are. In the
F^eral courts. All we ask is to give
that man the right to a fair trial when
they come before these ambitious people
who are either on the way to the Su-
preme Court or on the way to the circuit
court of appeal5, hopefully on the way to
a promotion. And. many of these men
have been great people when they were
in the Congress here, but when they put
on that black robe, they were as cold
a«! a dead Eskimo. They undergo a com-
plete metamorphosis; they make a 180*
turn; you would not recognize him if he
passed you on the king's highway.

There are other civil rights in this bill
which ought to be protected, but that Is
the main thing which we have to ad-
dress ourselves to. ju.st as these three
gentlemen announced in their treatises,
that the man is to stay out of jail if a
jury of his peers so decides or finds out
or determines, and that Is the thing
which we come to you today for. Do
not let political expediency haunt you
for the remainder of your natural lives.
Being in Congress w not worth it. Do
not let your service in this Congress be
such a temporary thing that when you
have here they will not even take note,
as the poet saj-s. of your departure. A
jury trial is only practical; It is only rea-
sonable; it is only following what has
been done in this country since the mem-
ory of man runneth not to the contrary.

Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Chairman. I of-
fer a preferential motion.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr HorrM.\N moves that the Committee
do nrrw rise and report the bill to the House
with the recommendation that the enacting
clause be stricken oat.

TH« PBOFOflKD LXCISLATIOIf IS COSTLY, VrmWWCKS-
BAKt — TEWDS TO DKFUTK CTTIZZirS OT A BASIC
CIVIL EIGHT

Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Chairman. In

what may be here said, neither directly

nor Indirectly will the ability, the pur-
pose, nor the sincere desire of the bill's
Iiroponents to protect the civil rights of
our citlxens be questioned.

The President has several times told
us that increased spendhig, either by in-
dividuals, private organliatloiis, or the
Oovemment. will add to the present dan-
ger brought on by Inflation. The party
platform, to which the President has
asked us to adhere, calls for economy,
the preservation of our financial Integ-
rity. We should, therefore, scrutinise
carefully all legislation which authorises
additional appropriations as does this bill
and in an undetermined amount.

The conmiittee has not been given
even an estimate of the new, additional
Federal appropriations which will be
made necefsary by the enactment of this
bill. It creates a new Federal agency,
with the usual authority to spend Fed-
eral money. It provides for the addition
of another assistant attorney general,
with an adequate staff, the cost of which
no one has thought necessary to even
estimate.

Experience demonstrates that both the
Commission, the assistant attorney gen-
eral and his staff will find ever-Increas-
ing duties, the performance of which
will add millions of dollars to the annual
national budget.

It is my desire to go along with the
Republican administration every time
that Is possible. No one, not even the
President himself, or our congressional
leaders, finds it possible to agree en every
proposed bill. Lately attention was
called to the fact that we should stand
on the platform. That Is as It should be.
It is the honest thing to do. but since
when has either party found that pos-
sible? Neither party has ever had a
perfect record.

We remember how Roosevelt was
elected on a platform promising a 25 per-
cent reduction of expenditures and em-
ployment? Adherence to the gold
standard? What happened? He fell off
that platform on all three counts within
6 months, but was reelected three times
afterwards.

So while talking about party platforms
and political expediency, the party which
promises the mast seems to win elections.

The 1956 platform of the Republican
Party promised economy.

Did we ever pause to think of the econ-
omy pledge in our platform while this bill
was being debated, that here in this bill
is provision for a new Commission, a new
agency, and so far as I can recall there
has not been a single word uttered about
the cost? With contradictory promises
In a platform, we must make a choice.
In my judgment, economy must prevail
over new, unneeded agencies or commis-
slor«.

How much will we authorize to be ap-
propriated by this bill? No thought has
been given to that.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN. I yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. May I say to the gentle-
man that a short time ago I tried to eUclt
from one of the proponents of this bill
even a rotigh estimate of the cost of the

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8841

Commission and the new Attorney Gen-
eral, but I got no information.

Mr. HOFFMAN. I gather If we as Re-
publicans want to win, we have Just got
to out-promlse and out-spend our
friends on the other side.

Mr. GROSS. That seems to be the
thing to do.

Mr. HOFFMAN. I cannot do that:
Promise and not deliver. We cannot
afford to win in that way at that cost.

LKGISLATIOIf VNNXCZS8AST

The legislation is imnecessary for the
reason there is now in the Federal Gov-
ernment ample authority to protect the
civil rights of all citizens, if that be the
sincere desire of those administering the
Department of Justice.

For his protection, the citizen needs,
not new and additional legislation in this
field, but the enforcement of that now
on the books.

Section 104 (a) (1) of the bill states
that:

The Commission shall —

(1) investigate allegations In writing un-
der oath or aflirmatlon that certain citizens
of the United SUtes are being deprived of
their right to vote by reason of their color,
race, religion, or national origin; which writ-
ing, under oath or affirmation, ahall set forth
the facts upon which such beUef or beliefs
are based.

Under the present law, it is the duty
of the E>epartment of Justice and. at its
request, of the FBI, to do everything out-
lined in this paragraph.

If either is incapable of performing its
duties because of a lack of ability or
money, then new individuals should be
employed and appropriations increased.
Section 104 (a) (2) makes it the duty
of the Commission to "study and collect
information concerning legal develop-
ments constituting a denial of equal pro-
tection of the laws under the Constitu-
tion."

The Committee on the Judiciary,
headed by the very able and Industrious
gentlemen from New York [Mr. Cellek
and Mr. KiatincI, has imposed upon it
the duties specified in that paragraph.
Section 104 (a) (3) charges the Com-
mission with the duty to "appraise the
laws and policies of the Federal Gov-
ernment with respect to equal protection
of the laws under the Constitution."
That authority is now expressly vest:d
in the House Committee on Government
Operations, which last Congress, in ad-
dition to the usual contingent funds
appropriation to regular standing com-
mittees, had $995,000 to perform its
duties.

The bill is entitled "A bill to provide
means of further securing and protecting
the civil rights of persons within the
jurisdiction of the United States."

In truth and in fact. If adopted, as
written, the legislation will tend to deny
and prevent the exercise of the civil
rights of citizens. In that, among other
things, it denies the right of a citizen
to a trial by Jury — a constitutional
right — when accused of criminal con-
tempt.

Not a single civil right is even remotely
referred to in the bill, except the right to
vote. To add insult to one's intelligence.
Section 104 (a) (1) falls to prescribe any
duty upon the Commission to investigate

Interference with the right to vote unless
that right Is denied "by reason of color,
race, religion, or national origin."

If we are honestly interested in pro-
tecting the right to vote, why not write
In a simple provision that, if the citizen's
right to vote Is interfered with, the person
Interfering should be prosecuted?

Why confine the reason for protection
of the right to vote to (me of the four
reasons Just given? It is not because
someone wants to get the support of a
particular minority group. Or is It?

It Is strange Indeed that men of such
ability as those on the Committee on the
Judiciary should Just forget for the mo-
ment that there are other ways of de-
priving a citizen of his right to vote or
having his vote counted aside from the
four reasons enumerated in this Wll.

If the right to vote is interfered with
because of color, race, religion, or na-
tional origin, such Interference is made
a crime subject to criminal prosecution
by the Attorney General or by applica-
tion for an injunction, the violation of
which may result in a Jail sentence with-
out a Jury's decision or to both. But if
those who so conspire, stuff the ballot
box, or prevent me from voting for any
reason other than 1 of the 4 indicated,
no offense under this bill is committed,
nor has the Attorney General any right
imder this bill to interfere.

Nor is my right to vote in a State or
municipal election protected even though
the interference be for 1 of the 4 rea-
sons mentioned in the bill. Cer-
tainly the right to vote in any election
is Just as much a sacred constitutional
right of citizenship as the right to vote
for President, "Vice President, presiden-
tial elector. Member of the Senate or the
House of Representatives, Delegates or
Commissioners from the Territories, as
\s provided in part rv, section 131 (b) .

It is my charge that the bill, as drawn.
Is not an honest, sincere attempt to pro-
tect the citizen's right to vote. That it
protects that right only if the Interfer-
ence is with the right to vote for the
officials named, and because of 1 of the 4
reasons outlined in section 104 (a) (1).

a FALSE TITLZ OS LABZL

If the same rules were applied to the
construction and the administration of
this bill as are used by the Food and
Drug Administration in construing and
enforcing the laws enacted for the pro-
tection of the health of our people and
for the prevention of fraud, the bill and
the arguments in its support would be
barred from the mails.

The title of the bill clearly states that
Its purpose is to provide means of fur-
ther securing and protecting the civil
rights of persons within the jurisdiction
of the United States. Protection of the
right to vote is limited to voting for 7
elective officers, and as a further limita-
tion for only 1 of 4 reasons.

Some individuals, less charitable than
Members of the House, have character-
ized the bill as an attempt to use Federal
funds, agencies, and officers in an effort
to secure the political support of a mi-
nority group or groups.
REAL s>racr

Whatever may be the real purpose of
the proponents of the bill, and let us

once again assimie that the sole desire is
to protect civil rights, the effect— the re-
sult—is to deprive a citizen of his right
to a trial by Jury when accused of con-
duct which may be a crime if the accu-
sation is made as provided In this bill by
the AttcHmey G«ieral of the United
States.

DCNIAL or EIGHT TO TBUI. ST 3Wt

The right to trial by a Jury of his peers
was won only as the result of a long and
a bitter fight. It has long been r^arded
as the most effective method of securing
justice, of protecting the righU, both
civil and criminal, of the individual. It
is doubtful if in the last 20 years there
has ever been as much idle chatter over
the issue as to when the citizen was or
was not entitled to a trial by jury as has
occurred in the debate over this bilL

So far as can be recalled, no opponent
of the bill has contended that the Issue
of whether an injunction should or
should not be issued should be deter-
mined by a jury. The question as to
whether an injunction should or should
not be issued is concededly properly the
function of the judge.

Memory Is that all that those who in-
sist that provision for trial by jury be in-
serted in this bill desire, is that one
charged with the violation of an injunc-
tion, shall be granted that right.

If it was the desire, the intent, to draft
a bill denying to the citizen the right to
a trial by jury when accused of acts
which were criminal in their nature, it
is doubtful If a more effective bill could
be phrased. It is conceded that when
the United States is a party to an action,
trial by jury is not guaranteed.

Evidently, to avoid trial by jury, this
bill, in addition to making the perform-
ance of certain acts criminal explicitly
provides for proceedings "for ^ United
States or in the name of tt|» United
States" by the Attorney OcnermL

By that provision prescribed in section
121 of part 3. the right to trial by jury
on the question of whether a citizen in-
terfered with the right to vote for any
1 of 7 Federal officials, is denied. A very
clever, deceptive, but very effective, piece
of drafting.

Though reminded during the debate,
as we often were, that an Attorney Gen-
eral is to be trusted, permit me to quote
Thomas Jefferson, who said:

In questions of power, then, let no more
be said of confidence in man, but bind him.
down from mischief by chains of the Con-
stitution.

For an example that an Attorney Gen-
eral may at times be used by biased,
subversive groups, permit me to call at-
tention to the persecution, some years
ago, of some 30 citizens, 4 or 5 of whom
were imdesirable Individuals, by the
then Attorney GeneraL

The Washington Post, to serve its own
selfish political and financial' ends,
through one of Its employees. Dillard
Stokes, using an alias, instigated and de-
liberately carried on a conspiracy to,
and it did for 4 years, persecute citizens
who were brought in from across the
continent to answer the false charge of
sedition.

fn9

M!

iti;

'Mf

\^^^

8842

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

Here In Washington for 4 long years,
those defendants were viciously perse-
cuted by a Special Assistant Attorney
General William Power Maloney. be-
cause of a conspiracy fathered by the
Washington Post.

Never convicted, exonerated by the
courts, after a defense by Washington
lawyers appointed by the courts who
served without compensation, the Post
ultimately, editorially, conceded the
falsity of its charge, half-way apologized
for Its action. That case, and you'll find
a running account of it in the press of
the day and in the Congressional Rec-
ord of June 1, 1950, volume 96. part 6,
pages 7933-7937 demonstrated again
that, as Thomas Jefferson said, we should
bind down administrative officials by
law. see to it that our Government does
not become one by men.

On November 23, 1946. the indict-
ment— which was the result of the con-
spiracy to which the Washington Post
was a party — was quashed by Chief Jus-
tice Laws. Of that indictment, and its
dismissal, the Washington Post edi-
torially commented.

Permit me to read:
(Prom the permanent Congressional Record,
vol.96, pt. 6. p. 79351
SoRRT Experiment

The Department of Justice had been \in-
conaclonably dilatory In handling the sedi-
tion cases which Chief Justice Laws threw
out of the District Court yesterday. Nearly
a years have elapsed since the death of Chief
Justice Elcher halted the notorious niasa
trial. At that time, Government witnessed
had been giving testimony for more than 7
months and vast piles of so-called evidence
remained to be read Into the record. When
the war In Europe waa over, the Department
sent Ita prosecutor, O. John Rogge, to Ger-
many In search of additional evidence On
his return, despite hla sensational innuendoei
against various prominent citizens, he rectum -
mended dismissal of the sedition cases. Mr.
Rogge was later dismissed for disclosing con-
fidential material In his report. But the
Department of Justice still Insisted on keep-
ing the cases op)en and was found in opposi-
tion when Chief Justice Laws finally brought
this sorry Incident In our Judicial history to
a close.

Whether the Government might have con-
victed some of the defendants If they had
been tried Individually Is a question that
can never be settled But one conclusion Is
obvious. It was a colossal blunder to herd 30
pervons of widely differing backgrounds and
no specific relation to one overt act Into i
■Ingle trial. The unwieldy character of th«
trial contributed In no small measure to the
farcical aspects which it soon developed. The
effect was to bring American Justice Into
contempt. But at last the court has acted to
end that deplorable experiment In circum-
stances which should make It stand out as i
warning against any similarly hysterical
move If we are again involved in war.

Permit me to summarize. This bill is
not. as the title states, a bill to secure
and protect the civil rights of persons
within the jurisdiction of the United
States.

At ita best. It is but an attempt to
further protect the right to vote for
certain Federal officials when denied for
1 of 4 named reasons.

To offset that, it calls for unnecessary
and costly legislation, provides for the
denial of the citizen s right to a trial by
jury when accused by the Attorney Gen-

eral of the United States of certain acts
which are also by the bill made a crim-
inal offense, subject to criminal prose-
cution.

It is costly, needless legislation, giving
opportunity for subversive groups to use
at the taxpayer's cost the office of the
Attorney General and the courts to fur-
ther their own purposes through the citi-
zens right to a fair, impartial trial by
jury.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in opposition to the motion.

Mr. Chairman, all I can say in a word
Is that the gentleman who has just ad-
dressed us in his usual eloquent way
is seeking to throw a lot of dust and try-
ing to indicate that we are taking away
certain rights.

We are trying by this bill to protect
rights. What rights? CoiVititutional
rights.

The 15th amendment reads:

The right of citizens nf the United States
to vote shall not be denied or abridged by
the United States or by any State 'in ac-
count of race, color, ur previous cunditio.a
of servitude.

Then:

The Congress shall have power to enforce
this article by appropriate legislation.

The bill before us is appropriate lei^i-s-
lation to enforce the provisions of tlie
15th amendment, which I have just read.

We have had brought before us in the
committee evidence of rights taken away,
of people who were deprived of their
right to vote. Many were denied those
rights. We seek by this bill to prevent
the denial of those rights.

The lofty language used to defend the
historic right of trial by jury by the dis-
tinguished gentleman who has just spo-
ken to us contrasts mightily with his
stony silence, for example, when we had
the situation in a number of States where
contempt citations were issued against
the National Association for the Ad-
vancement of the Colored People, with no
jury trial. I recall in one of those cases
there was a fine inflicted of $100,000. a
rather tall sum of money for that group,
yet I heard nothing by way of outcry
that there was no trial by jury In that
case, from the gentleman from Michigan.

I know that during the prohibition era
there were some 42.000 padlock Injtmc-
tions. where valuable properties were
padlocked and liquidated because there
had been violations of injunctions. I
heard no outcry either in this Chamber
or by the gentleman from Michigan. I
do not know whether he was in the House
at that time, but those from the State
of Michigan said naught about It.

I would say that the tears that are now
being so copiously shed for the so-called
lack of jury trial are just crocodile tears.
This argument of jury trial is advanced
to hinder and hamper the passage of the
bill.

All that the Attorney General can do
under this bill is, when he receives a
complaint that there is an intended or
prospective violation of civil rights, a
taking away of civil rights, is to apply
to a court, and the court i-ssues an in-
junction so that the civil rights might be
preserved, so that the crime or tort shall
not be committed. It is not a quesUoa

of jury trial whatsoever. All the Attor-
ney General does is go into the court
and ask the equity side of the court for
this injunction, and the court grants the
injunction to prevent the commission of
a crime. That is all this bill does.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. CELLER. I yield.

Mr. KEATING. Do we not have today
in the field of enforcement of the anti-
trust laws an exact parallel to this situa-
tion? Where several busine.ssmen get
together and conspire to fix prices, they
are committing a criminal act. The
Government can proceed against them
criminally. If the Government proceeds
against them in a criminal action, they
get a jury trial. The Government can
also proceed again.^t the conspirators by
injunction to restrain the continuance
of such unlawful acts; and. if they con-
tinue the acts, then they are in contempt
of court. In that event they are tried by
the court without a jury.

Mr. CELLER The gentleman is emi-
nently soimd in the observation that he
has made.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from New York has expired.

All time has expired.

The question is on the motion offered
by the gentleman from Michigan.

The motion was rejected.

Mr. DIES. Mr. Chairman, I move to
strike out the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent to proceed for 5 additional minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Texas?

There was no objection.

Mr. DIES. Mr. Chairman, the gentle-
man from New York says that we are
shedding crocodile tears because through
this subterfuge you are imdertaking to
dispense with the right of trial by jury.
I wonder if my friend the gentleman
from New York ( Mr. Cellir 1 was shed-
ding crocodile tears in 1930 when he
stood on the floor of this House and
urged the Congress to adopt jury trials
in labor cases. Let us see what he said.
As the poet said, "Oh, consistency thou
art a jewel." I want to see if my friend
has any jewels. This is what he said :

An examination of the precedents in this
country in the St^te and Federal courts,
shows that the word "Intimidation" forms
the htJUB of the greatest abuses in labor in-
junctions. All the cases seem to indicate that
the word "Intimidation" Is not capable of
exact definition and hence the courts have
become laws unto themselves.

Well, this till is written aroimd the
word "intimidation," the very word that
Mr. Celler denotmced in 1930, he has
incorporated in this bill today. He pro-
poses to have the citizens of this country
tried imder that general definition.

Then, what did he say about the word
"threat" which he uses in this bill today.

He says the same objections apply to
the word "threat." He was asked a
question by Mr. Eaton — "What about
threats?"

Then the gentleman from New York
[Mr. Celler] said. "That would be sub-
ject to the same objection.'*

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8843

And this Is the very basis of this bllL
The very basis of this bill Is the use of
the words. "Intimidation" and "threat."
What are the facts? The facts are that
an Injtmctlon Is an extraordinary pro-
ceeding. It is never granted except in
unusual clrctmistances. As every lawyer
knows. It Is never granted imtil the liti-
gant can show that he has exhausted his
remedy at law and that irreparable dam-
ages will result to him. Have they ex-
hausted their remedies at law? Read
the report. Read all the statutes that
were passed by the jaundiced and embit-
tered mind of Thaddeus Stevens and
those who sought to Impose upon the
South military rule. Recul the number
of statutes that are still on the statute
books covering every conceivable case of
possible violation of the civil rights law.
We have ample statutes, both criminal
and civil, and there is adequate remedy
at law. Of course, the argument is that
the southern juries will not enforce the
law. Well, what Is happening in Chi-
cago and New York and in other sections
of the North. I just read an article in
Reader's Digest quoting the sheriff of
Cook County depicting the many situa-
tions of discrimination which occur in
the city of Chicago. The article inti-
mated that Chicago is on the verge of a
racial outbreak that will be worse than
anything that has ever been seen in the
South. And yet this whole legislation is
aimed toward the South. We all know
that. There can be no doubt about it,
because when we asked the question
whether or not there is any evidence that
civil rights have been violated, the pro-
ponents cite hearsay and unsupported
charges that Negroes are denied the right
to vote in the South. You would nat-
urally assume that before proposing this
extraordinary and summary remedy of
injunction, substituting it in effect for
criminal and civil statutes, and clothing
the Attorney General of the United
States with the power to appear on be-
half of litigants, whether they want him
to apjsear or not — you would naturally
assume that you would not give the At-
torney General and Federal judges all of
this power when experience shows it may
be abused tinle&s there is a clear showing
of necessity. If it were abused in the
labor cases to such an extent that the
gentleman from New York I Mr. Cellir]
denounced it and led the fight to undo
the folly of It. what assurance do you
have that the same abuses will not be re-
peated in civil-rights cases? What field
IS more explosive than civil rights? Bulls
would rush into the china closet. They
V, ould undertake by meat ax to deal with
a question that requires evolution and
understanding and tolerance and years
(-f trial and error.

They speak of certain information that
has come to them that in some coimties
in a few States. Negroes do not vote.
When I heard that I was amazed at the
tremendous progress that had been
made. Only a few coimties were cited,
and I am sure that the information of
the NAACP has not been underestimated.
Yet here was a small area. I can re-
member well that in my lifetime that
situation would have extended over a
large portion of the United States. Yet,
year by year, the Negro and the white

In the South have made tremendous
progress. In my State, as I said on this
floor, and no one will deny it. There Is
not a Negro citizen who Is denied the
right to vote, and the truth is that they
are voting in large numbers in every
election. In fact in one of the largest
Negro boxes in Houston my opponent got
6,000 votes as against 23 for me. So I
know they are voting. They are voting
in Texas. And they are voting in many
of the other Southern States. But you
are not content with this great progress
made through good will and tolerance.
You must revive the same spirit that
actuated the Reconstruction Congresses
who said "We will force this about. We
will not wait a month or a year, but we
will enforce it by the bayonet." So they
had the Preedmen's Bureau and the Ku
Klux Klan statutes and they had the
Army and the Navy in order to disfran-
chise southerners, and what happened in
Texas and in the South? The Negroes,
who were not ready for citizenship and
wholly incapable of discharging their
civic responsibility, took complete con-
trol of the States, and they took over the
legislatures until finally the whole state
machineries of the South bogged down.
You are not content with that experience.

Oh, you are very clever. You seek
through legal means to disguise what is
essentially dishonest — an effort to sub-
stitute one man's opinion and one man's
judgment for trial by jury. How can it
hurt you to adopt this amendment?
The judge will still have the right to
ibfiue preliminary injunctions and tem-
porary restraining orders. If someone
is denied the righ*; to register or denied
the right to vote after he has regis-
tered, the judge of the court can im-
mediately issue a temporary injunction
to accomplish every legitimate purpose.
Why are you unwilling to preserve this
great institution of jury trial? I will
<55!icede that you can dispense with it.
I am not arguing that it is a constitu-
tional right, as it would be interpreted
by the present Supreme Court, to have a
trial by jiuy in these cases. I simply
plead with you, if you are going to en-
large civil-rights remedies — and God
knows there is ample remedy now — if
you are going to let the Attorney Gen-
eral of the United States be the attorney
for every fancied or real grievance in
the United States, at the expense of the
American taxpayer, something that has
never been done in a free country in a
field that is as delicate and as explosive
as civil rights, the least you can do is
to provide a trial by jury.

I will tell you what you are going to
do — and mark my words — you are going
to create a lot of mischief. You are
not going to help the Negro; you are not
going to help the whites; you are not
going to help anyone; you are simply
going to pass a political bill which has
been advertised as civil-rights legisla-
tion. You know that you do not want
to go home, some of you, and have to
explain that this is not, in fact, civil-
rights legislation; therefore, you will
vote for this bill just as you would vote
for any bill labeled "CivU Rights."

But I will tell you what Is going to
happen: This bill and all legislation
based upon force, upon summary pro-

ceedings, upon the Judgment of one man,
upon Interference with the efforts of the
people of the South to work out one of
the most dUOcult problems in all history,
^ill only delay the solution of the prob-
lem.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Texas has expired.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike out the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I want the member-
ship to know that I have always had
and will always continue to have an af-
fectionate regard for the gentleman
from Texas, although I emphatically
am in disaccord with what he says.

I do not know why he attached to me
such importance, why a good many
Members in opposition to the bill seem
set upon parading here today what I
said many, many years ago, in fact, 25
years ago, a quarter of a centiur. Of
course, what one says 25 years ago may
not be cogent or logical in today's set-
ting. Much water, of course, has gone
over the dam in those 25 years; indeed,
I have grown up, too. I would say
that I did not stop growing in 1932; I
continued to grow. I think I have had
more experience, that I have grown
older, and I hoi)e a litttle more sensible.

Twenty-five years is a long time, and
time marches on.

As to "consistency, thou art a Jewel,"
I think there is an element of consist-
ency in what I said a quarter of a cen-
tnry ago and what I am saying now,
because a quarter of a centiuy ago we
had t)efore us a history of abuses by the
courts and judges in the issuance of in-
jtmctions in labor disputes; hence there
was a national outcry and a demand for
remedial legislation, with the result that
we passed the Norris-LaGuardia Act.

We had abuses then; we have a his-
tory of abuses now, abuses of the right
to vote. We have a history of abuses
of the right of equality in education and
transportation, and in housing. We
have the abuse of the right of equality
on almost all levels of cultural and eco-
nomic life.

I seek today to legislate to correct
abuses just as I sought legislation 25
years ago to correct abuses then. That
in a way is consistency.

I will also say to the gentlemen that
life is full of inconsistencies. I remem-
ber reading not so long ago the follow-
ing:

Health inspectors In DoncaEter, England,
noted that the biggest smoke nuisance in
town was the local factory producing smoke-
less fuel.

Invitations to the dedication of a new
elementary school in Camden, N. J., carried
this note p.t the bottom: "No children,
please."

A hospital patient in Scranton, Pa., about
to undergo svirgery, made out his wiU on the
back of a get-weU card sent by a friend.

A Detroit woman who was embarrassed be-
cause her given name of Eddie was too
masculine petitioned the court to change it
to BilUe.

I give these illustrations, you will for-
give me. facetiously. Yet there is an ele-
ment of truth in these episodes.

Of course, we have these inconsisten-
cies, and we have inconsistencies by the
gentleman from New York, myself. But
we have to weigh each case on its merits.

s

I

liT

III

iii

(I

i

OOtrm

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8845

If you are going to throw In my face
what I said a quarter of a century a«o.
and say what I said then must be said
now. it Is going to be very difficult to get
ansrthlng done In a decent and logical
manner.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. CELLER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Maryland.

Mr. HYDE. Did I understand from
what the gentleman says that in his mind
it Is perfectly possible that the so-called
jury trial provision in this bill wiD not
stand the test of time?

Mr. CELLER. There are no specific
provisions for Jury trial in this bill. I
said yesterday that if there are abust.s
on the Issuance of injunctions, if this bill
passes. I would be the first to come hero
and endeavor to curb the powers of the
court just as I did 25 years ago. I think
trial by Jury will always stand the test of
time but that does not mean that you
have to have a trial by jury for every-
thing. I would say that most of the
wTonRS committed In this coimtry are
redressed without trial by jury. Con-
sider the multitudinous number of mis-
demeanors that are tried without juries.
I venture the assertion — I am givins: a
rough guess only — that 85 percent of the
wrongs are redressed with no trial by
Jury.

Mr. MATTHEWS. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.

<By unanimous consent fat the re-
quest of Mr. Long » . Mr. M.^tthews was
allowed to proceed for 5 additional
minutes. »

Mr. MATTHEWS. Mr. Chairman, t
am certainly grateful to the House for
permitting me this privilege and I wan:
you to knofv ftlao that I appreciate the
fair treatment that we from the Deep
South have received under the terms of
the debate. I only wish now that you
would take one more step and vote
sol idly with us and defeat this terrible
bill.

Mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to
the so-called civil-rights legislation. At
the outset of my remarks, I want to
refer to the statement made by the
gentleman from Michigan I Mr. Dices 1 —
and I quote from him on page 7780 of the
Record of June 10 this year — when he
said:

I can tell you about counties, for instance,
tn the State of Florida: Taylor. Madison.
Gadsden, and Jefferson Counties where
Negroes are not registered to vote.

Mr Chairman, anytime anyone men-
tions my district on the floor of this
House and he gives incorrect informa-
tion. I feel that it is my duty to give you
the facts. As I pointed out in my re-
marks on pace 7784 of the June 10 issue
of the Record this year, immediately
after the gentleman from Michigan [Mr,
Dices i made his statement about my dis-
trict. I went to the telephone and talked
to the editor of the Madison County
paper. Mr. Curry Merchant. Jr., and
asked him to give me information about
the number of Negro citizens registered
in Madison County. He told me there
were nearly 1.000 Negroes registered in
Madison County. Fla., and that many,

many hundreds of them voted In the
election laat year. Since that time. I
have found that the exact registration
In 1956 of Negro voters In Madison
County was 945. Now this county haa
a population of 14.000. with a white
registration in 1966 of 5.272. The fact
that there were more white registra-
tions in proportion to the total popula-
tion than Negro registrations does not
have a thing in the world to do, Mr.
Chairman, with civil rights. It has to
do with the desire of people to become
registered and go to the polls to cast
their ballots. I repeat again that Madi-
son County, Pla.. respects the rights of
Its fine Negro citizens, and I resent any
incorrect information that Is given to
this House to the contrary.

I .should like to point out that the
centleman from Michigan mentioned
Taylor County, the only other county of
the four he mentioned in Florida which
is in my Congressional district, as a
county that does not have any Negro
citizens registered. I have verified the
records and find that in 1956 there were
77 Negroes registered in Taylor County,
which indicates again that samctx)dy Is
giving the proponents of this terrible
legislation some information that to say
the least is not wholly accurate.

Now. Mr. Chairman. I want to point
out that although the proponents of this
legislation are in both parties, that op-
ponents also are in both parties. This
is a sectional problem. Every member
of the Republican Party from the Deep
South, and every member of the Demo-
cratic Party from the Deep South, is op-
posing this legislation. It Is my sincere
conviction that there will be no pohtical
advantage to be derived from supporting
this bill for either party. Yet I am just
as convinced as I can be that there will
be many votes cast for this bill because
of the belief that it will help get votes
in the ne.xt election.

Mr Chairman, many speakers have
commented on the nonemotional aspects
of this argument on civil-rights legisla-
tion, and Members have been congratu-
lated for toning down their emotions. I
am sure that you realize that this legis-
lation is pointed at the Deep South, and
naturally, those of us from that great
area of the country have difHculty In
toning down our emotions. There Is
implied in this legislation a charge
hurled at the Anglo-Saxon people of the
Southland that other Americans have
no confidence in our laws — you have no
confidence in our courts and juries — and
you feel that there should be super-duper
legislation passed giving the Federal
Government the right to supersede our
State courts.

This legislation is clearly In violation
of State rights, and the longer tenure I
have in Congress, the more amazed I am
to note the number of my colleagues
v.ho seemingly have no conception at all
of States rights. I admit that this
theory has sometimes been taken advan-
tage of In that too often we expect the
financial benefits of the Federal Govern-
ment to help our States, and we are not
willing to assume the responsibilities that
we should assume as States. However.
I want to emphasize, as I have done be-

fore, that to me the Jeffer«onlan concep-
tion of States rights is as sacred a con-
ception of the Constitution as any other
part of It. This Is a republic; we are a
sovereign nation composed of many sov-
ereign SUtes, and this Republic could
never have been created If the various
States had not submitted to its creation.
The difficulty of bringing together kin-
dred States with kindred feelings In a
commonwealth of nations Is graphically
Illustrated in our fight to obtain a Con-
stitution for ourselves in the colonial his-
tory of this country. In modem history
the great difficulty of the European na-
tions, with common cultures and back-
grounds, assuming even any kind of an
economic union, amply illustrates how
difficult It is to make the people of differ-
ent mores and traditions conform to one
tyrannical despotic standard Imposed by
a central government. Many facts point
to the great necessity of preserving the
rights of our States, and yet If this In-
iquitous legislation were passed, there
would be an appeal to Federal courts be-
fore local administrative remedies were
exhausted, and in fact, there would b«
every effort to encourage the direct par-
ticipation of the Attorney General and
the Federal Government in cases that
ought to be left to the adjudication of
local courts and juries.

This terrible proposed legislation
would make our Attorney General a Ge-
stapo agent, which let me emphasize to
you. would Xx the first time in the history
of America that that has been done. I
shudder ti} think of the great efforts that
both parties would make in the South-
land at the time of a general election to
convince certain pressure groups of the
parties' determination to win their votes
at all costs.

Mr. Chairman, I have previously In-
serted in the Record a legal argument
against this pror>osed legislation. I ap-
peared before the House Committee on
the Judiciary and protested this legis-
lation in the terms of that legal brief.
It Is not my purpose today to review that
material. The legal asijects of this
question have been thoroughly debated.
Surely even those who vote for this civil-
rights bill would give us in the South-
land the right of trial by jury, but as
far as I am concerned, a Federal court
armed with the power that would be
given If this legislation were passed
would be able to put southern citizens
in jail by contempt procedures In civil
cases. And whatever we think about the
fine points of law. basically the evil re- .
suits are retained In this bill.

I want to review some of the com-
ments that have been made about why
this legislation should be passed. F-or
several days I have read thoroughly
every speech In the Record and I find
this statement on the part of one of our
colleagues who urges that this bill be
passed, and said, "I urge that we con-
sult God." Now this would Imply
that those who are for this legislation
act better In the pattern of the Almighty
than those of us who oppose it. When
I first went to college I was preparing
for the ministry. I studied some the-
ology and some Greek. To be perfectly
frank, about the only Greek I remember

are some of the words In the Greek al-
phabet from alpha to zeta. both inclu-
sive. I do remember a little of my the-
ology and I have tried to retain an in-
terest in matters religious all my life.
I sny humbly that if you examine ob-
jectively the personal lives of those who
are in favor of this bill and then if you
examine in the same spirit of objectiv-
ity the lives of those who oppose this
bill. I believe it could be safely said that
those in opposition do not live less after
the pattern of the Almighty than those
who are proposing this legislation.

I think the most alarming statement
which has been repeated many times,
however, in behalf of this legislation. Is
the Idea that If we pass It, we can make
friends and Influence people, that we
can prove to the whole world that we
are a great democratic country fighting
for the rights of all our people. Here
are some of the quotations from recent
talks of our colleagues that argue for
this point of view :

Here is an opportunity to prove to the
world.

Let us make it perfectly clear to Russia, to
the world.

The Voice of America will also be jammed.

Impress the Communist world.

Our country Is trying to convince millions
of people across the world.

Communist propaganda will be directed at
the United States if we do not pass this bill.

Let us pass It as a signal to all the world.

Let us prove that we have kinship with
darker peoples of the world.

This bill will Increase the prestige of the
United States in the world.

Many times during this debate we have
heard emphasized this Idea that one
reason we ought to have civil-rights leg-
islation Is because It would Improve our
relations with the remainder of the
world. Speakers have stated that we
are criticized In other areas of the world
because of our discrimination against
certain races. Now. I do not doubt but
what some of our world travelers and
some of our newspaper reporters have
heard segments of foreign peoples criti-
cize us because of supposedly race dis-
crimination, but I doubt the validity of
any claim that maintains this is a prob-
lem as far as our relations with other
nations of the world are concerned.
For example, have we had a Gallup poll
in Africa to determine whether or not
that recently liberated continent feels
that race relations In America are a
paramount problem in maintaining good
relationships with Africa? How in the
world caa we have a valid poll repre-
senting the majority of the people of
Africa when it is my understanding
at>out 200 different dialects are spoken?
Africa does not even have a solid line of
communications. Or who among us has
taken a Gallup poll in India to ascertain
whether or not the people of that ancient
and venerable civilization feel that the
race problem in America is of chief con-
cern to them. Certainly India with Its
caste problem understands some of the
problems that America has. perhaps bet-
ter than any other nation In the world.
Or let us consider, please, the positions
of the various peoples in the Orient. Do
we have a valid Gallup poll In the Phil-
ippines, or in South Korea, or in Japan,

or In Formosa, to Indicate the fact that
if we Just had civil-rights legislation
everything would be hunkydory be-
tween the United States on the one hand
and these individual nations on the
other?

What I wish to emphasize, Mr. Chair-
man, is that if we are being sold on this
so-called civil-rights legislation because
of the fact that it will Influence people,
my feeling is that we are being not only
oversold, but we are being sold down the
river.

Just what does America have to do to
influence people? Give me. if you please,
the example of another great nation who
has been chiefly instrvunental in winning
two world wars and has not demanded
1 foot of territory as a result of vic-
tory. Yet. America poured here precious
blood and resources into the 2 recent
world conflicts and came out of it with a
debt approximating now $275 billion,
with a loss of hundreds of thousands of
the flower of her manhood and with vic-
tory, yet with not any semblance of ma-
terial gain. If we cannot make friends
because of this action of our American
people, what does it take to win friends
and influence people? Since that time,
Mr. Chairman, we have poured out over
$60 billion of our material resources to
the nations of the world to help them
help themselves. We have sent our man-
power into the areas of South Korea
when we took upon our shoulders largely
the responsibility of the Free World. In
facing final victory, we were halted by
the diplomacy of our allies from wirming
final victory and thus suffered an insult
to our national honor — unknown before
in all of our proud history. When we do
all this, and we have not sold ourselves
to the Free World as a friendly people,
what does it take to win friends and in-
fluence people?

Consider the recent events in Formosa.
The American Embassy was despoiled
and the precious Stars and Stripes was
hurled to the groimd. The official repre-
sentatives of our people were beaten and
himiiliated, and we have stood patiently
by because of our overwhelming desire
to be friendly. When we do all this, and
we have not been successful in giving the
other nations of the world a good im-
pression of us, Just what does it take to
win friends and influence people?

No, Mr. Chairman, the other nations
of the Free World are not too concerned
about civil-rights legislation in America
which is directed at the honor and in-
tegrity of the Deep South. There is one
possible exception — Communist Russia
is tremendously interested. They are
gleeful, their leaders are rollicking with
laughter because now through this dia-
bolical legislation we are dividing otu:
people, we are setting one section of the
country against the other, because it
should be emphasized again this is a
sectional problem. The pressure groups
who are pushing for this legislation
constantly refer to the South as the
battleground. So certainly Communist
Russia is very gleefully viewing this ter-
rible episode in Congress.

What do the other free nations of the
world want. Mr. Chairman? First of all.
many of them want just enough food to
feed their people. Tliere are over 1 bil-

lion people in ttie world today that do
not even get 3 square meals a day.
Do you think a billion people are inter-
ested in this civil-rights debate when
they are hungry, emaciated, starved?
I submit to you that for the majority
of these poor, imf ortunate people whose
friendship we are told we must win if we
win the cold war against Russia, have as
their chief concern Just getting food to
eat.

Greece wants Cyprus; France wants
peace in her empire; England wants
Nasser put in his place; many nations
want oiu- money, but not our advice;
Israel wants navigation rights in the
Suez; the deported Arabs want a
home. These needs are . so urgent I
doubt that in the minds of these people
this debate takes precedence.

The spirit of the day in nations
throughout the world is nationalism.
Those in our country and through the
years have preached the only way for
the salvation of the world is for America
to give up her form of government and to
dilute it with some kind of a world gov-
ernment organization would do well to
note the overwhelming surge of national-
ism . The nations who have J ust emerged
from colonial powers want technological
advances just as America has them.
They want our machinery, they want our
know-how, they want oiu: standard of
living. They are in a hurry, and I think
they are more concerned about these
things than they about the internal prob-
lehis of America. Some of these nations,
I am sorry to say, Mr. Chairman, want
our money without any responsibility.
They resent even a suggestion on our
part as to how they should spend our
money. But above everjrthing else, they
want to run their business Just as exact-
ly as they want to run it — and I think
I have every right to assume they would
have no respect for the United States of
America unless we ran our business just
as Americans want to nm it.

I say then, Mr. Chairman, that to try
to sell this iniquitous piece of legisla-
tion on the basis of the fact that it will
help us win friends and influence people
is Incorrect.

This so-called civil-rights legislation is
iniquitous because it establishes a prece-
dent of going to the Federal courts with-
out flrst exhausting local legal remedies;
it makes of the Attorney General of the
United States a possible Gestapo agent;
it violates the proper conception of States
rights; and in fact, will lead to the entire
destruction of States rights; it is im-
necessary because there are sufficient
laws on the statute books to deal with
civil-rights problems; and this bill is
aimed at one section of the country, the
great Southland which I represent and
which I think has set a high standard for
the remainder of the Nation to follow In
Its earnest endeavor to Improve the op-
portunities of our people of all races and
creeds.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Obobs, of Iowa:
"On page 1, strike out all of the language
beginning with line 8 through line 10. and
on page 2 all of the language beginning with
line 1 and continuing through line 18."

i

i -

1

11^

884^

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

Mr. GR068. Mr. Chairman. I am
sure that erery Member of the House
has read this blB and knows what this
amendment would do. I should like to
have offered an amendment to strike
out all of title I. but I am convinced
that would have been subject to a point
of order.

•ntle I deals with the establishment of
still another commission In Government
and vested with extraordinary powers,
I may say. I am prepared. If this
amendment Is adopted, to offer further
amendments to strike out all of the sec-
tions which deal with the establishment
of the commission. US' position with re-
spect to more commissions and assistant
attorneys general, assistant secretaries
and assistants to assistants, is well
established. I am opposed to the crea-
tion of more boards, bureaus, commis-
sions, assistant secretaries and assist-
ants to assistants In this Government.
We have them falling all over them-
selves now at heavy cost to the taxpay-
ers. The Department of Justice, to
which we appropriate millions of dollars
each year, has ample facilities and
plenty of money to take care of this
situation.

I have said that extraordinary powers
would be granted to this commission
and I am sure that those of you who
have read this bill know of these ex-
traordinary powers. For instance, this
commission reports to whom? It is a
creature of Congress, but to whom does
it report? To the President of the
United States. Not to the Congress that
creates the commission. I could go on
and enumerate the extraordinary powers
this commission would have.

I do not intend to do so, because all
of you have read the bill and you all
know the powers contained therein. I
have no intention of taking the time to
belabor the amendment. I am opposed
to the establishment of a new and ex-
pensive commission. I hope the amend-
ment will be adopted,

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Chairman. I rise
in support of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment
at the desk in form identical with the
amendment now under debate. As the
gentleman pointed out, we normally
would have to await the full reading of
the section, but if this amendment pre-
vails of course the net effect of it is to
delete part I from the bill.

Part I of the bill would establish a
Civil Rights Commission in the execu-
tive branch of the Government. If that
is the real purpose behind it. there is no
reed for this section at all because the
President of the United States already
has the power to establish a commission
in the executive branch of the Govern-
ment. The truth of the matter is that
former President Truman established a
Commission on Civil Rights in the execu-
tive branch of the Government. Presi-
dent Eisenhower established in the exec-
utive branch of the Government a Com-
mission on Education.

Why, then. Is this proposal before the
Congress? That Is one of the bugs of
the bill. The reason, and the only legal
reason, why they bring the matter to
the Congress Is in order to get subpena
power. The President can establish a

commission In the executive branch of
the Government but he cannot grant
subpena power. So the most Important
and vital part of this part ot the bill Is
the subpena power.

The idea is to give this commission the
power of cross-examination, the power
to bring books and records before the
commission, the power to hail people, In-
cluding ministers of the Gospel, by the
way. in the fashion the bill \b drafted,
across State lines, there to submit them-
selves to cross-examination, and open
up their books and personal papers; and
perhaps, and no doubt, It would resiilt
in a contempt proceeding, so that a man
hailed from one State to another, offend-
ing the commission, could be tried away
from home before a strange Federal
judge and without a trial by jury.

The Commission would be given au-
thority to investigate allegations that
people are being deprived of their right
to vote on account of color, race, reli-
gion, and national origin. I do not know
about the testimony on the Senate side,
for I have enough trouble trying to fol-
low the hearings on the House side, but I
think my chairman, the gentleman from
New York [Mr. CtllmI. will concede that
on the House side at least there was
no testimony that people were being
deprived of their right to vote on
account of religion. The proponents
of the bill point out that the real
reason for the bill is to protect the
right to vote — to further scciu-e and to
protect the right to vote. If that is
true, if that is the real reason for the
bill, you already have laws on the books,
both criminal and civil, protecting the
right to vote. But. in addition to that,
parts n. ni. and IV deal with civil
rights and deal directly with the right
to vote, for example. So. hearing the
testimony, the majority of the commit-
tee already reported out legislation; so
what possible work is there left for the
commission to do? We already have
parts n, m. and IV on the subject of
the protection of the right to vote. Now
the bill says the reason for the commis-
sion is to investigate allegations that
people are being deprived of their right
to vote. Under the provisions of parts
n. m. and rv that allegation is assiuned
to be true. The majority is satisfied
with the legislation that is already pro-
posed; so we would be creating a use-
less commission, and the only reason for
coming to the Congress is to grab the
subpena power.

Mr. Chairman. I hope the amendment
will be defeated.

Mr. BOYLE. Mr. Chairman. I rise in
opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman. I am sorry that I have
to take issue with my good friend and
fellow member of the Committee on the
Judiciary regarding the absence of any
proof in the hearings on the House side
to the effect that there was evidence of
intimidation.

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. BOYLE. I am glad to yield,

Mr. WILLIS. I said that to my
knowledge I did not know of any testi-
mony in the record before the House
dealing with proof or even indicating
that people are being deprived of the

right to vote on account of rellgloa 1
would like the gentleman to address
himself to that, and for my Informa-
tion— for my serious Information — to
indicate at this point in the record the
passage In the House committee report
on that subject.

Mr. BOYLE. In answer to the gen-
tleman, within the 5 minutes I have
under the rules, I do not have the time
to go through not only this volume of
testimony that was elicited In the 85th
Congress, but also to the testimony ad-
duced In the 84th Congress. As a mem-
ber of the clvll-rlghU subcommittee In
the 84th Congress, and I beard all kinds
of testimony to that effect. I think. If
the gentleman goes Into the record, at
least of the 84th Congress, you will find
there ample and sufficient testimony to
satisfy the Inaccuracy of your observa-
tion.

Mr. Chairman, now let us get back to
the question of whether or not. as we
stand here today, there is a need for this
commission.

In answer to the amendment. I might
say to the gentleman from Iowa [Mr.
Gioss] that, although a Republican, he
Is not In sympathy with President Eisen-
hower's thinking regarding the necessity
of the establishment of this commission.
The record is replete with evidence that
the Republican administration feels
there is an absolute need for such a
commission, and I say that I. too. feel
there is need for such a commission. If
the commission did nothing more than
give the right of subpena. it would be
ample reason and justification for its
existence, because no commission set up
by the President himself, without an act
of Congress, would have that very valu-
able and necessary device.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, wlU the
gentleman yield?

Mr. BOYLE. In Just a minute, I will
yield, since I mentioned the gentleman's
name. Going back to the proposition,
you need subpena power to compel peo-
ple to come before the committee. You
need subpena powers so that these peo-
ple who are in fear of being intimidated
might come and testify before the com-
mittee. Notions of subpena power or no-
tions of committees having the right to
Investigate, run down the whole gamut
of the administration procedures. Every
one of the commissions, without excep-
tion, has at least broad subpena powers.
This regulatory body that we are setting
up has some geographical limitations,
whereas most of the others do not.

I now srleld to the gentleman from
Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. Did the gentleman say I
was not in sympathy with the President,
or something to that effect?

Mr. BOYLE. No. I said out of sym-
pathy with this recommendation of the
President, setting up a commission.

Mr. GROSS. But I am In sympathy.

Mr. BOYLE. Oh, certainly; and I am
too.

Mr. GROSS. Just a minute. I am in
sympathy with the taxpayers of this
country. Will the gentleman tell me
what this Commission will cost the tax-
payers?

Mr. BOYLE. I would be the last one
to represent to the gentleman that I was

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8847

under the Impression that It would not
cost anything, because the realism of
this bill is that it is going to cost some-
thing. But how in the name of heaven
can you use an argument of a mere sum
of money for enforcement against dep-
rivation of the rights of free people to
their security, to their liberty, and to
their right to vote? If you sisk is this
bill going to cost some money and if so
we are not goir^ to pass it, I say do not
stand idly by because it is going to cost
some money. Inaction does not solve the
problem.

Mr. GROSS. Ca i the gentleman give
us a rough estimate of what these $350-
a-week commissioners, plus all their
retinue, plus the other 15 people they
are going to name to some kind of an
advisory committee, plus everything that
goes with it. is going to cost?

Mr. BOYLE. The gentleman asks a
very fair question, and I would love to
answer It. The testimony was that the
Attorney General did not think it was
going to cost a great deal because they
had enough personnel that would be able
to handle this phase of activity.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Botli] has
expired.

(By unanimous consent, at the request
of Mr. Yates. Mr. Boyli was granted 5
additional minutes.)

Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. BOYLE. I yield.

Mr. YATES. Does not the gentleman
believe that the purposes of this bill are
of sulBcient importance to warrant the
expense which is Involved?

Mr. BOYLE. I would say that, within
reasonable limitations, that is very true.
I know the gentleman from Iowa [Mr.
Gross 1 feels somewhat like I do. that
probably In a conceptual situation there
is almost enough law on the statute books
to take care of all offenses in this very
particular area, if everybody tried to
exhaust the potentialities of existing
law.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOYLE. I yield.

Mr. ABERNETHY. In his opening re-
marks the gentleman said that a num-
ber of people of a certain religious faith
In the South were denied the right to
vote because of their faith. Will the
gentleman tell the House what faith he
was referring to?

Mr. BOYLE. There is evidence of
denial because religion was not mutually
exclusive and It applies to more than I
of the 4 or 5 major faiths, as I recall the
testimony in the 84th Congress.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Who gave the tes-
timony?

Mr. BOYLE. I cannot recall. I do
not have that record here, but I promise
the gentleman when I get an opportunity
I will research the committee testimony
of the 84th Congress, and I will be happy
to favor him with the page and testimony
haec verba.

Mr. ABERNETHY. And the ntunes
of witnesses and the people Involved.

Mr. BOYLE. That is right.

Mr. ABERNETHY. I would appre-
ciate that information. I have been
waiting to get It for several days.

Mr. NICHOLSON. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOYLE. I shield to the gentleman
from Massachusetts.

Mr. NICHOLSON. What is there to
stop the Atttomey General from prose-
cuting an Indlvldfial now for efforts to
violate the election laws?

Mr. BOYLE. I do not think there is
anything, but I do want to say that as
far as my understanding of the present
statutory law is concerned, it becomes
real hard for neighbors to put teeth
into those conspiratorial statutes by
prison sentences and most often you do
not get a chance to act imtil the elec-
tion has been held. In that case you
find yotirself prosecuting an alleged fel-
ony in July, August, or Christmas, that
was committed in a previous November,
or possibly in the primary months of
the preceding election.

Mr. NICHOLSON. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman jrleld further?

Mr. BOYLE. I yield.

Mr. NICHOLSON. What we are do-
ing is passing a bill through this Con-
gress which just tells the Attorney
General he can do in the future what
he can do now if he wants to apply the
law which is already on the statute
books.

Mr. BOYLE. That is a good obser-
vation, but I think this bill does
something different. It substitutes rem-
edies, although using almost the same
words or about the same language. It
provides a civil remedy and the purpose
of a civil remedy I think will be to firm
up the guaranties under the 15th
amendment.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Illinois has again ex-
pired.

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in support of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I am heartily in favor
of this amendment. Let me tell you some
of the reasons why.

The executive department has all au-
thority necessary to set up any executive
commission the Executive might desire.
If we are going to set up another com-
mission, I ask you why should we abdi-
cate? Why should we set up a Presi-
dential commission when the President
has complete authority to do it for him-
self?

And if you are going to set up a com-
mission why in this world do you not
accept my challenge of yesterday? Why
do you not defeat this bill and set up a
Congressional investigating committee?
You are the ones who are charged with
making the laws of this country. You
are the ones who are going to be respon-
sible to the voters in this country. I ask
you In simple justice, if you have got to
have a commission, why not a Congres-
sional commission? The gentleman
from Illinois [Mr. Boyle] Just got up
here, and he is in favor of this legislation,
but as a lawyer he tells you you have
already got all the laws on the books
that you need to enforce civil rights
where you have any righteous complaint.
But if you are going to have a commis-
sion anyway, why do you not accept my
challenge? Why do you not give us a
commission right here In the Congress?
Why do you not put it on television?

Why do you not let the people back home
hear it and why do you not let them see?
Are you afraid? Oh, how I would like
to meet you over there, I would like to
meet the NAACP, and all of the rest of
those boys and put them under oath.
The kind of commission you have here is
silly. Not a single witness will be xmder
oath, did you know that? They can lie
with impugnity. You are Inviting lies,
you are inviting perjury, you are inviting
false swearing. It is a sad commentary
upon the Congress of the United States.

Mr. BOYLE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. FORRESTER. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Illinois.

Mr. BOYLE. Is it a fact I served with
the gentleman In the 84th Congress in
coimection with this very bill?

Mr. FORRESTER. The truth of the
matter is that the gentleman and myself
are in harmony on most everything ex-
cept this and I hope I can get him in
harmony on this one.

Mr. BOYLK I want to say for the
benefit of the record that the gentleman
in the well of the House is a very fine
lawyer. I should like to make the fur-
ther observation at no time during all
of the hearings did he come forward
with a suggestion that maybe we ought
to attach to the procedure as it refers
to this committee the oath and the cross-
examination features.

Mr. FORRESTER. My friend Is a
mighty fine individual until you say "civil
rights." Then he gets beside himself. I
tried my best to tell the gentleman, but
you would not let me tell you. You
sealed my lips over there. You would
not let me bring in witnesses, you
would not let me do anything. You did
not consider this bill 2 hours and the
gentleman knows it.

Now I want to tell you why you are
putting a commission In this bill.

Mr. BOYLE. The gentleman did not
answer my question in the first place,
and, secondly, does he mean to tell the
House now that we never considered this
bill for more than 2 hours in the 84th
Congress?

Mr. FORRESTER. I certainly do
mean to tell you that. I told you that
last year, I told you on the floor, and I
tell you again today, and the Record will
prove it.

Mr. BOYLE. I do not know, but I
think the gentleman and I were in many
sessions there a long, long time. Wheth-
er he wants to put a different Interpre-
tation on it I do not know, but I know
very well I was in attendance hour after
hour and days and days. If the gentle-
man will recall, on 3 or 4 occasions I was
the Individual who requested the Attor-
ney General, Mr. Brownell to come
before the subcommittee and give us the
advantage of his thinking.

Mr. FORRESTER. I do not mean to
tell you the hearings were only 2 hours.
I do say the legislation was not con-
sidered 2 hoiu^. That reminds me. You
know, I asked Mr. Brownell three times
In the 84th Congress. He would not
come over until you were ready to re-
port H. R. 627. It Is purely political.
It was only when It appeared that the
Celler bill would be reported that he
showed any interest whatever.

II

ill

11^ i

li

I'
t\'.

.1

8848

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Oeorgla has expired.

(By unanimous consent (at the re-
quest of Mr. HALrr ) Mr. PoMism was

allowed to proceed for 5 additional
minutes.)

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Chairman,
here Is what I was about to say. Thla
Is a sad day In America. For the first
time In the history of America you have
started legislating on religion, and that
should be enough to stop this Commis-
sion in its tracks.

Mr. ABKRNBTHY. Mr. Chairman,
win the gentleman yield?

Mr. FORRESTER. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Mississippi.

Mr. ABERNBTTHY. I have been try-
ing for several days to find out what
people It is or what religious faiths have
been discriminated against. That Is
what this bill Is driving at. Now. did
the gentleman hear any testimony to the
effect that any person of any particular
faith was being denied the right to vote
because of his faith? Did the gentle-
man hear any testimony to that effect?
Mr. FORRESTER. Let me answer
thi.'! categorically. It Is a mythical Issue,
mythical witnesses. I heard all that
evidence, and I tell you — you can get the
record and see — that there is not one
scintilla of testimony that anybody has
been discriminated against on account
of their religion. It is positively a fact
that not one person testified there had
been anywhere any discrimination in
the right to vote because of religion.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Well, if that Is
true, then what is the object of this being
In the bin? Is It an attempt to butter
up some group of people In the country?
If so, what group?

Mr. FORRESTER. That Is right;
nothing but kowtowing to the minority
groups, and the majority of the minority
groups do not want it. Do you know
who called my attention to this? One
of the greatest lawyers In Georgia, who
Is a Hebrew friend of mine. He said to
me. **Tlc, for God's sake dont let the
people of America start arguing and
fighting over relip'on."

Mr. ABERJJETHY. Well, that Is the
only statement that the gentleman has
heard on that point, then?

Mr. FORRESTER. That was not In
committee. There was nothing In the
hearings. His statement was made to
me in my office.

Mr. ABERMETHY. Did not the com-
mittee first take this out of the bill?

Mr. FORRESTER. Of course they
took it out. and they took it out after
my Hebrew friend, Hon. Charles Bloch,
got up there before the subcommittee
and just laughed it out. He said.
"How in the world are you going to
square it with the first amendment?"
Do you know who took it out? The
seven gentlemen constituting that sub-
committee, and the nearest one to the
South was either Ohio or New Jersey.
They took It out because they are good
lawyers.

Mr. ABERNETHY. And then It was,
put back?

Mr. FORRESTER. It was put back
in an innocuous sort of way. This la
Upserrice. It is not going to hurt ex-

cept where you are bringing religion In,
and I hate to see it come in.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Will it not Just
make things worse If the situation la
bad. and I do not agree that the situa-
tion Is. I do not t)elieve the situa-
tion exists that they are attempting to
correct.

Mr. FORRESTER. You are now fix-
ing to start trouble.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Why. of course.

Mr. FORRESTER. Because if a man
ts looking for some sort of remedy,
it is amazing how he can discover
certain things that he never thought of
before. Yea, you are fixing to get into
trouble now. This has been a land of
religious freedom, but what you are fix-
ing to do, you are fixing to do something
now that you will wish to God you had
not started.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FORRESTER. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Illinois.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. As a trial law-
yer. I am sure the gentleman is an able
trial lawyer, and we are all interested in
getting a fair and Impartial trial when
we are handling a lawsuit, whether It be
criminal or civil. Now. in your State or
your district, what Is the method of sum-
moning a venire of Jurors, whether it be
in the Federal court or some other
court? How do they do it?

Mr. FORRESTER. Why, they draw
them out of the Jury box.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. How do they
arrange the Jury box? What determines
the names that go into the Jury box?

Mr. FORRESTER. What did the gen-
tlemen say?

Mr. BYRNE of Ulinola. What deter-
mines what names go Into the Jury box?
Do you have a system of Jury commis-
sioners or who are the people that deter-
mine who the Jury men and women are
to be?

Mr. FORRESTER. That is right, and
I am glad my friend brought that up.
You get your hst.

Mr. BYRNE of minoia. What Is the
answer to my question?

Mr. FORRESTER. What is your
questloQ? You have not asked a ques-
tion.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. I certainly
have asked a direct question.

Mr. FORRESTER. Well, ask me
again.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. All right.
What determines who are the men and
women whose names go Into the Jury
box?

Mr. FORRESTER. I told you. The
Jury commissioners.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. You did not
tell me an3rthlng yet.

Mr. FORRESTER. I told you the
commission. They are the ones who
determfne that. Let me tell you another
thing.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. Complete your
answer and answer the first thing first.
You have a registrar, is tiiat right?

Mr. FORRESTER. That is right. A
Jury commissioner.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. One or more?

Mr. FORRESTER. I think there are
five. I am not sure.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinoia. You think
there are five?

Mr. FORRESTER. Yes.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. How long
have you been practicing law in your
community?

Mr. FORRESTER. WeU. I was in the
practice of law 30 years, and I won a
whole lot more than I lost, and I will
be glad to meet you in the courtroom any
time you want to.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. Back in my
community I won them, too. because I
only represented the innocent if they
had enough money to hire me.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Foaaas-
Tsil has again expired.

Mr. BOYLE. Mr. Chairman. I ask
unanimous consent that the gentleman
may proceed for an additional 5 min-
utes.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objec-
tion, it is so ordered.

There was no objection.

Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FORRESTER. I am glad to yield
to the distinguished gentleman from
Georgia.

Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. Mr. Chair-
man. I do not think the gentleman from
Georgia In the well understood the ques-
tion of the gentleman from UUnoU IMr.
BYRital.

Mr. FORRESTER. He wanted me to
answer It his way.

Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. I would Uke
to give him the details. In Georgia we
have 5 commisEioners who are appointed
by the superior court Judge. Brery 3
years they revise the Jury boxes, which
are the grand Jury boxes and the petit
Jury boxes. When the Jurors are to be
drawn, the Judge of the superior court
tells the clerk of the court who keeps
the boxes sealed and locked in his office
all the time, to bring them into open
court, into the courtroom and there the
clerk, the sheriff and the Judge open
those boxes, in open court and draw
out the names. The sheriff reaches into
the box and pulls a name out. He hands
It to the Judge. The Judge reads It. The
clerk records the name on the list right
there, where everybody can see and hear
what Lb being done.

Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. FORRESTER. I yield to the gen-
tleman.

Mr. HOFFMAN. Will the gentleman
from Illinois tell us how they get them
In Chicago when they are trying the
Capone gang?

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. Yes: the gen-
tleman from Michigan [Mr. HottmamI
raises a very good question. I come from

an area

Mr. FORRESTER. Please answer the
question briefly, as it is on my time.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. I shall be
glad to make it as brief as I can. In
Chicago they talk about "blue ribbon
Juries." You ought to put that in quota-
tion marks — ^"blue ribbon Juries"— be-
cause I do not think you can get a fair
and Impartial trial In that way. The
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Horr-
MAwJ asks how we get them in the Ca-
pone case. They send out to the post-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8849

masters and say, "Bend in half a doaen
jurors." or something to that effect
They ask for Jurors to tolunteer their
services in these so-ealled "blue ribbon
juries," but you cannot get a fair and
impartial trial anywhere in the United
States of America in that way.

Mr. HOFFMAN. Well, that is Chi-
cago.

Mr. FORREBTTER. Mr. Chairman,
may I make this observation? I want
to tell you something else about the
voters' list That is made a month or
2 months before election day. There is
no excuse in the world for one waiting
around to the eve of the election to ap-
peal to the courts for his rights unless he
is crooked. You see. this Is Just what
this legislation Is going to do. They are
naturally going to wait until the eve of
the election to come In and enjoin your
elections and destroy your election proc-
esses. I know that

Mr. HALEY. Mr. Chairman. wlD the
gentleman jrield?

Mr. FORRESTER. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Florida.

Mr. HALEY. For the Information of
the gentleman who was inquiring about
how jurors are selected may I say that
in my great State of Florida the Jury
commission, as we call it, is recom-
mended by the board of county commis-
sioners: and I might say they are all
Republicans at this Um^, men appointed
by the Governor of the State. I might
say also that 25 years ago in Florida we
had Negro Jurors serving on Juries and
their names were in the box from which
the names of jurors are drawn. Those
are taken from the registration rolls of
the county in which the people reside.
And there is no discrimination because
of race, color or creed.

Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. FORRESTER. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Georgia.

Mr. LANHAM. That was the point
that I intended to make and that is
what I think the gentleman from Illi-
nois [Mr. Bmifsl was trying to deter-
mine. In the State of Georgia, too, Ne-
groes are in the Jury box at every term
of court and serve both on the grand
Jury and the petit Jury.

Recently, Just a few years ago. the
FBI sent some snoopen down Into one
county of mine. Cobb County, alleging
that Negroes were not in the Jury box
there. After they sent the FBI down
there suggesting that they better not try
this Negro rapist who had been con-
victed and sentenced to die, and whose
sentence had been reversed on some
technicality by the Supreme Court, and
after snooping around and suggesting
that he not be tried again, he was
again tried and was convicted. They
found out that the Jury commissioners in
this county were not guilty of any dis-
crimination whatever and entirely
cleared them on the only charge that
was made against them.

Mr. FORRESTER. Yes. May I say to
the gentleman that the Supreme Court
reversed the case, saying you had dis-
criminated. Mr. Bnnmell sent his offi-
cers down there in order to persecute
you. Tlien he told the House Judiciary

cm 657

Committee he had Investigated and
found out it was not so.

Mr. LANHAM. Exactly.

Mr. FORRESTER. So you had the
Supreme Court saying you did and the
Justice Depcuiment saying you did not

Mr. L.ANHAM. That is right.

Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise In
favor of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, last Sunday a week ago
in a very historic telecast the boss <rf the
Communist Party in Russia took to the
American air and television waves to an-
swer certain questions propounded to
him by American Journalists. This man.
obTloualy a dedicated Communist had a
great deal to say. all Communist propa-
ganda. One of the things he said was
that our grandchildren would live under
commtmlam. He went on further to say
in Justification of this statement that
communism represented the way of the
future, that his system, the Russian sys-
tem, was the new system, and that as
otb&r systems had vanished from the face
of the earth our American system would
Tanlsh and would gire way to this alleged
new system.

I know that many answers are being
made to Mr. Khrushchev. I know that to
any American, who has the slighted
knowledge of Americanism or the slight-
est appreciation of the great system un-
der which we live, the Khrushchev state-
ments on their face are palpable lies, be-
cause if there is any modem system on
the face of this globe whereby men de-
termine the affairs of their fellowmen.
It is the system under which we as free
Americans live and breathe.

What Mr. Khrushchev does not seem
to imderstand Is that his system, his
Communist sjrstem. Is probably the most
reactionary system that ever existed on
God's earth; that within it is Incorpo-
rated all of the tsrranny ever known to
mankind; and that in contrast thereto
our system, the American system, is the
most revolutionary thing that ever oc-
curred to mankind. Now why is this?
Well. I think It Is because of Just a few
fundamental considerations. When our
forefathers. God bless them, had the
coiuvge to sit down and write our Con-
stitution and to draft our Bill of Rlghfes.
they did something which was revolu-
tionary then, which is revolutionary now,
and which is much more vital to the fu-
ture of mankind than all of the reaction-
ary devices that communism could ever
conceive of. Why? Why is our system,
why ts our American system the most
dynamic force on the face of God's earth?
Because, in my Judgment, and I think la
the Jodgm^it ot every student of history
and of any student of philosophy. It frees
the strength and power of men by giving
them dignity and freedom.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Louisiana has expired.

Mr. HOGGS. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that I may proceed
tor S additional minutes.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. Mr. Chalr»
man. I object.

Mr. BOGGS. I thank tlie gentleman
very much.

Mr. LONG. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous ctmsent that I may proceed
for 6 minutes.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. Mr. Chair-
man, I withdraw my objection.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Illinois witiidraws his objection.
Without objection, the gentleman from
I.ftii<itia.na. may proceed for 5 additional
minutes.

Mr. BOGGS. I appreciate the reason
for the gentleman objecting. This ts by
way of digression, but I might say to
the gentleman from Illinois. I have the
highest respect for every Member in this
body. I know uhy the gentlemau ob-
Jec^^d to my request because back here
a few weeks ago when we were debating
the appropriation bill for the Depart-
ment oi Health, Education, and Wel-
fare, the gentleman made some refer-
ence which I am certain was inadvertent
and was not intended to be persotud to
the distinguished gentleman from
Rhode Island [Mr. FogarttI, about his
profession, and I, at that time, objected
to the gentleman proceeding further. I
can assure the gentleman I have nothing
but the highest regard and respect for
him, and I appreciate the gentleman
withdrawing his objection, and I thank
him very much.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOGGS. I yield.

Mr. BYRNE of Illinois. At that time
I was mpjring my maiden talk as a fresh-
man, and I appreciate yoin* kind words
and I have the utmost respect for the
gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. BOGGS. I thank the gentleman
very much.

Mr. Chairman, to pick up what I was
saying, I think what we have done in
oiu- country has been the most revolu-
tionary thing in the world because we
have given our people a climate of free-
dom where they can grow. This climate
of freedom has made our country the
greatest Naticm In history; has guided
our Nation from its early agrarian days
to its present position of indusMal
power.

We have done this despite the fact
that many of the things that we mrxln-
taln are for the moment not popular.
All al you know that several of our
original States would not J<rin this UOion
untU we had ratified the Bin of lUarhts.

The BiU of Rights are very reaL They
exist, and they work every day. These
rights exist not aoij for p(H?ular move-
ments or for things that appeal to most
of us, but for the things that are diffi-
cult and hard to take. For instance, all
<a jrou know, and all erf you get mail
every day saying, "Why do you not do
something about the fifth amMutanent?"
When a Communist cranes before a com-
mittee of the House or the Senate, or
when some oth^ person comes before
a committee and will not even say who
his father Is, and pleads the fifth amend-
ment. If we bow to a particular Gallup
poll at the very moment imder particu-
lar clrcnmstances, beUeve me, we could
resubmit the fifth amendment and ttae
fifth amendment ml^it be repealed.
God forbid.

lliere are so many other instances at
these rights being part of our lives.
Sometimes we go home and we turn on
the radio, and It is November aad some
f ellov Is running against us asA, ob

J^

I

III

r

V'

j i

8850

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

brother, the things he can think of to say
about us, and we do not like it a bit.
Down deep inside so many of us say.
"Why should that fellow be allowed to
get up and say such things?" Or we
might pick up a newspaper, and there we
read an editorial with which we vio-
lently disagree. Or we might know of a
religious sect or a religious group whose
concept of worshiping our Master differs
entirely from our own, and may even
be reprehensible to us. but because of
the Biil of Rights, because of the guaran-
teed liberties to Americans, that man
continues to make that radio speech
against me or against any of you. and the
editorialist continues, and as long as he
lives within the realm of the law of libel
and slander, the American system func-
tions.

Mr. COLMER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield briefly?

Mr. BOGGS. I wUl be glad to yield
to the gentleman from Mississippi.

Mr. COLMER. The gentleman refers
to those who plead the fifth amendment
and contempt of the Congress of the
United States. Is it not a fact that even
those people whom the gentleman says
the Gallup poll would deny that right
possibly, even those people now have the
right of trial by Jury, under the law of
the United States?

Mr. BOGGS. Yes. sir; that is correct.
That is why I think that any thinking
Member of this body will hesitate a long
time before he votes against the amend-
ment providing trial by Jury.

Mr. BOYLE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. BOGGS. Certainly I yield to the
gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. BOYLE. Is it not true that in the
question Just put to you it has been made
a crime by statute, and that is why you
are entitled to a trial by Jury?

Mr. BOGGS. Now the gentleman Is a
lawyer, and he is a good lawyer, and I
have the greatest respect in the world
for the gentleman. I would not even at-
tempt to put my very little knowledge of
constitutional law against the gentle-
mans, but I would say in reply to the
gentleman, the question is in the nature
ot what happens to the individual. If I
am hauled into a Federal court, and I am
charged with contempt of that court, say
it is a civil contempt, and therefore, un-
der the Attorney Generals interpreta-
tion. I am not entitled to a trial by jury,
what ultimately happens to me?

The judge might send me to jail time
and time again. I do not know, and I
wish the gentleman would answer for me.
what rights do I lose thereby?

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Louisiana has again ex-
pired.

(By unanimous consent Mr. Boggs was
allowed to proceed for 5 additional min-
utes. )

Mr. BOGGS. I would Uke to ask the
gentleman from Illinois this question:
If I am sentenced to a year and a day for
violation of a court order, let us say the
order of the Eastern District Court of the
State of Louisiana, and I am sent to the
Federal penitentiary in Atlanta for a
year and a day. do I lose my civil rights?
Am I able to vote when I return home?

Or am I in exactly the same category
had I served a year and a day as a felon?

Mr. BOYLE I do not know Just what
the law of the gentleman's home State
of Louisiana provides in that case.

Mr. BOGGS. I am talking about Fed-
eral law; I am not talking about 8tat«
law.

Mr. BOYLE. That was not in the hy-
pothesis that the gentleman gave me. and
I do not know.

Mr. BOGGS. Oh. no; the hypothesis
I gave was the violation of an injunction
under the provisions of this bill, and I
was sentenced to over a year in the Fed-
eral penitentiary for the contempt with-
out trial by Jury.

Mr. BOYLE. In that hypothesis
where there is not a felony and you are
put in Jail for contempt of an injunction
writ I would say "No."

Mr. BOGGS. The gentleman does not
know?

Mr. BOYLE. I say categorically "No."

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield ''

Mr. BOGGS. I would be very happy
to yield for enlightenment.

Mr. BOYLE. There is no loss of citi-
zenship or the right to vote under an ad-
judication when one ts found in con-
tempt of court.

Mr. HAYS of Ohio. I would Just like
to point out another facet of the gentle-
man's speech in which he was talking
about Mr. Khrushchev and the Soviet
Union. I would just like to point out
that according to my understanding
there is no such thing as trial by Jury
in the Soviet Union, it is virtually un-
known, as far as I know.

Mr. BOGGS. I do not know, but I
think there is no such thing as trial by
Jury in Russia or any other Communist
country.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. BOGGS. Certainly I yield to the
chairman of the committee.

Mr. CELLER. I have checked on some
of the commitment statutes in various
States. In the gentleman's own State
we find this to be the law :

Every court hM Inherent powers to enforce
the orders which It ha« power to render, and
to punish as belntf a contempt every Inter-
ference with or disobedience of lis processes
or orders as well as every act.

Mr. BOGGS. My time Is limited: I
cannot yield further.

Mr. CELLER. Let me finish now.
Then it goes on to another title:

'District courts civil and criminal
cases in contempt."

Mr. BOGGS. I thank the gentleman
but this power is very limited in the
courts. My recollection is that the
maximum sentence is 10 days, applied in
very limited situations.

Mr. CELLER. There is no Jury trial
in the gentleman's State. I want to say.

Mr. BOGGS. Let me proceed, please.

Mr. CELLER. I only want to empha-
size the fact that in the gentleman's
State there is no jury trial.

Mr. BOGGS. I thank the gentleman.
He is talking about 2 or 3 different things.
Actually, as I understand the gentle-
man's proposal here — and. mind you. I
am not the constitutional lawyer the gen-

tleman Is and other members of the Ju-
diciary Committee are— but actually,
what you are trying to do Is extend the
equity concept In the power of the courts
to this concept of mass contempt. From
the point of view of what happens to the
Individual, maybe he does not lose his
citizenship, I do not know; I have not
been reassured on that point. But I
know that his status ultimately is not
any different from that of the man who
went to Jail tried by a Jury; he Is still
a prisoner of the United States of Amer-
ica.

Mr. BROOKS of Louisiana. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOGGS. I am sorry, not at the
moment. I will be pleased to yield to my
distinguished colleague in just a mo-
ment.

And In any event while we lawyers
may understand this roundabout concept
of equity, believe you me It is pretty dif-
ficult for the average layman to under-
stand; and the more you read Attorney
General Brownell's pronouncements in
this particular matter, the more con-
vinced you are that he Is operating under
one of the most discarded philosophical
notions that ever hit the mind of man.
namely, that the end Justifies the means.
That Is what Is really Involved.

What is really Involved Is that regard-
less of what violence is done to the fun-
damental concept of justice and freedom
which, as I said a moment ago. has been
the most revolutionary concept that ever
hit this world, that regardless of what
is done to those basic American con-
cepts, that some law that he, Mr. Brow-
nell. can enforce from Washington must
be put on the books.

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. Mr.
Chairman. I move to strike the requisite
number of words.

Mr. Chairman, on the question of
whether these are criminal proceedings
or whether they are civil proceedings,
I would Uke to summon on the question
to sustain the position that they are
criminal proceedings a fairly respectable
witness. This is from the opinion of Mr.
Justice Holmes In the case of Samuel B.
Gompers v. The United States (158 U. 8.
604) in which Mr. Justice Holmes said:

These contempts are infractions of the
law. vlstted with punishment as such. If
such acts are not criminal, we are In error
as to the most fundamental characteristic
of crimes as that word has been understood
In English speech.

The gentleman from New York has
said that from time immemorial this sort
of procedure has been substituted for
trial by jury in contempt cases. Not ac-
cording to Mr. Justice Holmes have they
been recognized as crimes from time im-
memorial because he said :

So truly are they crimes that It seems to
be proof that in early law they were pun-
ished only by the usual criminal procedure
and that, at least in England, It seems they
still may preferably be tried In that manner.

I say to the gentleman from New York
that the first time in a United States
court an injunction was used as a wea-
pon in a political and economic dispute
arase in the Deb's case (158 U. S. 564) In
1894 during a period of nationwide hys-
teria over Uie strike against the Pullman

J

1937

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8851

Co. In Cbicaga That Is the first
time the doctrine ever received approval
In Federal courts.

I woukl like to say that I hold here
the Democratic Party platforms begin-
ning in 1896 and continuing each 4 years
thereafter until 1912 demanding trial
by Jury in all cases of contempt outside
of the presence of the court. It was in
that atmosphere. Mr. Chairman, that In
1908 William H. Taft^-not President
Taf t. not Chief Justice Taft but William
H. Taft — candidate for office ami under
heavy assault for his position made the
statement that has been quoted here in
debate which culminated in the ridicu-
lous statement that "To give a man trial
by Jury would lead to anarchy."

Again in 1912 the Democratic Party
took the same position, and I have the
platform here.

In that year the results were different
and the Democrats put In the Clayton
Act and put on the statute books a pro-
vision that there shall be a trial by Jury
in these cases. That matter came before
Chief Justice Taft for decision. This
case was argued brilliantly by Donald
Richberg. and I earnestly urge the con-
sideration of the brief In that casa.
There, however, those who sought gov-
ernment by injunction, those who sought
to uze the injtmction as a weapon In a
political and economic dispute, found
that Chief Justice Taft was not Candi-
date Taft because of an opinion to which
he subscribed. Chief Justice Taft sub-
scribed to the principle of constitutional-
ity of such legislation in cases of con-
tempt arising out of the presence of the
court.

Now, the gentleman from New York
has said that he has moved from his
position of 25 years ago. He has, indeed.
He has progressed all the way to the
point that he now stands on the position
of Taft Republicanism of 1908 and 1912.

Now, I have another witness. How do
these injunctions work In operation, just
as proposed In this bill? I have another
witness I would like to calL

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. I yield
to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. WILLIS. As a matter of history,
and not politics, what was the position
of President Wilson?

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. Presi-
dent Wilson signed the Clayton Act.
President Wilson ran on the Democratic
platform in 1912 and on the Democratic
platform of 1916. In 1916 the Demo-
cratic Party reviewed what It has accom-
plished In those 4 years, and said, "We
have given to the workingman the right
of trial by Jury In cases of contempt
committed out of the presence of the
court."

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Virginia has expired.

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. Mr.
Chairman. I ask unanimous consent to
proceed for 2 additional minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Virginia?

There was no objection.

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. Now, I
said I had another witness, and this la
a witness as to how this inJimcUon works.

The name of the witness Im a great Im-
mortal, Louis Brandeis, who. In the
course o^his dissenting opinion In the
case olTriMx v. Corrioan (257 U. 8.
316. 366) tells how it works. He tells
how long it had been customary to Im-
prison people In economic and political
disputes by injunction. He said further:

In America tlw Injunction did not secure
recognition as m poeelble remedy until 1^88.
When a few years latCT Its use became ex-
tensive and conspicuous, tbe controTersy over
the remedy OTerabadowed in bitterness
tbe question of the relative substantive
rights of the parties. In tfae storms ot pro-
test ag.tUut this use many thoughtful law-
yers Joined.

And. may I mention some of them:
Alton B. Parker. John W. Davis. Donald
Richberg.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. I yield
to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. CELLER With reference to those
things that the distinguished gentl«nan
has uttered, I wish to state that some (^
those opinions were expressed before
1914, when this Congress passed the
statutory definition of criminal con-
tempt.

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. Oh, no;
most were not.

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Chairman, If the
gentleman will yield fxirther, did not
Mr. Taft become a member of the Su-
preme Court after 1914?

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. Mr. Taft
was appointed by President Harding in
1921.

But to continue the quote from Justice
Brandeis:

The acts enjoined were frequently, per-
hape usually, acts which were already crimes.
But in eqtilty Issues of fact as of law were
tried by a single Judge, sitting without a
Jury. Charges of violating an injunction
were often beard on affidavits merely, with-
out the opportunity of confronting or cross-
examining witnesses. Men found guilty Tere
committed in the judge's discretion, with-
out either a statutcny limit upon the length
of the imprisonment, or the opportunity of
effective review on appeal, or the right to
release on ball pending possible revlsatory
proceedings. The effect of the proceedings
upon the Individual was substantially the
same as If he had been successfully prose-
cuted for a crime; but he was denied In the
course of the equity proceeding, those rights
which by the Constitution are commonly
secured to persons charged with a crime.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of tbe
gentleman from Virginia has again ex-
pired.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Mr. Chairman.
I ask unanimous consent the gentleman
may proceed for 2 additional minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection.
It Is so ordered.

There was no objection.

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. Contin-
uing this quotation:

That through such proceedings a single
Judge often usurped the functions not only
of the Jtuy but of the police department;
that In describing the conditions under
which strikes were permissible, and how they
might be carried out, he usurped also the
powers of the legislature; and that Inci-
dentally he abridged the constitutional
rights at individuals to free speech, to a Iree
press, and to peaceful assembly.

You can take your position with tht
Republican Party of 1908 or 1912. If you
want to; but, for me. I win stand with
Holmes. Woodrow WUson, Brandeis, and
John W. Davis.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Mr. Chatrman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. I yield.

Mr. SANTANGFELO. I heard the
gentleman lament concerning the trial
without a jury; the gentleman is against
a trial without a jury?

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. Yes. sir.

Mr., SANTANGELO. Even if the
gentleman got a trial by jury, would he
still be against the bill?

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. Cer-
tainly; does the gentleman want to know
why?

Mr. SANTANGELO. I have not asked
the gentleman why.

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. I am go-
ing to answer the gentleman's question.
Because there Is no presumption of inno-
cence; there is no right to ball; there is
no right to be confronted by one's ac-
cusers; there is no right to cross-exami-
nation of witnesses. Under these pro-
ceedings a man could be Imprisoned on
affidavit.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield further?

!i4r. HARRISON of Virginia. Yes.

Bfr. SANTANGELO. This bill is to
provide for and protect people who are
denied the right to vote; that is the
purpose of the bill. Is your State of
Virginia a poll-tax State?

Mr. HARRISON of Virginia. This bUl
Is to make votes for the Republican
Party; and the gentleman Is simple
enough to vote for it.

Mr. DOWDY. Mr. Chairman, I rise
In support of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I want to get back to
the amendment that is pending befoiv
the Committee at this time. If I recall
correctly, I offered this amendment in
the full Committee on the Judiciary
when the bill was there being considered.

Mr. BOYLE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman 3^eld?

Mr. DOWDY. I yield.

Mr. BOYLE. We had trouble hearing
the gentleman's opening remarks.
Would the gentleman be good enough to
repeat them?

Mr. DOWDY. I just sUted that it
was my memory that it was I who offered
this amendment In the full Committee
on the Judiciary when the bill was up
for consideration there.

Mr. BOYLK The gentleman Is re-
ferring to the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Okoss] ?

Mr. DOWDY. I think there is only
one amendment before the Committee at
this time.

Mr. BOYLE. The gentleman from
Louisiana [Mr. Willis] said that he was
joining in and had an Identical amend-
ment

Mr. DOWDY. I do not tiilnk that has
anything to do with what I did in the
Committee go. the Judiciary.

"nils bill proposes another unneoes-
sary Federal commission on top of the
many that we have here. This com-
mission would have powers far greater
than the numerous other cammlssions

r

D

fii2t;9

rnMr,RF.S.<sTONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8853

Ill

m

m

I

J

.

1

«i

#■

I

8852

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8853

In the Federal Government. For ex-
ample. It would be given an \icprece-
dented power of subpena. never hereto-
fore given to any Federal bureau. Un-
der this power It could and would reach
out and command your people and mine
to travel aa much as several thousand
miles to appear before it. The commis-
sion could and would also use Its power
not only to hall private citizens before
It. but force them to bring and open
their private books and papers for pub-
lic inspection on a mere suspicion. It
would not only interfere with the liber-
ties of all the people but it would have
almost imllmited power to regiment our
people.

There Is this ambiguity or contradic-
tion in the bill itself. The first part sets
up a commission to investigate what
should be enacted to protect civil rights,
and then in later sections proceeds to
enact legislation along the very line the
commission is to look into.

This one bill first states a need for
study, evaluation, and recommendations
as to needed legislation, while contem-
poraneously It goes about as far as is
conceivably possible in enacting legisla-
tion about which it first aclmowledges
that a study is needed.

The subpena power of the Commis-
sion is much too broad and gives rise to
the possibility of requiring any citizen
to appear at hearings hundreds and
even thousands of miles from his resi-
dence in answer to any charges whatso-
ever, no matter how absurd and
ridiculous they might be. Such arbi-
trary power reminds us of another of
the grievances that I mentioned on Fri-
day when I spoke about the indictments
against the English King in our Declara-
tion of Independence. I named several
of them then and I shall name more
now.

One of those grievances that led to
these words being incorporated In one
place in the Declaration of Independ-
ence as one of the indictments of the
English King:

He has erected a multitude of new offices,
and sent hither swarms of otBcers to harass
our people, and eat out their substance.

Another indictment In the Declara-
tion of Independence is this:

For transporting us beyond seas to b«
tried for pretended offenses.

This so-called civil-rights bill does
Just that. If this bill is enacted, the day
could well come when outraged Ameri-
cans would rise and curse every Member
of Congress who voted to so oppress them
as in this bill here.

Since such a commission is wholly un-
necessary, any funds spent by it would
be a shameful waste of public moneys.
I do not see why we should do It.

Here we find a great pressure to
authorize another commission when we
are trying or at least we should be try-
ing to cut down on Government spend-
ing. If this Commission is created it
will cost additional millions upon mil-
lions of the taxpayers' hard-earned
dollars. No one will deny that. I must
oppose it for these and many other
reasons.

I might say in connection with this
that I think anyone would agree that

former Senator Herbert Lehman of New
York was an ardent champion of so-
called civil-rights legislation, jit he had
this to say about a proposal similar to
this In a statement he made before the
Judiciary Committee in 1956:

There are thiee bills pending before you
reflecting the same proposal to create a
Federal Commission to study, conduct in-
vestigations, and report on the status of
civil rights in our Nation today. I. myself,
do not give this proposal a top priority.
CtvU rights have been extensively studied In
previous years by many Congressional com-
mittees. Including this one —

The one he was speaking to then —
by many private groups, and by the Presi-
dent's Committee on Civil Rights In 1M7.
All of this study material Is available.

That material is still available today.

Furthermore, aside from the fact that
such a commission would be a wasteful
duplication, there is absolutely no neces-
sity for Congress to provide for the
creation of such a body since the Presi-
dent already has the power to create such
a commission if he so desires.

I want to quote again from Senator
Lehman to conclude my remarks. He
said this:

I must point out that If the administration
is sincerely Interested In creating a com-
mission, and It has established much less
Important study commissions by executive
order, the President could easily proceed to
appoint a commission tomorrow.

Mr. Chairman. I feel that the amend-
ment offered by the gentleman from
Iowa [Mr. Gross] should certainly be
adopted.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. DOWDY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. Does the gentleman not
think we have already had too much
ruling by delegation of authority to
boards, bureaus, and commissions in the
Government?

Mr. DOWDY. Undoubtedly so.

Mr. BONNER. Mr. Chairman. I move
to strike out the last word.

Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous con-
sent to proceed for 3 additional minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
North Carolina?

There was no objection.

Mr. BONNER. Mr. Chairman, it is a
bold layman who comes down to this
well in the face of all the controversy
between such brilliant lawyers. No won-
der the laymen of this Nation are con-
fused. It was interesting to hear the
gentleman say the other day that if it
were not for these controversies concern-
ing the law, there would not be so much
business in the law as there seems to be
today. Mr. Chairman, that is not what
I am about to say, and you can rest as-
sured that I will not offend the feelings
of any man no matter what his national-
ity or race may be.

Mr. Chairman, the pages of history are
full of the records of the rise and the in-
evitable fall of dictatorships. While the
fundamental basis of our form of govern-
ment is abhorrent to the principles they
advocate, there are times when pressure

arises which tends tc induce a small part
of our population to embrace them un-
wittingly. If there Is a place such as
Hell, and I have been taught to believe
It. I can Just picture Hitler, I can just pic-
ture Hitler looking to this distinguished
body and saymg. "You criticized my Ges-
tapo and today you are following suit.
You thought of setting up a division in
the Department of Justice with the power
to do the very things that we hated in
the Gestapo."

It makes me shudder today for the
future of our country to think that good
Americans, learned in the law, can rise
and say that their fellow citizens can
have no right to a jury trial for an al-
leged offense — an alleged offense — and it
puts us right in the path of dictatorship.
Since the days of the Magna Carta free-
men have cherished that privilege and
have rightly regarded it as their main
bulwark against oppression. To seek to
deprive us of that protection in a matter
as important as this is to attempt to
reverse the course of history and puts
us back when men were subject to the
whims of whatever petty tyrant had
control of the government at the mo-
ment. Ladles and gentlemen of this
House, when you go home after the
House has passed this bill without pro-
viding trial by jury, and you are asked
by the average layman to whom was
this fundamental and constitutional
privilege denied, all of you with legal
training or otherwise will have difficulty
in explaining to the overwhelming ma-
jority of the people of the Nation who
are lajrmen why you have deprived him
of what he believes and has been taught
to believe Is his greatest protection
under the law. As a layman, and pri-
marily associated with laymen, in all
probability I hear more expressions from
the people with respect to the courts,
the Judiciary, and the legal profession
than you who are in the profession and
do business in the courts.

I regret that I must be perfectly frank
and say that the rank and file of people
are losing confidence in the courts and.
to some extent, losing confidence in the
legal profession. I regret to say this, but
I hear it. The legal profession is not
protecting Its profession as it should,
and the courts are ndt conducting them-
selves as they should. And with this
monstrosity thrown into the courts and
the Department of Justice, how in the
name of God do you expect them to rise
in stature and gain any additional con-
fidence among the people?

This is not due to any prejudice on the
part of the people, because they know,
and I know, and all laymen know that
once the respect of the courts and the
legal profession is destroyed, democracy
will be eliminated in this ureal Nation
and around the world. Look at the fancy
decisions of our Supreme Court. If you
will, please. Not based on law. but on
fiction and sociological writing. In
God's name, how can they expect to be
held as learned men in the law and re-
spected by laymen of this Nation?

I hold no brief for those who abuse
any minority group, be it black, white.
or yellow, and I firmly b<'lieve In the
right of all citizens to exercise their
full privilege as citizens. Certainly his-

tory has demonstrated Ume and again
that we cannot successfully legislate
upon the matter of social custom and
the attitudes of our people.

A prime example, and one within our
memories, was the Ill-fated Volstead
Act. That ill-advised, ill-fated legisla-
tion, though well-intentioned, undoubt-
edly produced more disrespect for law
than any other single piece of legis-
lation ever enacted by the Congress.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
pentleman from North Carolina [Mr,
Bonner 1 has expired.

(By unanimous consent, Mr. Bonneb
was granted 3 additional minutes.)

Mr. BONNER. The results this legis-
lation proposes to accomplish by coercion
have been steadily and healthily ap-
proaching fulfillment at an ever increas-
ing rate during these past 90 years. The
development of our American culture will
continue and be strengthened on a
sounder basis if left to the good will of
men and women. Immorality will not
continue when exposed to light.

Yes. Mr. Chairman, while we have
criticized Russia, this legislation is lead-
ing in its footsteps, and those In the
Kremlin are enjoying the episode that is
takin4 place here in this House t<xlay.

Again I say. history speaks with a
louder voice against such legislation than
anything we here in the House of Rep-
resentatives can say today. I hope, if it
is the determination of the House to pass
this bill, that those who are so enthusi-
astically for it will stop and ponder
whether they shall be the judge to an
extent of depriving citizens of trial by
jui-y.

In closing, Mr. Chairman. I think it
fitting to quote from a recent report filed
in the Senate by the scholarly and dis-
tinguished Senator from North Carolina,
ray esteemed friend, the Honorable Sam
Ervin, Jr.. who was a member of the
Superior Court of the State of North
Carolina, and a distinguished member
of the Supreme Court of the State of
North Carolina, and unquestionably one
of the best brains in the country today
and, without doubt, a gentleman of the
highest integrity, and a scholar who has
no peer.

I quote him. He said :

This bill would vest In a single fallible
human being, namely, the temporary occu-
pant of the office of Attorney General, re-
gardless of his character or qualifications,
autocratic and despotic powers which had no
counterpart In American history and which
are repugnant to the basic concepts underly-
Ini; and supporting the American Constitu-
tion and legal systems.

Crocodile tears and all that Is at-
tempted under this legislation will never
do the United States any good, will never
do my colored friends at home any good,
who are privileged to come in and vote
whenever they please, and will never do
democracy around the world one lota
of good.

Mr. RAINS. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Alabama?

There was no objection.

Mr. RAINS. Mr. Chairman, let me
say first that it is hard to believe the
Congress of the United States is actu-
ally considering legislation which forces
those of us who still respect our Consti-
tution, regardless of the Supreme Court,
to stand here In defense of the Bill of
Rights and the Magna Carta.

I understand full well that we are
living In the atomic age. the age of nu-
clear power, of intercontinental missiles,
4-day workweeks, pushbutton kitchens,
air-conditioned automobiles, and finally,
the age of modem Republicans.

The administration, guided by modem
Republican Brownell. Is now ready to
repudiate the principal bulwark of West-
em World liberties for 1.000 years — the
right to trial by a jury of one's peers.
The absiird arguments which Mr.
Brownell presented in his plea for the
unique powers which this bill provides
should raise the question in every mind
as to what Is the real motivation behmd
such a measure.

For many years we have gone through
the annual hassle over this catch-all
legislation but never. In the ominous
course of this political football, have I
ever been more seriously concerned.
For today, my friends, we are asked to
turn all of our courts over to the Execu-
tive, in effect, and while the present
Supreme Court evidently sets little store
by precedent, or the law. if you approve
this bill you will surely hand them a
precedent which will haunt every Con-
gressional district from border to border
and coast to coast.

For that reason I do not think we In
the South are fighting alone this year.
There are too many million Americans
who believe in our Constitution and in
the principles of justice from which it
came. There are too many millions who,
like the Barons of Runnymede. have
defended the very thing which this bill
would now take from us.

I want to quote a few sources, doubt-
less familiar to many of you, on the sub-
ject of trial by jury.

Blackstone, perhaps the greatest legal
scholar of all time, said:

Trial by Jury is a trial that hath been
used time out of mind in this Nation and
seems to have been coeval with the first civil
government thereof. In Magna Carta it Is
more than once Insisted as the principal
bulwark of our Uberties.

The late Chief Justice of the Penn-
sylvania State Supreme Court, Robert
von Moschzisker, in his book. Trial by
Jury, emphasized the need for reform in
some of our State laws relating to jury
trials, but. quoting from Justice Thomp-
son, in Warren against Commonwealth,
he states :

The framers of the Constitution undoubt-
edly knew and Intended that legislation
must provide the form under which the right
to trial by jury was to be enjoyed, and they
meant no more than that It should be en-
Joyed under regulations which should not
take away the right.

Prof. Robert L. Henry, an Oxford
scholar and authority on Anglo-Saxon
contracts, had this to say in his legal
essay. The Story of the Criminal Jury:

The fact that the popular courts in the
form of the criminal Jury have persisted for
■ome 800 years in Anglo-Saxon countries: the

fact that they have functioned In the form of
the quaectlo In Republican Borne for per-
haps 600 years; the fact that as soon as the
peoples of Europe became free and assumed
control of their governments that reestab-
lished the popular court In the form of the
jury for criminal trials, and that this insti-
tution has already survived for nearly one
thousand and fifty years, would seem to In-
dicate a deep-seated and universal deeire on
the part of the people to participate In the
administration of the criminal law. We
must retain such popular participation in
some form.

George Washington had something to
say on jury trials. In a letter to General
Lafayette, dated AprU 28. 1788, Wash-
ington described attitudes prevailing at
the Federal convention. He reported
that no one objected to the Bill of Rights
or trial by jury, and explaimng to La-
fayette, why the latter was not spelled
out in detail, Washington wrote:

It was only the difficulty of establishing
a mode which should not Interfere with the
fixed modes of any of the States that In-
duced the convention to leave It, as a matter
of future adjustment.

Thus you see that our constitutional
fathers were concerned about States
rights and for that very reason, un-
doubtedly, stated many of the principles
in the Constitution only in general terms.

Today we have an administration de-
termined to override State laws, nullify
State judicial systems, run State voting
machinery; in short, to establish a new
bureaucracy so strong that there is no
way of even predicting where its powers
might end.

We are asked to authorize a Civil
Rights Commission and to approve a new
Civil Rights Division in the Justice De-
partment. In regard to the Commission.
I seriously question the purpose of any
such body which is allowed to use volim-
teer personnel at random. In this in-
stance, it is not difficult to picture the
army of meddlers, and the organizations
which would send them, to go about the
land prying mto the privacy of all our
citizens.

Mr. Speaker, no one seems to know
Just how many aspects of our llvmg this
bill would really encompass. Nowhere
have I ever seen civil rights actually
spelled out in black and white.

I question the motivation behind this
entire bill. I am not calling it an anti-
South measure only but rather anti-
American. The grievances, more imagi-
nary than real, which such legislation
In Itself would incite and inflame would
stretch from ocean to ocean, and those
of you from outside the South had best
keep this in mmd.

Finally, let me say that I am amazed
that such a brazen attempt to knock
down State laws and to expand executive
powers has come from an administra-
tion whose leader said, at the governors
conference in Seattle, only 4 years ago:

I am here because of my Indestructible
conviction that unless we preserve In thla
country the place of State government with
the power of authority, the responsibilities
and the revenues to discharge those respon-
slbUltlee. then we are not going to have
America as we have known it. We will have
some other form of government.

Mr. Chairman, It Is my belief that en-
actment of this bill would Indeed be a

WM

Hi

i"

'jii

I

\^

ii

1^

8854

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

giant step toward that "some other form
of goremment" to which President
Eisenhower referred 4 years ago.

Mr. WHTITEN. Blr. Chairman. I rise
In support of the pending amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this debate has
stirred up lots of legal terminology
and interpretation. I happen to be
a lawyer. Some of the discussion
by the proponents of this measure re-
mind me of the old story to the effect
that you could tell a doctor's ability by
how simple he could describe medicine.
The more simple his words the bigger or
better doctor he is. The better a lawyer
was the more understandable he was
with this exception : A good lawyer, when
his case wad no good, would often use all
kinds of technical language which had a
way of leading the layman far afleld
from the real issue. I am afraid the
lawyer proponents of this measure are in
the latter category.

Mr. Chairman, it does not make any
difference actually whether this action
of depriving citizens of the right to trial
by jury is done through this means, that
means, or the other means. It does not
really matter if the bill destroys consti-
tutional or merely statutory rights to
trial by jury for I say without any fear
of contradiction that as of today, for
the violation of certain laws, the vio-
lators are entitled to a trial by jury. If
this bill becomes law the persons who
violate those same laws will not be en-
titled to trial by jury. That being true
there is no basis for any Member to mis-
understand what you would do if you
vote for this measure.

Hew that is brought about is easy to
imderstand by those who are trained in
the legal profession. I say again that it
is as simple as this: Today you have a
right to trial by jury in some cases. If
this bill becomes law you will not have
that right in those cases.

Mr. Chairman, it has been said here
that this bill is directed at the South, but
I say further it is directed toward the
North, in an effort to get votes in the
North. I would like for some of my
northern friends to listen to this. It is
true that in many Southern States a rela-
tively few Negroes vote, and I would like
to explain to you why that is true. In
view of this very kind of legislation
passed after the Civil War. the white
people, for the preservation of life and
of property, yes. and in the interest of
orderly government itself, were forced
Into a white primary which was legal
iintU a few years ago. Every election
wa* determined in that white primary
election. We have never had enough
contest in November elections to count,
you might say. until a few years ago.
When Republicans were in power, we had
to dress up some renegade Democrat like
a Republican in order to fill the post-
maaterahipa. I say to you that for gen-
erations the elections were determined
In the white primary. There was no
contest in November, therefore, no in-
centive for any nonwhite to be interest-
ed in voting. That is one of the reasons.
It is true that fn the last few years since
the white primary was discarded by the
Supreme Court there has been a little
more interest on the part of the Negro
citiaens to register and vote in a big part

of the South, but not a great deal be-
cause (rf the background of disinterest.

Let me tell you something else that
may be an Important factor. In the
South we were smart enough to profit by
what was going on In other sections. We
saw each major party and its platform
set out to get the votes of these minori-
ties m New York, Detroit, and Chicago.
The platforms were a bid for that vote
from the colore«l citizens in those areas
and each 4 yeais the bids of those run-
ning for office became higher and higher.
We saw in the South that it was not to
anybody's advantage to go out and solicit
the registration of huge groups of voters
who were disinterested, then bid among
ourselves and pay the costs of trying to
get their votes on election day.

Virtually nobody locally has promoted
registration and voting of the.se groups.
I would say that in recent years more
and more Neero citizens are t>ecomlng
Interested. More aiKl more of them are
registering. More and more of them
are voting.

Now. in certain sections, since the Su-
preme Court decision In the school in-
tegration cases, there are many good
Negro citizens who normally would bt
Interested. In my area — and I have a
town where more than 50 percent of
the population is Negro, and I believe I
can call every one of them my friend —
I say to you that under present condi-
tions the good colored citizens that I
know of in that area have lost Interest
in voting for the time t>eing because to
do so they are afraid it would identify
them with the NAACP and Identify them
with these agitating elements in this
country, and they want no E>art of It.
They do not wish to have any part in
destroying the fine relationships which
have existed.

I was district attorney 9 years In my
section of the country, and I say to my
friends in New York and Chicago — and
I spent much tune \n both places —
that the Negro citizens in my section of
Mississippi enjoy more privileges and
enjoy more rights than the colored cit-
izens in any city that you can name, and
that includes Washington, D. C.

No: this bill was not written because
you have any real interest in us down
there. It was written as a further bid
for the Negro vote in the large cities
of the North. Should it pass each major
pohticai party will be claiming credit
for its passage. Is it not kind of odd
that the two chief proponenUi of this
measure are from the State of New
York. They say they are looking after
our affairs in Miseissippi and in the
South. It may be that they have been
In my State; It may be that they have
been in the South but I doubt it. Of
course this is smart politics for many of
you. You can go back home to such
Northern cities and point with great
gusto to what you did to straighten out
things tn the South, thousands of miles
from you. What you will be doing really
Is covering up in an effort to avoid fac-
ing up to what goes on in your own dis-
trict. Is it not odd that on the eve of
every national election for the last three
elections the Attorney General, not hav-
ing the powers that he would have under
this hni. baa issued an announcement

that the FBI was being sent into some
Southern States just before the election
and. my friends, the original draft went
to the press in the northern cities and
carbon copies went to the FBI as to the
alleged violations. At thai time the
Attorney General did not have the power
that would be given under this bill.
but they did use the power of sending
out the FBI in an appeal to the bloc
votes of these northern cities in these
national elections. Just how far do you
think they will go if this bill should
l)ecome law? May I say to you that as
bad as this bill is, and however you
may argue about the legal maneuvering
of its language to shift criminal offenses
over to so-called civil remedies. It \x as
certain as the night follows the day that
people who now have the right of trial
by Jury for certain violations of the
law would not have It if this bill becomes
law. It is as simple as that.

Now. If you will analyze the effects of
this bill, we will have serious difficulties
In a few Isolated places In the South.
And. that Is bad. No, the major damage
will be done because in every election ac-
tions win be taken down South for north-
ern consumption In an effort to get the
northern vote. But, the thing that Is
serious to me Is the fact that we have
been willing to jeopardize our very form
of government, both parties. In an effort
to obtain the votes of these great minor-
ity blocs. They are desired so that cer-
tain groups can stay In political power
and In office; that here we are interested
hi politics to the point that we would
weaken the heritage we have from Eng-
lish jurisprudence which has made this
country great. My friends, you can look
to South America, you can look to Ger-
many, you can look to Russia. There
are many nations where the right of
trial by jury has r»t been as carefully
protected In law as It has by English-
speaking peoples. But, I will tell you that
the nations which have stood best the
test of time have been largely those
which trace back to the English -speak-
hig peoples who won the right of trial
by jury in the Magna Carta from King
John. We should jealously guard that
right.

And. I say to my friend who Is the
chairman of this committee. I feel that
in my judgment he would meet his re-
sponsibility more fully if he recognized
or rather admitted these facts. For him
to come here and admit that a Judge
and an Attorney General could take ad-
vantage of the people of this country
under the terms of this bill, and yet sup-
port It, Is hard for me to understand.
He admits they could, and he says. "But,
If they do, I will call my committee to-
gether and do something about it." No,
It Is high time, my friends, that we turn
back to law and let us get away from
men. We have long been a nation of
laws and not of men. Every student of
government, every great man in our po-
litical history, has always warned that
we must protect the people by laws and
not trust to the whims and caprices, nor
the political desires, of men.

Mr. WHITENER. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield ?

Mr. WHITTEN. I yield to the gentle-
man.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8855

Mr. WHITENER. I would like to ask
the gentleman from Mississippi if we
have not overlooked another basic civil
right as we have discussed this matter.
As I imderstand the proponents, they
say that they are converting this matter
into a civil proceeding and that, there-
fore, it is consistent with time-honored
principles. Is it not true that in a civil
proceeding there Is no obligation under
the Constitution or any of the decisions
of our courts to furnish the accused
with counsel? Would not this procedure
deprive an indigent Individual of the
constitutional right to be represented
by counsel in the case which might re-
sult in his Imprisonment?

Mr. WHITTEN. It certainly would,
under present conditions.

Mr. Chairman, the thing which \a
most alarming here today is to see so
many members raise the bid for the
Negro vote to the point of taking away
the right of trial by Jury. Each year
the bid gets higher and higher. If this
bill becomes law, and God forbid, next
year the proponents of this bill will be
In with another raising of the offering
price for Negro votes to an even higher
level.

It was Lord Benchley, I believe, who
said in the 17th century that a democ-
racy could not long endure, for the
elected representatives of the people
would give away the coimtry In order
to keep getting elected.

Mr. Chairman, this bill makes me
wonder if Lord Benchley was more right
than he may have thought.

Mr. SIKES. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike out the last word.

Mr. Chairman, In the House the theme
of civil rights is an old and familiar one.
If it serves any useful purpose, it is that
it helps both the proponents and op-
ponents to get reelected. But that Is the
end of its value. It is of no consequence
legislatively. The bill Is going to die In
the Senate. All of us anticipate that.
We are in the process of wasting 2 weeks
discussing something we have no ex-
pectation we shall see written Into law.

Our legislative accomplishments in
this session have not been monumental.
Two more wasted weeks do not add to
make a total which is any more Impres-
sive. A good friend on my side of the
a'sle said to me a day or so ago. "I guess
this is just something I have to vote for
and you have to vote against." So, here
we are right where we were when civil-
M^ht5 legislation was offered in the last
Congress and right where we will be
when it is offered In the next.

I do not question the sincerity of any
person who has spoken on this subject,
but I Insist there Is no need for this
legislation. I insist that Its enactment
\^ould accomplish nothing but added ten-
sion, misunderstanding, and mistrust be-
tween the races. We have had attempts
at reform by administrative edict and
reform through a new phenomenon —
legislation from the courts. If this is an
attempt at reform by Congressional man-
date, we have had too much of that sort
of thing already without accomplishing
any good or useful purpose. The ques-
tions this measure proposes to treat can-
not be so simply dealt with.

My friends here know that I am not
an extremist. I try to see both sides
of a question. 8<xne questions go far
too deep to be settled by edicts of the
courts or acts of the Congress. You
cannot change the thinking mr the cus-
toms of millions of people overnight.
Reforms, which I do not think are a
basic purpose of this bill, cannot be sold
to the people In advance without ui
understanding and acceptance of the
need of reform. People* must be al-
lowed to feel their way on broad social
problems and to adjust according to
temperament and environment. The
impatience of the sociologists, with
whom we are overafflicted, changes this
not at all.

Regardless of where you stand, this
legislation will be improved by the safe-
guard of Jury trial. If it were good
legislation. It could not be harmed by
that safeguard. I consider It bad legis-
lation which needs the protection af-
forded by Jury trial On this amend-
ment, we should be unanimous in ap-
proval.

If this measm^ were to become law.
the Inclusion of trial by Jury would
greatly temper its Impact. Trial by jury
so long recognized as a guaranty of
individual rights would remove the sus-
picion of star-chamber proceedings
and would clip the wings of zealots out
to make a reputation by demagoguery
or persecution. The responslbilties of
citizenship are not always fully under-
stood even in this enlightened land.
Trial by Jury would help to bring it more
clearly to the consciousness of all groups.
I would not want to have to tell my peo-
ple I was reluctant to give them that
protection.

Nonetheless, we are for 2 weeks In-
flicted with the biennial ordeal of civil
rights. It is my earnest hope that it
can be completed with a minimum of
tension and bitterness between ourselves.
There is much good legislation that is
needed, on which we can agree; much
that should be done for the good of the
Nation before we find ourselves at the
end of another session, now not far
distant.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, Just to
check the opinion of the Members, I ask
unanimous consent that all debate on
this amendment and all amendments
thereto close In 20 minutes.

Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. I object, Mr.
Chairman.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I move
that all debate on this amendment and
all amendments thereto terminate in 30
minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the motion.

The question was taken; and on a
division (demanded by Mr. KiAnNC)
there were — ayes 93, noes 74.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Chairman. I
demand tellers.

Tellers were ordered, and the Chair-
man appointed as tellers Mr. Celler and
Mr. Abernetht.

The Committee again divided, and the
tellers reported there were — ayes 121,
noes 89.

So the motion was agreed to.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, out of my generous q>lrlt, I yield
back the time allotted to me.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from Georgia [Mr.
Lanham].

Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Chairman, those
of you who have been here during the
period of time that I have had the privi-
lege of serving in this Congress know that
my votes have not been sectional. I have
voted for the development of your har-
bors and your rivers, the dredging of your
harbors and the damming of your rivers.
Because I believe in the development of
all our natural resources; furthermore,
I think it a misnomer to refer to such ex-
penditures as "pork barrel." I have
voted with you people In the North, In the
big cities, who needed public housing. I
do not need It in my district. I have
some of It, but you need it and I voted
with you. I have not been sectional in
my voting.

This bill is aimed at me and the people
whom I represent. It is part of a con-
spiracy in America today to make the
South appear to be decadent, to make the
people appear to be ignorant and biased
and prejudiced.

There was an article In American Mer-
cury last month that shows how some
of the people who make our moving
picture shows, the editors of some of our
newspapers, and the publishers of some of
our magazines are all picking on Dixie.
I think one reason for it is that because
In the South during the past 15 years,
since we have been unshackled from un-
fair freight rates, the South has made
marvelous progress industrially. That
may accoimt for It in some measure.
Just why everybody is now picking on
the South, I do not know, but they are.
These warped presentations are not rep-
resentative of the South of today but
untrue caricatures. It looks like some of
you people here today are going along
with that gang In spite of what I have
done to try to help you. But I caimot
put this on a personal basis. I know
some of you feel like you have to vote for
this legislation.

You do not, because It Is not neces*
sary that you come back to Congress or
that I come back to Congress. But I
have had friends tell me that if they
did not get a vote from certain minor-
ity groups they would not come back to
Congress.

I tell you, Mr. Chairman, there is
something more important than your
coming back to Congress or my coming
back to Congress.

You think this is our problem, the
problem of the South; it is, but the gun
is pointed at your head Just as cer-
tainly as it is at our heads, because you
are guilty, too. It is your problem, too.

The gentleman from Texas told you
of the explosive situation that exists in
the city of Chicago today. It is liable
to blow up into a race war at any time
because you in Chicago are discriminat-
ing against the same people that you
say we are discriminating against.

Mr. YATES. Mr. Chah-man, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. LANHAM. I cannot yield at this
point.

m

I

II

!i

Mi

! .

!

If it
11

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8657

I read In Look magMine during the
past year the story of Deartom, Mich.
This in Michigan. In Dearborn. Mich.,
they wiU not let a Ncfro spend the
night They will not let a Negro spend
the night in that city of Michigan; and
the mayor was reelected because he had
succeeded in keeping the Negroes from
coining into that city.

As I say, it is your problem just as
much as it is ours; and you are guilty
just as much as we are guilty. Your
ancestors sold us the slaves and you are
guilty for that reason; your ancestors
and my ancestors justified slavery, and
they sinned. Even the churches tried
to justify, to rationalize, slavery. That
was a sin.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Georgia has expired.

(By unarkimous consent Mr. D.wis of
Georgia and Mr. OHara of Hlinois
yielded their time to Mr. Lanham.)

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Georgia is recognized for 10 addi-
tional minutes.

Mr. LANHAM. The fact that we have
this problem and the fact that you have
this problem is proof of the immutabil-
ity of moral law. You cannot violate It
without being punished, and neither can
I. The sins of the fathers are visited
upon the children to the third and
fourth generation, and you are seeing
the truth of that Biblical saying today.
So it is your problem, and it is my
problem.

We have been trying to solve it In the
South, and we have been solving it. The
Negroes vote in my State. I am includ-
ing with my remarks a copy of an article
that appeared in the Atlanta papers a
few days ago. You will see from that
editorial that the Negro vote is increa.s-
ing faster in the State of Georgia than
is the white vote in spite of the fact
that the Negroes are moving North.

As proof of the statement I make I
am quoting an article which appeared
in the Atlanta Constitution for Friday,
June 7, written by William M. Bates, en-
titled. "Negro Voters Increase in 97
Georgia Counties." Mr. Bates says:

Negro voting »trengUi, which was revived
as a political Issue In Atlanta's recent city
primary, increased in 97 Georgia counties
last year

This sharp upswing In Negro voter reg-
tstratlon. underway for several years, appears
to be general throughout the State and is
nrt limited to big cities.

Some rural counties. In fact, have the
highest percentage of registered Negro vot-
ers. And In one county — Liberty — Negro
▼o*^ers outnumber whites by almost 400,

According to records in the secretary of
■tate's office. Negro registration hit a new
high of about 158,000 last year. This was
an increase of about 20.000 over figures com-
piled in 1954.

During thi same period, white registration
tncreased by about the same figure to ap-
proximately 1.075.000

ItECTSTRATION CAIN

This amounted to a gain of about 2 per-
cent in white registration and about 15 per-
cent for Negroes in the 2-year period.

The potential strength of Negro voters in
Georgia was given new stgnlfVrance by tha
Atlanta primary in which a colored candi-
date for the board of aldermen forced a run-
off with a white candidate.

Oovernor Qrtffln brolre prrecedent by pub-
licly endorsing the white candidate and urg«

tog whit«* to bloc vote ag^inaC tha Nagro.
Tba wlUta candidate won. but tha election
baa caused much concern In aonw State po-
Utleal quarters.

zieRT coxmnia

Thexa are now eight countlea In which
the number of Negro voters la about half
aa great or more than the white registra-
tion.

In addition to Liberty, theae oountlea ar»
Camden. Taliaferro, Muscogee, bong, Mcla-
toab. Green, and Hanccxk.

Generally speaking, the trend in registra-
tion in the varVoua countlea la the same for
whites and Negroes. In most Instances
where there was an Increase tn white voters,
there was also an Increase In Negro regis-
trations.

The same was generally true for dropa In
registration.

THISTT oacaEASis

Thirty counties reported decreases In the
number of registered colored voters between
1954 and 1966 and 97 had Increaaea. The
remaining 32 counties either did not report
changes or county officials did not nuike a
breakdown of white and colored voters.

The increase in Negro voter registrations
h.i3 been going on since the end of World
War II when the Supreme Court struck
down the white nrimary in Georgia and
elsewhere in the S<iuth.

About 1 out oX every 7 Negroes Is now
registered to vote compared with about &
out of every 12 whites.

The Increase in Negro registration has
taken place at a time when the colored
population In Georgia is dropping.

According to the United States Censxis
Bureau. Negro population In Georgia de-
clined from 1,065.446 to 1,064,001 between
1940 and 1950. The State s overall popula-
tion gained 320,855 during this period.

There's another factor about the Atlanta
city primary that has not escaped the at-
tention of Stale-level poUUclans.

The Metropolitan Voting Council reported
that 73 percent of the city's registered Ne-
gro voters went to the polls in the first
primary compared to 54 percent of the white
voters.

In the runoff primary. In which the Ne-
gro aldermanlc candidate was defeated, the
Negro turnout was 70 4 percent against only
36.3 percent tor the whites.

Besides there are adequate statutes
on the books guaranteeing the right to
vote and other civil rights. Not only is
this true but Negroes serve on the board
of education of the city of Atlanta, and
as indicated in the above-ciled article
a Negro recently ran for the council in
that city and in the first primary was
the leading contender.

It is true the Negroes often vote en
bloc but, of course, that is their privilege,
and as far as Georgia is concerned I
know of no effort in any part of the
State to prevent the Negro from voting.
So, as I say, this bill is wholly and en-
tirely unnecessary. I am convinced it
was conceived in misunderstanding and
born in politics. It is a slap in the face
of one great section of our Nation. It is
just a part of the popular effort to dis-
credit Dixie and make the people of the
South appear to be decadent, prejudiced,
and of a low order of intelligence. I wish
I had the time to quote in this connection
from an article which appeared in the
American Mercury and which was In-
serted in the Rscord by Georgia's junior
Senator. Hon. Herm.^n Talmadgk, on page
A4360 of the daily Record for June 5.
The writer of that article makes It
clear that there Js apparent con-

■piracy among lome radio commentators,
newapapcrs, magazines, and even book
publishers to belittle and mislead the
people of other lections about social and
economic conditions in the South. Part
of thia may be due to the fact that for
the past 10 or 15 years industry in the
South has been expanding and growing
at a great rate. The South's industrial
potential lay undeveloped for years as
a result of oppressive reconstruction laws
after the War Between the States and
the unfair freight rates which shackled
us for so long. In this connection I cm
sure that Negroes in Atlanta, Ga.. and
other large cities of our Slate have more
economic advantages and live fuller and
better lives than in any other State in
our Union. Not only do they take part
in politics but they own their own banks,
they have several Insurance companies
of their own. and there Is absolutely no
effort made to prevent their entering into
any business that they may desire.

Moreover, there are three or more fine
educaUonal institutions conducted by
and for the members of the Negro race.
Race relationships had been good until
the Supreme Court decision of 1954 de-
creeing the end of segregation In our
schools; and the interference followiii?
that decision. In our State by the NAACP
and other leftwing and even Communist-
front organizations, reversed the trend
to better race relations. There Is no
doubt hi my mind that all these things
have set back by at least a generation the
welfare of the southern Negro. Race ten-
sions have Increased and animosities
have been rekindled — all of which had
been gradually disappearing tn the
South.

Consequently, to any person who
knows the real facts and Is not misled
by so much of the propaganda about the
South now circulating, it is perfectly
obvious that this bill is not needed and
Is simply a part of the struggle by cer-
tain members of both parties to comer
the minority group votes in other sec-
tions of our country.

This is going to be your problem ID
years from now more than it will be ours,
because they are leaving and are going
north. Your problem is going to in-
crease as ours diminishes.

I know there are probably spots in the
South where the Negro has been denied
the right to vote. It is not true in my
State. It may at one time have been
true; but we have been making rapid
progress. But all this agitation has set
back the progress of race relations in
the South for a generation. That is
what has happened, and it is going to be
worse If you p€iss this bill.

I want to say Just a few words about
the jury trial amendment. It is an
astounding thing to me. Before I con-
tinue, let me say that I was one of the
few southerners who voted against the
Hartley bill when it was upon the floor
of the House. It was my first year In
Congress. That was an iniquitous and
vicious bill. I am glad I voted against it.

It went to the Senate. Senator Taft
got it modified. The Senator sent it
back here in much better shape than It
was when we in the House had to vote on
It. But. still, after the President had
vetoed it I voted to sustain hK veto. If

I had known that the frienda of labor on
the floor of the Houk «lurliif tUa week
were going to renege and admit that the
Taft-Hartley had changed or super-
seded the Norrls-La Ouanlla law so that
now labor is not protected In the matter
of strikes, my action in opposing the
Taft-Hartley law vould have been even
more vigorous. Because of that fact I am
more glad than ever that I voted against
the Taft-Hartley Act After I went back
to my State I told the people, our labor-
ing people, the reasons that the act was
passed. It was because of abuses imder
the Wagner Act and I told them they
were going to have to live with the
law and that they were going to have
to make the best of It They then
tried to do that. But I did not know.
I do not beMeve any of you thought,
that when we passed the Taft-Hartley
Act you were taking away from labor
the right to a trial by Jury In strike
cases. But that is what your leader
from New York says you hare done.
But. he says, he has grown. He says
he did not stop growing when he
was 32. Wen. I wonder if he has grown
to the point that he does not want labor
to be protected in these strike matters.
Is that how far he has grown? Have
you grown to that point? Do you ap-
prove of the statements made on the
floor of this House by those who pre-
tend to t>e the friend of labor that the
Taft-Hartley Act has repealed or It has
limited or it has In some way superseded
the law which guarantees to the labor-
ing man the right, the fundamental
American right, the right guaranteed us
by English Jurisprudence all down
through Its history from the time of
Runnymede. are you willing to say by
your vote today that you approve that
statement? Are you going on record as
saying that the laboring man Is no longer
protected by the law that was passed to
protect him? I do not believe you want
to do that. I do not beUeve you have
thought about what you are doing.

You may have to vote for this bill, you
may think you have, but you do not have
to vote against the amendment involving
trial by Jury. I would hate to be any
one of you and go back to my home and
have to Justify my vote against that
fundamental right. You say It Is neces-
sary because Juries will not convict In
the first place that is not true. I was
prosecuting attorney for 6 years before
I came to Congress and time after time
I have seen Juries convict white men on
the testimony of Negroes. The Juries in
our State have leaned over backward to
protect the rights of Negroes who were
being tried in our courts. That Juries
will not convict is a false aasumptlM);
but even if true, It Is a cynical thln^ to
say that because juries might not convict
the right of a trial by Jury should be de-
nied the accused. It Just violates all of
the rules of moral law and you cannot do
it with impunity.

This Mil Is not necessary. It Is not
right. It Is conceived In mlsimderstand-
ing and it Is bom in poBUca I hope that
if yoQ have to vote for the bill you
will vote for the Jory-trlal amendment,
which will be penmaalve authority of the
right of the laboring laan to protectioa
from arbitrary decisions and rulings by

theeourt At the same time it wiH pre-
serve the right of trial toy iury for those
tiiarged with the vloiatioD of Injunetiooe
issued wider this act.

Oh, you know what they had to go
through, and yet you sit here today and
apparently i^^u-ove what both gentle-
men from New York say. when they say
that the Taft-Hartley law and other
leglslatlOD has repealed or superseded the
law which protected the lab(»1ng man
when he is accused of violating an in-
junction issued by the court in the mat-
ter of a strike.

In the next place the bill is. In my opin-
ion, the most dangerous tpgiiJ^tion that
has been sponsored with any hope of
passage slnoe I have been a Member of
CongreaSw It Is an Invaskm of the rights
of the States to regulate their own af-
fairs and will result In the loss of many ot
the rights guaranteed to the States and
their citizens by the Bill of Bights.
However much the u>ft/<tT\g prcHixments of
this bill may profess to be ignorant of
any such Intention, nonetheless, this biU
takes a portion of the criminal law rela-
tive to ehrfl rights and seeks to transfer
It to the equity courts of our land. This
for the sole purpose of denying the right
of trial by Jury to those charged with
vi<daUon of such provisions of the crim-
inal law now transferred to the equity
courts. As the dtitlnguished gentleman
from ^^rglnia [Mr. Porr] told you a few
days ago. If yon were on the floOT to listen
to his remarkable address. George HE
tried this very "gimmick" to transfer pro-
visions of the criminal law to the equity
courts of Kngland for the very same pur-
pose. Those of you who claim you do
not know that this was the purpose for
taking literally the words of the criminal
law and writing them into the legisla-
tion are certainly naive, not to say gulli-
ble. The Department of Justice knows
that this is the reason for the transfer of
this Identical language from the criminal
oode to this bill for they have stated
that it was done because they say south-
em Juries will be reluctant to convict
This is a cynical philosophy that advo-
cates any means however violative of our
fundamental constitutional rights if it
results in what its proponents claim to
be a desiralrie end.

It Is a false indictment of the SouUl
For 9 years before I came to the Con-
gress I was prosecuting attorney for the
Rome Judicial circuit composed of three
counties in the northwestern section of
Georgia, and my observation was that
Juries leaned backward in an effort to
be fair to Negro defendants in our courts.
In fact they often convicted white people
upon testimony of Negro witnesses. One
case I recall very well — a Negro who was
ohvioiisly gnilty of shooting at another
Negro was cleared by a Jury because of
the amusing and forceful statement he
made to the Jury. A better speech he
made %y^^r\ his own coimsel. Uhder the
laws of the State of Georgia a defendant
may not be sworn, btit can make a state-
ment to the jiUT on his own behalf,
and the judge must charge the jury
that it may brieve \ht statement Instead
of the sworn testimony. That Is what
I think the jury did in the ease of the
Negro who was a better counsel than
his own lawyer. It Is often said that »

defendant who is his own attorney has
a fool for a client, but it certainly did
not prove so in the case to which I have
referred.

At Clint<m, Tenn.. we have the spec-
tacle of the judge making a law appli-
cable to a particular situation and then
attempting to punish persons alleged to
have violated this order who were not
parties to the suit before the court and
many of whom, no donbt, had no actual
knowledge of the court's rarder. You
will recall that the Attorney General,
Mr. Brownell. sent his prosecutors into
the State and substituted the United
States Government as a party to that
suit so that the accused persons would
not be entitled to a trial by jury. There
was su^ a reaction to this unfair and
disgusting procedure on the part of the
presMit Attorney General that the court
upon motion of defnidants' counsel
finally agreed that the accused persons
should have a trial l^ Jury. This agree-
ment on the part oi the court was ap-
parently a move to try to iMrevent the
C<mgress from writing into this bill a
guarantee of a right to trial by jury for
those accused of violating a general in-
junction such as that poBsed by the
judge in Tennessee. It was a sort of
Mother Hubbard injunction — a law
which covered evenrthing but touched
nothing as a Moth^ Hubbard has been
defined.

In this connection I am amarjed at
those of you who profess to be the frienda
of organized labor. You have taken the
position in this case that the guarantiea
written into the law assuring a jury trial
to members of labor unions charged with
the violation of inJimctioDS in labor cases
have been repealed or superseded by the
Taft-Hartley law. This is a most dan-
gerous position it seems for any person to
take who claims to be a friend of Amer-
ica's working people. What an imten-
able posi^n this places you in when next
you try to write into the Taft-Hartley law
a provision that will gtiarantee such right
of trial by jury to members of the labor
unions.

You who were here when the Labor
Relations Act of 1947 was passed know
ttiat I was one of the few southern Rep-
resentatives who voted against the iniq-
uitous Hartley bill as it was known in
the House. This bill was so outrageously
unfair to labor union members that
frankly I could not see how any Member
could vote for it who believed that labor
unions should continue to exist

After it went to the Senate it was
amended and became known as the Taft-
Hartley bin. Mr. Taft who while favor-
ing legislation to correct abuses that had
arisen among the leaders of the labor
union movonent modified the extreme
provision of the Hartley bill aod when it
came back to the House It was certainly
a much more moderate law than that
wfai^ was first passed tn the House.
However, there were harsh provisions In
the law that should be modified. Sen-
ator Taft himself favored such modifica-
tion and had he lived no doubt they
would already have been written into the
law.

After the President vetoed the bin I
again was one of the few southern Mem-
bers of the House who voted to sustain

4li

«■■

n*

•fi

!1

II

ffi

8858

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8859

the President's veto and thus against the
enactment of the Taft-Hartley Act.

After Its enactment, however. I took
every occasion to urge members of the
labor unions to learn to live with the law
and to correct the abuses which had
given rise to Its passage. I have been
perfectly frank with them in saying that
I doubted that the law could be repealed
and urged them to live within its terms.

So I approach this problem of a jury
trial for those who violated injunctions
with a desire to protect the labor unions
In the rights guaranteed to them prior
to the passage of the Taft-Hartley law
which certain so-called friends of labor
now claim were repealed or modified by
the Taft-Hartley law. It Is inconceiv-
able to me that thost) of you who pretend
to be labor's friends are willing to en-
danger labor's rights to a jury trial when
accused of violating injunctions passed
by a court of equity.

So I am convinced that even where
charges in the nature of criminal con-
tempt are made in the name of the Fed-
eral Government or any other govern-
ment those charged with such offenses
should be guaranteed a trial by a jury.
It is sophistry to say that to protect a
civil right of one hindered from voting
justifies the denial of a fundamental
constitutional right such as that of trial
by jury. This is putting expediency
above principle. In 1916 Woodrow Wil-
son said, and deep down in your hearts
you know it is true, that:

A point in national affairs never lies
along the lines of expediency. It always
rests In the field of principle. • • • Justice
has nothing to do with expediency. Justice
has nothing to do with any temporary
eundard whatever.

As I have said this law Is a slap at the
South and I warn you that while today
racial problems seem to be confined to
the South, such is net the case. Recently
I read ah article which told of the ex-
plosive situation which now exists in
Chicago and an article in Look some
months agro which told of the city of
Dearborn. Mich., where a Neerro is not
permitted to spend the night. The prob-
lem is growing by leaps and bounds in
the districts many of you represent, and
the denial of the right to trial by jury
which seems to you today to be directed
only at the South is really a gun pointed
at your own heads for as surely as we
live today and present trends continue
the problem will be more your problem
than ours within the next 10 years.

I am quoting here a syndicated column
by David Lawrence entitled "It Was a
"Wise Move To Insert Jury Trial in Civil
Rights Bill":

I: was a wise move on the part of the
Senate Judiciary Committee this week to
rei-ommer.d that Jury trials be provided by
law In contempt cases arising out of the
enrortement of civil rights. It wUl do more
to help the cause of public understanding on
the iiuegratiou-segregatlon Issue and similar
questions th.nn anything the Cungress or the
courts have done thus far.

Tnts Is because the action by the Senate
ccmmittee ccmes at a time when emotion
has bten substituted for reason In many
parts of both the North and the South in
dealing with matters of law and constitu-
tional rights.

A dramatic example was the case last weeic
In Montgomery. Ala., when a white Jury ac-

quitted two white men who were defendant*
In a case involving the dynamiting of »
Negro church. No one was Injured, but the
property was damaged. It wa* apparent
from the way the caae was summed up by
the prosecuting attorney and defense counsel
that the issues were presented In the back-
ground of current antagonisms. Although
the defendants had signed a confession, the
claim was made later that It had been Irreg-
ularly processed — that It waant made at po-
lice headquarters but In a hotel room under
circumstances which led to the expression
of many doubts.

SHOCKKO

This correspondent spent the weekend In
Alabama and talked to many people about
the Integration question. Notwithstanding
the Individual beliefs oi cltlzfns generally.
It la fair to say that many people who are on
the antlsegregatlon side were shocked by the
verdict of the Jury at Montgomery. Yet In
some respects the verdict wasn't surprising.
As one man In the South put it, "Why should
not 12 men In Alabama express their feelings
in a verdict, when 9 sociologists on the Su-
preme Court do the same thing?"

Reference was made specifically to some
of the recent cases of rape committed by
Negroes against white women — cases In
which confessions were duly recorded and
guilt plainly established, only to have the
Supreme Court of the United States reverse
such verdicts on technlcaUtles and allow the
defendants to go free.

Emotionalism has brought a state of ten-
sion that Is not going to be cured by any
provision of law denying Jury trials merely
because the privilege has been or might be
abused. While contempt committed Inside
a courtroom always has been punishable by
a Judge without a Jury trial, and attempts
to violate directly the terms of an Injunc-
tion are ordinarily within the power of a
Judge alone to punish, the real Issue Is
whether the Judge's Injunctions can be
stretched to cover crimes committed outside
the courtroom itself that normally are tried
by Juries.

It is better, therefore, for Congress to err
on the side of caution and to put faith
and trust In the people In a'.l sections of the
country, rather than to assume In advance
that ♦hey cannot be trusted In the Jury box.
To apply such faith Is to follow the path of
reason as against emotionalism.

For the racial questions are far from set-
tled, and those persons who think that, by
the order of any court, the people of the
South or of any other sect'on will approve
an ed:ct which they honestly believe Is not
constitutional Jii.'^t do not understand the
worltln^s of human nature. The crusade, for
Instance, against the 18th amendment on
prohibition — the willful disregard of the pro-
visions of the ;aw by millions of people —
showed clearly that a reform which Isn't sold
to the people In advance by thorough under-
standina: isn't accepted Just because it Is sol-
emnly proclaimed as "the law of the land "

A CONOmON

It Is a condition rather than a theory
which confronts the Nation In dealing with
the racial question which now has begun to
present problems in all parts of the country,
and not Just In the South. Violence will
not solve It. nor will coercion by broad In-
junctive orders of the courts. An adjusted
society has to come voluntarily out of the
processes of reason.

The amendment to the law which would
grant Jury trials In contempt cases Involv-
ing alleged crimes is bound to assist the
cause of reason. It puts the responsibility
squarely upon the people to see to It that
Jury trials are fairly conducted and fairly
restilved.

There are. of course, extremists on both
sides Their number will diminish, how-
ever, only as a sense of fairness develops
through the application of reason Instead ol

Tlolence. That Is why the grant of a Jury
trial in criminal contempt cases would be a
prosreaslTe step toward a better undersUnd-
Ing of the r«sponslbillUes of citizenship.
But if Congress, on the other hand, does
deny Jury trlaU, far more ground will
Xte lost than gained in the emotionally com-
plicated. If not presently unsolvable. problem
of sociology and government.

Fundamentally this whole act Is un-
sound and a dangerous threat to the
rights of the States and still more im-
portant It concentrates power In the
Attorney General such as no individual
official in America has ever enjoyed be-
fore.

Within this bill are the seeds Df a
Soviet-type Gestapo, of secret informers,
and. if the bill should become law. we
would be faced with the knock on the
door at midnight of the secret and un-
paid agents of the commission set up by
this bill and the tools of the Attorney
General. We could be jailed without
the benefit of trial by jury and at the
instigation of faceless informers. The
minds of Khrushchev. Bulganin. or
Stalin himself could not have conceived
a more dangerous surrender of in-
dividual power to a Government official,
politically minded as our Attorneys Gen-
erals usually are.

I warn you that in passing this bill
you create a Frankenstein monster that
can destroy us all. Power corrupts and
absolute power corrupts absolutely, as it
has been said. No Attorney General
should be entrusted with such power as
this bill would give him.

The people of my district have tasted
the bitter brew concocted of the unwar-
ranted interference by the present polit-
ically minded Attorney General who
sent his snoopers into Cobb County,
Ga., not to protect anyone's civil rights
but to Interfere with the adminis-
tration of the courts of law In that great
county of my district. He did this with-
out consultation with and. I beheve. over
the objection of the United States dis-
trict attorney for the northern district
of Georgia. He did It upon the Insistence
of the NAACP which had Interfered in
the defend of a Negro rapist who had
twice been convicted of the offense and
who was at the time of his last offense
of the same sort serving a sentence for
one of the previous assaults upon white
women. Moreover, the accused had ad-
mitted a third such offense and was con-
victed and sentenced to death though
represented by able counsel appointed by
the court and later had his conviction
affirmed by the Supreme Court of
Georgia where he was represented by
one of tne ablest lawyers In the State
employed by the NAACP.

And the snoopers who made the In-
vesligation did not confine themselves
to an investigation but slyly made sug-
gestions which the officers of the court
took to be an attempt to prevent fur-
ther prosecution of the Negro who, in
the meantime, had been granted a new
trial by the United States Supreme Court
upon a trivial point of law.

Although it gives me no pleasure to
do so, I can now report that the Negro
was tried again, was sentenced to death,
appealed his case to the Supreme Court
of Georgia, where it was affirmed, and

was executed recently after the Oorer-
nor had refused to commute his
sentence.

The charges of Irregularttlea in the
operation of the courts of Cobb County.
Ga.. were wholly without foundation and
the snoopM^g investigators finally made
a report clearing the coonty officials of
the charges that had been made against
tliem.

These laws would affect adversely the
South today, but they may well be used
in the future by politically minded At-
torneys General against every one of
you and the people of the States in
which you hve. In concJusion. let me
warn you that you had best lay aside
any polltisal Impulses that might cause
you to vote for this biO. and kill It.

The Chairman recognizes the gentle-
man from New York IMr. KkatikcI
for 5 minutes.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, we
have wandered rather far afield from
the amendment upon which we are
about to vote. This amendment seeks
to strike out the entire section 101 which
creates the Commission on Civil Rights.
If carried. It would entirely eliminate,
for all practical purposes, iwirt I of the
biU. It Is simply the begiimlng of an
elTort. Mr. Chairman, to tear this bill
apart section by section.

The opponents of the measure, know-
ing that it cannot be defeated in its
entirety, will offer amendment after
amendment, I apprehend, to weaken the
bill, to take out essential parts of the
bill. And this will be followed by others.

Nowhere today in our Government is
there any agency with the authority to
study the very important question of
whether there are American citizens who
are not being properly protected in their
constitutional rights. This field of con-
stitutional rights Is admittedly a tech-
nical one and, we know. It is perfectly
apparent that there are serious problems
in connection with It.

Those who have worked In the field
recognize the need for investigation and
serious study. Although this bill before
us. In parts m and IV, would broaden
the protection which people now have
In this area, there are still problems and
questions which this bill does not at-
tempt to answer.

There were other bills before our com-
mittee with provisions much more drastic
than this. They were rejected. Many
of them, however, are entitled to study.
It would be up to such a commission to
study them. We do not have sufficient
facts now. in our opinion, to make find-
ings and recommendations beyond those
embodied In thb measure. That is why
the President has recommended, and the
committee has reported, a bill which
calls for the creation of a bipartisan
commission to do research in this field.
I call attention to the fact that it would
be limited in its scope. It woukl com-
plete its work In 3 years. It would be
bipartisan in its character.

It is not at all unusual for such a com-
mission to be created by Congress to
make studies and reports such as those
contemplated by this legislation. We
have now the Commission on Govern-
ment Operations. We have the Com-
mission on Intergovernmental Relations

and the Commhakw on Oovenuna^ Se-
curity, all of them created by us la Con-
greas, and all of them attempting to gei
the answers to aomc o< the great prob-
lems which face oiu* country.

CoDgress has conferred on all of these
commiiBloris sidMtantis^ the powera
which are given to this commlssioo in
this legidatioKL They are not unusual.
They are not arbitrary powers, and
those who are to wield them are commis-
sioners to be appointed by the President
of the United States and confirmed by
the Senate. Certainly the last agency
on earth that could be vievjd as suspect,
or viewed with any fear on the part o<
any citizen in this land, or any Member
of this body, would be an agency set up
to look into the rights guaranteed by our
Constitution. This very Commisskxi is
created to preserve and to protect those
rights.

Mr. Chairman, I hope this amendm^it
will be defeated.

Mr. SHELLEY. Mr. Chairman. I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point in the Bscoao.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
California?

There was no objection.

Mr. SHELLEY. Mr. Chairman. In the
course of the debate on H. R. 6127, the
civil rights bill, the gifted constitutional
lawyers among my colleagues on both
sides of the issue have probed In detail
the legal and constitutional questions
which arise. They have came to no
general agreement. Two basic areas of
disagreement appear. Let me make my
own position on those basic issues clear.
I support this bill in Its entirety and
in supporting it I stand with those who
regard the Constitution as a guarantor
rather than a denier of the rights of
man.

First is the question as to whether th»
Congress has the right under the Con-
stitution to legislate on civil rights at
all. In February if this year I stated to
the Committee on the Judiciary my view
that—

The Constitution, which guarantees to the
Btatcs certain rights, does not guarantee
them tlxe right to do wrong.

Nothing in this debate or in the thou-
sands of words that have been spoken
or written on the issue since have
changed my strong conviction in that
regard one whit. Our Government im-
der the Constitution is a government
of laws and not of men. When we find,
as we do now, that over a period of
many years the voting rights and other
civil rights of a large body of our fel-
low citizens have been denied them by
the aeticms of men and the Inaction of
law, the law and the Congress as the
ultimate lawmaking body must assert it-
self. The 15th amendment to the Con-
stitution specifically states with regard
to voting rights that "Congress shall
have power to enforce this article by
appropriate legislation." Nothing can
be clearer. To say. as some have said,
that because the Congress has not seen
fit to use this power in the past they
should not or caimot do so now is pure
nonsense. There is no statute of limi-
tations on the rights and the duties of

the Cengresa as prescribed in the Con-
stitution. There is. on the other hand,
a limit on the extent to which those
who defy the Constitution can be al-
lowed to carry that defiance. To hold
otherwise is to reject every principle
upon which the Declaration of Inde-
pendence and the Constitution are
based. To hold otherwise is to forget
that section 2 of article IV of the Con-
stitution declares that —

The cttiaeBs of eacb State shall be entitled
to all prlTUeges and immunities of citizens
In the several States.

How Is that provision to be upheld if
the Congress and the Executive do not
have the power to legislate and to en-
force through the Federal courts laws
protecting those privfieges aod Immuni-
ties? It may be held that this section
guarantees to any citizen of the United
States that, while he is within the boun-
daries of any particular State, he Is
entitled only to those prirOcges and Im-
mtmlties which such State is willing to
accord him. But Congress must know
that the framers of the Oonstitution were
not blind moles any more than we are.
We must not limit our vision to a dark
tunnel of Ignorance as to what goes on
within the several States, and the clear
implication of section 2. article lY. is
that the Constitutional Convention of
1787 did not intend that we should.

The second basic legal issue on which
disagreement appears is on the question
of trial by jury in contempt cases arising
uiider the provisions of this civil rights
bill. The opponents of the bill, appar-
enUy conceding that they will lose the
first battle as to the Congress' power to
su:t, are in the classic phrase "retreating
to positions previously prepared" by set-
ting up a holding action on the issue of
trial by jury. The analogy to military
action is apt in that this maneuver is an
obvious feint to divert the House and
public opinion throughout the country
from the true purpose and from the main
objective of the campaign; namely, to
hold the line against any effective legal
protection f ex- the voting rights and other
civil rights of large blocks of our
citizens.

The House has been buried under a
mass of legal citaticMis on the pros and
cons of this argument. The issue seems
to me to be completely clear. The Con-
stitutiixi deals with the right to trial by
jury in two places: Section 2, article ni
says that —

The trial of all crlBsea, except in cases of
Impeachment, shaU be by jury.

And the sixth amendment states
that—

In an criminal prosecvrtlons, the accused
shall enjoy the right to a speedy and publle
trial, by an Impartial iwrj.

And I want to emphasize the word
"impartial." The contempt proceedings
which may result from the provisions of
H. H. 6127 are not crimes or criminal
pro8ecuti(»s within the clear meaning
of the Constitution. They must be un-
der the terms of the proposed law civil
contempt proceedings. Under prece-
dents reiterated time after time by the
courts and In common law any judge
And any court has the right to enforce

\ .1

CI7MATF

IM

111

I ■

h

fl

8860

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

'June 11

Injunctions or restraining orders Issued
by it through the power of a finding of
contempt of court with appropriate
punishment. This la not a new and a
barbarous concept as many of our dis-
tinguished colleagues would have us be-
lieve. It is as old as the courts and
written law.

Trial without Jury has precedMit In
these times in admiralty and other spe-
cial court proceedings. It may be un-
fortiuiate that circimistances prove the
necessity of resorting to it in civil rights
cases, but that is the case. It is signifi-
cant that the only exception to such a
finding by a Judge without a Jury trial
which the opposition to the present bill
can find is that in the Norris-La Guurdia
Act. As has been shown conclusively
that exception has since been waived by
the terms of the Taft-Hartley Act.

It is further significant, and I do not
believe the point has been brought out
here, that the Norris-La Guardia Act
contained an exception to the exception;
namely:

That this right shall not apply to con-
tempts committed In the presence ot the
court or so near thereto as to interfere di-
rectly with the administration of Justice
or to spply to the misbehavior, nalscon-
duct, or disobedience of any officer of the
court In respect to the writs, orders, or
process of the court.

This debate has brought out that a
great many of the anticipated violations
of court orders under this bill would oc-
cur under Just such circumstances.
Thus, the use of the Norris-La Guardia
Act provision as an argument against
the terms of H. R. 6127 is knocked inuo
a cocked hat as easily as the claim that
we do not need the bill at all because
there is nobody in this country who
suffers from the loss of civil rights.

Mr. Chairman. I had not intended to
spend so much time on these legal is-
sues which have been more ably pre-
sented by the distinguished chairman
of the Committee on the Judiciary and
other learned Members of the House.
The great body of people in this country
are not concerned with the legal niceties
of this situation where it cannot be
shown that the action proposed here
would do violence to the basic riglits and
constitutional guaranties of our citi-
zens, or to the rights reserved to the
States. Proof of that is certainly lack-
ing. In that case our first concern
must be that the remedy we apply is
good enough to cure the existing sick-
ness. H. R. 6127 is an absolute mini-
mum dosage if it is to be effective. The
committee has bent over backwards in
removing from the bill a great many
proposals which might have intruded
the Federal Government too far into the
affairs of the States. This bill for the
first time attempts to provide legal in-
surance that the civil rights of all of
the people of this country will be pro-
tected impartially no matter where they
may live. Let this Congress seize the
opportunity we have today to establish
a new landmark on the road to full
equality for all. regardless of race/ creed,
or color. We can do so by passing H. R.
6i27 without weakening amendments.
If we yield on these minimum demands
we will have failed to answer the voice

of those crying In the wilderness of dis-
crimination, asking that they be set on
the path leading to enjoyment of their
dignity as creatures of Ood and brothers
of all men.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from New York [Mr.
C«llir].

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield
back my time.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. CELLER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. The gentleman from
New York tMr. KxatingI stated that the
Commission would complete its work In
2 years. Will the gentleman from New
York [ Mr. Ciller 1 point out where in the
bill there Is a teimination date for this
Commission?

Mr. CELLER. The gentleman will
find it on page 6, starting on line 9 and
running through line 16.

Mr. GROSS. I do not believe that
provides for the termination. It states
that the Commission shall submit to the
President a final and comprehensive re-
port of its activities, findings, and recom-
mendations not later than 2 years from
the date of the enactment of this act.

Mr. CELLER. Now read further.

Mr. GROSS. 'Sixty days after the
submission of its final report and recom-
mendations the Commission shall cease
to exist."

I thank the gentleman from New York
and I am convinced.

The CHAIRMAN. The question Is on
the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Iowa [Mr. Gross).

The question was taken; and on a di-
vision (demanded by Mr. Gross) there
were — ayes 88. noes 127.

So the amendment was rejected.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman. I of-
fer an amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Arn)«Ews: On
paste 1. strike out all after the enacting clause
and Insert the loUowlng:

"ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION ON HITMAN
BCSXTTUTMENT

••SccnoN 1. There Is hereby created a com-
mission to be known aa the Commission on
Human Resettlement (hereafter In this act
referred to as the "Commission).

"MEMSnSHIP or THE COMMISSION

"Sec. 2. (a) The Commission shall be com-
posed Of three members appointed by the
President by and with the advice and consent
of the Senate.

•• ( b » Any vacancy In the Commission shall
not affect Its powers, but shall be filled in
the same manner In which the original ap-
pointment was made.

"oaCANIZATION OF THE COMMISSION

"Sec. 3. The Commission shall elect a
chairman and vice chairman from among
Its members.

•■quoktjm

"Sec. 4. Two members of the Commission
shall constitute a quorum.

"COMPENSATION OF THE MEMBKES OF THE

COMMISSION

"Sec 5. Bach member of the Commission
shall receive compensation at the rate of
$17,500 per year.

"STAFF OF THE COMMISSION

"Sec. 8. (a) The Commission shall have
power to appoint and fix the compensation of

such peraonnel m It deems adTlsAble. In ac-
cordance with provisions of the civil servlc*
laws and the classification act of 1949.

"(b) The Commission may procure, with-
out regard to the civil service laws and tha
classification laws, temporary and inter-
mittent services to the same extent as Is
authorised for the departmenU by section 15
of the act of August 2, 1940 (80 sUt. 810) .

"KZPSNSa OF THE COMMIS8IOK

"Sec. 7. There Is hereby authorised to b«
appropriated so much as may be neceaaary to
carry out the provisions of this act.
"BtrriEa of the commission

"Sec. 8. (a) The Commission Is authorised,
upon application therefor, to grant a relo-
cation loan in accordance with this Act to
any Negro living In any State In which racial
segregation U practiced, to enable such Ne-
gro to move to any StaU In which racial seg-
regation Is not practiced.

"(b) Each applicant for a relocation loan
shall specify In his appllcaUon the State,
and the town. city, or other location In that
State, to which he desires to move, the
names of the members of his Immediate
family who will move with him, the amount
of furniture, household effecu. and other
personal property which he plans to have
moved to that locaUon. and such other In-
formation as the Commission may require.

"(c) After an application has been ap-
proved, the Commission shall consult with
the sppllcant with a view to ascertaining the
exjjenses that he will incur in moving to the
new location and for which be may obtain a
relocation loan. The expenses for which an
applicant may obtain a relocation loan shall
be limited to the espenses of transportation
of the applicant and his Immediate family,
the expenses of moving furniture, household
effecu. and other personal property, and a
reasonable amount for immediate living ex-
penses of the applicant and his family after
the applicant has moved to the new location.
The Commission shall determine the total of
the expenses referred to In the preceding
sentence that will be so Involved In moving
to the new location and shall grant the ap-
plicant a relocation loan to pay such ex-
penses. No relocation loan shall be made to
any applicant in an amount in excess of
• 1.000.

"(d) No applicant may receive a reloca-
tion loan under this act unless he establishes
to the satisfaction of the Commission that
he has a general reputation in the commu-
nity In which he resides for working.

"PBOVISIONS EXLATINO TO REUKATION LOANS

"Sec. 9. (a) Each relocation loan may be
made available to the applicant In a lump
sum or, if the Commission determines that
the loan will not be needed by tiie applicant
in a lump sum, the loan may be made avail-
able to the applicant from time to time in
amounts as needed.

"(b) Relocation loans made under this
act shall not be assignable, shall be exempt
from the claims of creditors, and shall not be
liable to attachment, levy, or Belzure by or
under any legal or equitable process what-
ever, either before or after receipt by the
payee.

"(c) If any applicant for a relocation loan
under this Act who has recelveil any portion
of such loan, spends all or any part of such
portion for any purpose other than a pur-
pose for which such loan was made, he shall
be fined not more than 1 1,000 or imprisoned
not more than 6 months, or both.

"INTESEST ON IEL0CAT10N L-3AN8 AND
EEPATMENT

"Sec. 10. (a) Each relocaUon loan made
under this act shall be repaid in monthly
Installments. In amounts prestzrlbed by the
Commission at the time payment of such
loan Is first made to the applicant. Such
loans shall bear Interest at the rats of 2! a

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8861

per centum p«r annum, compounded annu-
aUy.

"<b) Kach relocation loan made under this
act in the amount of $500 or less shall be
repaid to the Commission In not less than 10
years: each such locm made in an amount In
excess of $500 shall be repaid to the Commis-
sion in not lass than 30 years.

"OKPTNITIOH

"Sec. 11. As used In this act, the term
'State' means each of the several SUtes and
the District of Columbia."

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I make
a point of order against the amendment
on the groimd that it is not germane.

Mr. ANDREWS. WIU the gentleman
reserve his point of order?

Mr. CELLER. Will the gentleman in-
sist upon pressing for his amendment?

Mr, ANDREWS. I would like to say
that I would like to have the amend-
ment adopted.

Mr. CELLER. If the gentleman insists
upon it. I must make the point of order
now. Unless the gentleman is willing to
withdraw his amendment after he makes
his 5-minute speech, I shall insist on
the point of order.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman. I ask
unanimous consent that I may proceed
for 5 minutes.

Mr. CELLER. And I will reserve my
point of order.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection,
the gentleman may proceed.

There was no objection.

Mr. ANDREJWS. I would like to ask
the gentleman from New York if he is
opposed to this amendment, which is a
bill now pending before his committee.

Mr. CELLER. There is a Rusisan
proverb that you do not roll up your
pants until you get to the stream.

Mr. ANDREWS. This bill was before
your committee last year, and we never
had a hearing. It is before your com-
mittee this year, and I doubt if we will
get a hearing. I did appear before your
committee and discussed this bill.

Mr. CELLER. Will the gentleman
yield?

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield.

Mr. CELLER. I believe the gentleman
did appear before our committee and did
testify at length on this amendment or
on the so-called human resettlement
when we were considering the civil-
rights biU.

Mr. ANDREWS. That is right, and
I asked you to incorporate it in your
civil-rights bill.

As I understand the civil-rights bill,
the main purpose of it is to help the
Negroes of the South. I submit to you
that my amendment or my bill will give
the Negroes of the South far more help
than will this so-called civil-rights bill.
My bill simply provides that if they are
imhappy down there they will have
ways and means of leaving and joing to
some State where they will be happy.

I submit to you that the proportion
of Negroes in the South is out of line
with what it should be. We have coun-
ties in the Sou-h where the ratio of
Negroes to whites is 8 to 1. The popu-
lation ratio in Mississippi is 45 percent,
and yet out In the State of Washington
the ratio is .0129. Up in North Dakota
the ratio is .0005.

Now we have done the best we could
for them in the South. If they are un-
happy. I am perfectly willing for them
to leave, and I think it is only fair that
some of these other States, whose Rep-
resentatives have so much ssrmpathy
for and Interest in these Negroes, to take
some of them from us if they want to
leave. But you would be surprised how
few would like to leave. It has been
said on the floor that they fare better
in the South than they do anywhere in
this United States. The purpose of the
bill pending before the House at this
time is to help a certain group of people
who at the present time live in the
South. I submit to you' that the pur-
pose of my amendment is to help that
same group. I submit further that the
only hope for better relations between
the white and colored people of America
is not to pass the civil-rights bill that
will penalize people of a certain section
of this Nation, as the pending bill will
do. but to pass a bill that will make it
possible for those people who are today
unhappy where they happen to be living
to move to some other place.

There Is ample precedent for this bill.
Following the end of World War n we
had a Displaced Persons Commission.
My amendment was drawn almost word
for word like the Displaced Persons Com-
mission Act.

What did we do under that bill? We
established a commission and they
brought literally himdreds of thousands
of people into this coimtry from foreign
countries. Why did they come here?
Those who came to America were un-
happy with local laws, customs, and con-
ditions that prevailed in the countries
whence they came. That is all my bill
does; it provides that any American citi-
zen who is living in a State today and
who finds himself unhappy virlth local
laws, customs, and traditions in that
State will be eligible for a Government
loan to move from that State.

The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentle-
man from New York insist on his point
of order?

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman. I renew
my point of order.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. FoRAND). The
Chair is ready to rule.

The gentleman from Alabama offers
an amendment to which the gentleman
from New York [Mr. Ciller] makes the
point of order that it is not germane to
the bill.

The Chair has examined both the bill
under consideration and the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Alabama.

The Chair finds that the bill under
consideration provides for the securing
and protecting of the civil rights, where-
as the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Alabama provides for the cre-
ation of a Commission on Human Re-
settlement which deals more with eco-
nomic benefits than with civil rights.

The Chair holds that the amendment
Is not germane and, therefore, sustains
the point of order.

The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

STTLIS or PROCEDURE OF THE COMMISSION

Bec. 102. (a) The Chairman or one desig-
nated by him to act as Chairman at a hear-

ing of the Commission shall annotmce ia
an opening statement ths subject of ths
bearing.

(b) A copy of the CcMnmlaslon's rules shall
be made avallabls to the witness before the
Commission.

(c) Witnesses at the hearings may be ac«
companled by their own coimsel for the pur-
pose of advising them concerning their con-
stitutional rights.

(d) The Chairman or Acting Chairman
may punish breaches of order and decorum
and unprofessional ethics on the part of
counsel, by censure and exclusion from ths
hearings.

(e) If the Commission determines that
evidence or testimony at any hearing may
tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any
person. It shall (1) receive such evidence or
testimony in executive session; (2) afford
such person an opportunity volunturlly to
appear as a witness; and (3) recefre and
dispose of requests from such person to
subpena additional witnesses.

(f ) Except as provided in sections 102 and
105 (f) of this Act. the Chairman shall re-
ceive and the Commission shall dispose of
requests to subpena additional witnesses.

(g) No evidence or testimony taken la
executive session may be released or used In
public sessions without the consent of ths
Commission. Whoever releases or uses in
public without the consent of the Commis-
sion evidence or testimony taken in execu-
tive session shall be fined not more than
$1,000. or Imprisoned for not more than
one year.

(h) In the discretion of the Commission,
witnesses may submit brief and pertinent
swcH-n statements in writing for inclxision
In the record. The Commission is the sols
Judge of the pertinency of testimony and
evidence adduced at Its hearings.

(1) Upon payment of the cost thereof, a
witness may obtain a transcript copy of his
testimony given at a public session or, if
given at an executive session, when author-
ized by the Commission.

(J) A witness atendlng any session of ths
Commission shall receive $4 for each day's
attendance and for the time necessarily oc-
cupied In going to and returning from ths
same, and 8 cents per mile for going from
and returning to his place of residence. Wit-
nesses who attend at points so far removed
from their respective residences as to pro-
hibit return thereto from day to day shall be
entitled to an additional allowance of $12
per day for expenses of subsistence, includ-
ing the time necessarily occupied in going to
and returning from the place of attendance.
Mileage payments shall be tendered to the
witness upon service of a subpena issued on
behalf of the Commission or any subcommit-
tee thereof.

(k) The Commission shall not Issue any
subpena for the attendance and testimony of
witnesses or for the production of written or
other matter which would require the pres-
ence of the party subpenaed at a hearing
to be held outside of the Judicial circuit of
the United States, as defined in section 41 of
title 28 of the United States Code, wherein
the witness Is found or resides or transacts
business.

Mr. LOSER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an
amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Loskr of Ten-
nessee: On page 4, lines 21 and 22, strllce out
the language "Judicial circuit of the United
States, as defined in section 41 of title 28
of the United States Code': and substitute
in lieu thereof the word "State."

Mr. LOSER. Mr. Chairman, I want
to call to the attention of the committee
what seems to me to be a rather vicious
provision in this proposed bill and if the
members of the committee will get their

ks

ia

11

1

8S^

COJSGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 11

1957

u

(•

i)

I ii

i

copies of the bill before them and turn
to page 4. I would like for all of you to
follow me for Just a minute.

I do not believe there is a aaember of
tlie bar present in the room who cannot
support this amendment with good grace.
It does not affect the bin at all other
than it is a protection to those persons
who may be called to testify before this
Commission. I should lilce the members
of the committee to look at line 17, page
4. and follow me for just a minute.
There It is stated :

The Commission shall not issue any sub-
pena for the attendance and testimony or
witnesses or for the production of written
or other matter which would require the
presence of the party sutpenaed at a hearing
to be held outside of the Judicial circuit of
the United States, as defined In section 41
of title 28 of the United States Cude. wherein
the witness Is found or resides or transacta
business.

It may appear to you from a super-
ficial reading that this pro\isicn cf the
contemplated law is Innocuous ^nd in-
consequential, but I want to call to your
attention title 28, section 41, of the
United States Code.

That section of the United States
Code sets up 11 Judicial circuits in the
United States and in the Territories and
possessions of the United States. The
First Judicial Circuit is the District of
Columbia. I will move on down to the
Fifth Circuit for the purpose of making
my point. The Fifth Circuit consists
of Alabama, the Canal Zone. Floilda.
Georgia, Louisiana. Mississippi, and
Texas. So this bill as presently drafted
provides that a witness can be compelled
to appear before the Commission at any
point in a judicial circuit — namely, at
any point in any one of the several
States.

To illustrate my point, may I say that
the Commission created by this act can
set itself up in the Kenilworth Hotel in
Miami Beach and call some poor unfor-
tunate out yonder in El Paso. Tex . to
come down to Miami Beach and testify
before this Commission.

And if that gentleman fails or refuses
to come he can be cited to appear before
the Commission in the Kenilworth Hotel
and moved down there by a United
States marshal and required to testify,
and if he is cited for contempt, if he is
found guilty of contempt, after the
United States attorney cites him in the
Federal District Court in Miami, he can
be tried by that judge in Miami Beach,
if a court sits there — and I am sure it
does — for contempt of court, and when
be makes his defense, if he has a certain
witness in his hometown in El Paso, Tex.,
he will be required at his own expense to
bring to Miami Beach one or a dozen
witnesses to testify to his good character,
if he so elects.

Mr. CKTJ.ER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. LOSER. I yield to the gentleman
from New York.

Mr. CELLER. If the gentleman will
refer to the bill, particularly on page 8,
he will find that only the district court
to which the Commission shall repair in
the event there Is a refusal to obey a sub-
pena can punish him in any way or com-
pel compliance with the subpena. The

Commission cannot compel compliance;
only the court can.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Tennessee has expired.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Chair-
man, I ask unanimous consent that the
gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Loscx]
may proceed for 5 additional minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Texas':*

There was no objection.

Mr. LOSER. The section that the dis-
tinguished chairman of the committee
refers to provides that —

In case of tcntum-^icy or refusal to obey a
wubpena. any dl9tr<?t covirt of the United
States or the United States court of any Ter-
ritory or possession, or the District Court of
the United States for the District of Colum-
bia, within the Jurisdiction of which the In-
quiry 18 earned on. or within the JunsdlcUoa
of wh.ci) said person guilty of ciniumacy or
refU5al to obey is found or resides or trans-
acts business.

So it provides specifically and cate-
gorically that if the Commission is sit-
tmg in Miami Beach, Fla.. and it cites
a person for his failure to appear from
El Paso. Tex., then it is reported to the
district court in the southern district of
Florida, and he can be required to come
there.

Now. if he fails to answer, or is guilty
of some act of contempt if he does an-
swer, then it is reported to a district
court in the .southern district of Florida
where he will be tried. And. I know of
no greater travesty, no greater reflection
upon the integrity of the members of
the legal profession than to submit to
you for your approval such a vicious and
reprehensible provision.

Listen to this, members of the com-
mittee. It not only provides that it
can happen in the Fifth Judicial Circuit,
but it provides that if the Commission
should so see fit to ro out to Honolulu
and sit. and hear, and determine what
IS happening in that island, they can
subpena some man or «:ome woman from
Alaska about any violation of his civil
rirrhts. They can call you people from
Arizona, from California, from Idaho,
from Montana, from Nevada, from Ore-
gon. Wa-shington. even from Guam.

Mr. Chairman. I know of no more
vicious and reprehensible section of an
act than what I have called your atten-
tion to, and all that I am asking you
to do is this: This does not hurt the bill,
Mr Chairman; It does not hurt the bill.
All that I ask i.s and all this amendment
provides is that whatever State or Com-
monwealth this Commission is holding
its meetmg in. that the witness be called
in his own State, if he is guilty of an
act of contumacy, and let him be tried
in his own State. That is the law of
the land. That is the law of our fore-
fathers who came over here on the
Mayflower. Let a man be tried wher-
ever he resides, and I cannot see why
any man would object to such a pro-
vision as I have offered here.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LOSER. I yield to the distin-
guished gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. The gentle-
man has disclosed such an atrocious in-
vasion of the rights of American citizens
in this ridiculous provision of this bill

that I am wondering if the gentleman
in charge of the bill will not agree to
his amendment.

Mr. LOSER. I have great admiration
and respect for our very distinguished
chairman. I have learned io love him
here during these months, as I have some
Oi my friends over here. I am Just won-
dering if the distinguished gentleman
from the great State of New York would
not yield just this little one inch so that
a man would have the right to be tried
in his own State. I do not believe the
chairman would want one of the citizens
of Brookljm to have to be called down to
Guam or Hawaii.

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman >ie!d?

Mr. LOSER. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. WILLIS. May I .say that this
amendment was offered beftn^ the full
committee. There was a quorum pres-
ent. We are all lawyer.s Those who
were present voted in favor of this
amendment. It was defeated by the pro-
duction of proxie--^ of those not present.

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield ^

Mr. LOSER. I yield to the distin-
guished gentleman from Tennessee.

Mr BAKER Mr. Chairman. I want
to compliment my colleague from Ten-
nessee on a very fine argument and a fine
amendment.

Mr. LOSER. I thank the gentleman.

Mr CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield'

Mr. LOSER. I yield to the chairman
of the committee.

Mr. CELLER. Of course, under exist-
ing law. under title 28 a United States
district court now may subpena anyone
from any part of the country. He is not
limited even to the Judicial circuit. He
can subpena him even from a foreign
country, if the person Is a citizen. So
that there is nothing novel or new In
this provision.

I might say, Mr. Chalrmar, that when
it comes to commissions such as the Fed-
eral Communications Commission, the
Civil Aeronautics Board, the Interstate
Commerce Commis-slon. t.^e Federal
Trade Commission, the Fedtral Housing
Commission, the Atomic Energy Com-
mission, there is no su?h limitation such
as the gentleman seeks to impose In this
bill. Those Commissions may subpena
from any part of the land and compel a
man to come to Washington. So that I
say again there Is nothing new about
that.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Loser]
has expired.

Mr. LOSER Mr. Chalnnan. I ask
unanimous consent to proce«?d for 5 ad-
ditional minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is theie objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Tennessee?

There was no objection.

Mr. LOSER. Mr. Chairman, I would
like to say to my dlstingui;ihed friend
from New York that he hf.s correctly
stated the law. I am not talking about
a witness lieing subpenaed; you pay his
expenses, so much per diem; I believe
$12, and so on. That is all right. But
I am talking about trying him for con-
tempt thousands and thoiisands of miles

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8863

away from his home. I say that Is a
travesty and a reflection upon Anglo-
Saxon thinking, that such a bill should
be brought Into the Congress of the
United States. Here you are talking
about trying a man in Quam who lives
In Miami, or vice versa. Even El Paso,
Tex., \B 2,500 miles from Miami Beach.
And you can take a man and try him
under such circumstances.

I appeal to the finer sensibilities of the
memt>er8 of the bar, a great profession.
I Just cannot believe; It is inconceivable
to me that partisanship aside. Republi-
cans or I>>mocrats, Just fair play, re-
spectability, doing imto others as you
would like others to do unto you, would
Impel everyone to vote for this amend-
ment. It Is Just fair play and decency.

Mr. Chairman, I would like the oppor-
tunity to bring a message to you from
Tennessee. I say that Tennessee today
Joins with the grand Old Dominion, the
Commonwealth of Virginia, South Caro-
lina. Louisiana, Texas, and the galaxy
of Southern States in opposing this
vicious piece of legislation. But If you
are determined that it shall become law,
if you are determined to send Into the
Southland these 15 Itinerant carpet-
baRKers to search out their friends and
their neighbors, and to array class
against class, neighbor against neighbor,
and friend against friend, under the guise
of protecting the civil rights of these peo-
ple, then at least accept the amendment
which I have offered.

Listen: down In my country we want
their support. If I may be permitted
to say, I have heard it said that thou-
sands of dollars have been spent in major
campaigns in my State and in my city
in order to get every person of any race,
color, or creed registered and qualified to
vote. I thank goodness that I list them
among my friends. Forty-five percent
of the population of my community Is
colored. I have had the pleasure and
the privilege of serving as the district
attorney in that area for more than a
quarter of a century. At no time within
my recollection has a man of color or
any man. without reference to his rell-
pion, received from me consciously an
unfair deal. I have prosecuted thou-
sands and thousands of people, but at
no time have I ever sought to try a man
away from his home unless he had come
into my district and had committed a
crime.

So I appeal to you, ladies and gentle-
men of the committee; the Members of
the greatest parliamentary l)ody on
earth, presided over by a man who has
made the greatest contribution to the
legislative processes of the greatest Na-
tion in the world In its history, and I
refer to our distinguished and beloved
Speaker.

I do not believe that you meml)ers of
the bar and I do not l)elieve that you
nonmembers would want to be hailed
down in my neighborhood If you live In
Texas, and there tried for contempt of
court.

Mr. CELLEK. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. LOSER. I yield to the gentleman
from New York.

Mr. CELLER. That would not be the
case. You have to be within the Judi-

cial circuit, and New York Is not In the
same circuit as Miami.

Mr. LOSER. That Is exactly right.
New York la not in the same circuit.
New York Is In the second circuit, and
It does not bother you too much because
the other two States In your circuit are
nearby. But I am talking about the poor
unfortunate Individual who lives In El
Paso, and this Commission sits down In
Miami In the Kenilworth Hotel, If you
please, and I Just Imagine they would,
because they provide here that their
actual and necessary expenses shall be
paid plus $50 a day.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Tennessee has expired.

Mr. LOSER. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to proceed for 3
minutes, and then I will conclude.
There is something that has not been
referred to.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Tennessee?

There was no objection.

Mr. LOSER. There Is Just one other
phase of this matter that I want to call
to your attention. There Is not a single
requirement for membership on the
commission other than that he be a
Commission other than that he be a
Democrat or a Republican. The very
distinguished gentleman from New York
(Mr. Keating] suggested that It would
be bipartisan. Suppose the President of
the United States, and he has that power
under this bill, decides to appoint as
members of this Commission the dis-
tinguished gentleman from Rochester
as the Republican meml)er and the dis-
tinguished gentleman from Brooklyn as
the Democratic member. Two members
can go about the country with their
horde of Itinerant carpetbaggers looking
around to see what they can do.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Chairman,
win the gentleman sdeld?

Mr. LOSER. I yield.

Mr. ABERNETHY. I think the gen-
tleman has described more qualifica-
tions than they are required to have.
They do not have to be Democrats or
Republicans — they Just have to be a
member of a political party. That Is all
the bill says.

Mr. LOSER. That is right.

Mr. ABERNETHY. They just have to
be politicians^ that is all.

Mr. LOSER. I thank the gentleman.
The amazing thing to me about the re-
quirements of this Commission, to Illus-
trate the point that i make, is that It Is
entirely within the realm of i)ossibility
that the gentleman from Rochester and
the gentleman from Brooklyn might be
two members of the Commission because
the members of the Commission are
exempted from the operation of section
281 of title 18 of the United States Code.
I wonder how many have gone to the
trouble to discover what section 281 Is. I
will tell you what It is. It is a felony
statute. It Is in the criminal code of
the United States. It exempts Members
of Congress from receiving gratuities for
any service that they might render In
cormectlon with the performance of their
duty as members of this Commission. So
I say It Is contemplated by the draftsmen
of this statute that Members of Congress

would be eligible; and I say to you In all
frankness that I do not have any objec-
tion to it at alL But, It does seem as a
matter of fair play, and I would say a
bit of respec^blllty, that there should
have been some geographical limit placed
upon the membership so that there
would have been some semblance of bi-
partisanship or nonpartisan conduct, if
you please. Now I have made these ob-
servations— I have attempted to recite
the law. I submit myself now for what-
ever time is available to answer any
question that any Member of Congress
wants to propound.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LOSER. I yield.

Jilr. ABERNETHY. Did I understand
the gentleman to say that there was a
waiver put in this bill so that Members
of Congress could be appointed to this
Commission and draw compensation
therefor? In other words, are the pro-
visions of the statute which would pre-
vent them from serving on this Commis-
sion and drawing compensation waived;
is that the situation?

Mr. LOSER. Let me read the section.
It Is on page 5, section 103. subsection
(b):

Each member of the Commission who la
otherwise in the service of the Government
of the United States shall serve without
compensation in addition to that received
for such other service, but while engaged in
the work of the Commission shall be reim-
bursed for actual and necessary travel ex-
penses, and shall receive a per diem allow-
ance of $13 In lieu of actual expenses for
subsistence, inclusive of fees or tips to porters
and stevrards.

Mr. ABERNETHY. In other words,
the answer to my question Is "Yes"; is
that it?

Mr. LOSER. Yes.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Then I think that
answers it clearly enough and one would
not have to go any further than that.

Mr. LOSER. Let me answer you in
this way. I assume that the Members of
the Congress are in the service of the
United States and. therefore, they are
eligible for appointment to the memlser-
shlp of this Commission. The exemption
which the distinguished gentleman from
Mississippi inquired about is the $12 a
day that they are going to draw and the
subsistence including fees and tips — so
I say I am hopeful, extremely hopeful.
that we will consider this thing of the
question of the right of subpena — let it
lae limited to the State in which the wit-
ness lives, In order that he might be near
his friends and neighl>ors. if not with
them.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point in the Record.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Alabama?

There was no objection.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Chairman, this
bill impinges upon vital principles — the
right to trial by Jury, the rights of the
States to govern themselves. It Invades
fields for the Federal Government In
which the Government never before has
entered. It would pour out an Indeter-
minable amount of money with no prom-
ise of equitable return. It would be

1:

ye 'J

4

! >i

8864

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

azwther step toward altioiate centralln-
tion at CtoTerzunent. It would breed
mistmst and conflict. And. with all this.
it would provide no new tight, no new
prlTilege to any citizen of this Nation.

The signposts of approaching central-
isation of powers haye long been appar-
ent. You can see them along the path
taken for the past 20 years by the Su-
preme Court. In decisions as recent as
yesterday, this Court has demonstrated
g^eat pains to protect the fifth amend-
ment. But what of the 10th amend-
ment? What df the powers reeerved to
the States? These have been recklessly
overlooked, brazenly defied.

The Supreme Court tossed aside Judi-
cial precedent in its integration decree.
It showed an amazing lack of concern
for the rights of the citizens, of the
States, and even of the Congress. Under
this Supreme Court, we are traveling a
road to tsrranny. One of my distin-
guished colleagues has called it. most ap-
propriately, "a centralized Federal tyr-
anny." This trend manifests Itself in
the civil force measure now before us.
This bill would further the move to cen-
tralize all Government in Washington
and. more specifically, in the OfUce of the
Attorney General. This is an impossible
course. In 1887. a distineiulshed north-
em general. Gen. George B. McClellan,
wrote:

In a country lo vast as ouri. with such
great differences of topography and climate,
with a population so numerous and derived
from such a variety of sources, and. In con-
sequence of all this such diversity of habits,
local laws, and material Interests, it Is Im-
possible for a centralized government to leg-
islate satisfactorily for all the domestic con-
oerns of the various parts of the Union.

And yet. that is the course upon which
this bill attempts to navigate. This bill
even dares to push the Federal Govern-
ment into the field of elections, special
and primary. The Members well know
that there is no such thing as a Federal
election, nor is there any Federal elec-
tion machinery. Each election is a State
election, conducted under State law. in
harmony with the Constitution of the
Unttid States. This is as the people want
It aad this is how our Founding Fathers
intended it.

There has been a lot of talk about
jury trials and indeed, there needs to be
additional talk, if that is what it takes,
to show those who would favor this bill
why this right must be protected. Loss
of jury trials is a serious abrogation. It
was one of the complaints of the colonists
when they set down their Declaration at
Indtpendence, charging King George
with "depriving us. in many cases, of the
benefits of trial by jury."

It was grounds for tisserting the peo-
ple's rights, for flethting for them, as it
were. George IV heard the people's
voice when he arbitrarily wrested this
riuht from tlie early Americans. And
the Attorney General will hear this voice
re-echoed down the decades. Patrick
Henry was ri^ht when he said he judged
the future by the past. We can well
profit by readin?: our history tx)oks. The
citizens of today will not sit idly whUe
the rights of their States are usurped.
They will not twiddle their thumbs per-

functorily while their right* to jury trials Commission who would do this. There-
are encroached upon. fore. I think it is fair to assume that
A law that cannot be enforced is worse the Commission would act in good faith,
than no law at all. This bill, should it would use its subpena powers as neces-
become law, would not be enforceable by sary and Justiflod. and that therefore
its repugnancy to thousands of good the fears that there would be injustice

citizens.

If no other argument appeals, this bill
should be rejected from a purely eco-
nomic standpoint. Estimates on what
the proposed Civil Rights Commission
would cost the taxpayers have been con-
jectural, but they have been tremendous.
And what assurance is there that the
Commission would cease to drain the
taxpayers' dollars at the end of the pro-
posed 2 years? Does anyone honestly
thmk the minority pressure groups
would allow such a powerful tool to perish
once they have succeeded in spawning
it? We diligently try to keep the budget
in line, to trim the fat from the lean,
and then there comes along such legis-
lation as this, attempting to create an
entire, new Government agency and to
spend an inestimable sum of money to
make it function. It is puzzhng para-
doxy.

Mr. Chairman, to truly protect the
rights of the people, to preserve the
rights of the States in their own affairs,
to curtail further centralization of power
in the Federal Government, and to wisely
use the taxpayers' hard-earned dollar, it
seems imperative to me that we reject
H. R. 6127.

Mr. PORTER. Mr. Chairman. I rise
in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the posi-
tion of my colleague from Tennessee.
I know that he speaks sincerely. Cer-
tainly I know that he must have been
a very effective prosecutor and a very
fair one. But I am mterested that my
colleague from Tennessee and the others
here who are so anxious to improve this
bill are not intending to vote for it when
they have it improved.

I think the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee would, con-
trary to his assertion, hurt the bill, be-
cause the bill is addiessed to a regional
problem, and to limit the subpena power
of the Commission, even to greater ex-
tent than is the case witli Federal dis-
trict courts, as the able chairman
pointed out. would be to tie the hands
of the Commission in attacking what is
a regional problem. We may disagree,
and I am sure we do, about what we
should do with respect to the solution
of this regional problem, but If we are
trying to solve it by this method, trying
to make the Commission effective, then
we should not tie its hands and say its
power should be limited with respect to
subpenas to a single State. So I say It
would certainly hurt the bill. It Is all
right to be against the bill. Many will
vote against it. But I do not think we
should say it would improve the bill to
limit the Commission's power in this
manner.

The gentleman from Tennessee said
this could give rise to a "vicious and
reprehensible" practice of calling some
man from Texas to Miami Beach. I do
not think it is fair to assume that this
would be done without reason. I do not
think it is fair to assume that the Presi-
dent would appoint a person on the

of a sort that could be called vicious
and reprehensible certainly are not war-
ranted under these circumstances.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. PORTER. I yield.

Mr. CELLER. If this amendment
passes, you have a situation where you
confine the work of the CommisKion to
a single State, and the Commission
would be hampered in its labors. They
have to hold hearings in probably 30
or 40 different States, When you con-
sider that their life is but 2 years, very
little could be accomplished. Otherwise
they would simply hold their heai'ings
in the Judicial circuit which takes in a
group of States. To Insist upon their
holding their hearings in individual
States may sound nice but it is purely
specious and. as the gentleman says, this
is a regional proposition rather than a
State proposition.

Mr. PORTER. I heartily agree with
the gentleman.

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr. Chair-
man. I move to strike out the last word.

Mr. Chairman. I rise because of my
affectionate concern for my dear friend
from Texas. Marthi Diss. I do not want
him to become convert to the ekiquence
of his own oratory so that tonight he
would lie restless and unable to sleep
worrying about that time when there
will be in the city of Chicago a race riot.
It was nice of my dear and beloved
friend from Texas to suggest that such
should come to my city of Chicago. I
am glad to know that he is thinking of
Chicago, and I am certain that he would
like to know what is the real situation
there.

Yes; we have a very large Negro popu-
lation.

Yes; a considerable part of It has come
in recent years from the Southland.

Yes; one boy came from the State of
Mississippi in the year 1950 lookmg for
opportunity. He came to our Chicago.
He worked there to obtain his education:
and I am happy to tell my dear friend
from Texas that it was my great privi-
lege within the last few months to ap-
pomt that young man. winning in a
competitive examination with a very
slight fraction under the maximum pos-
sible, to a cadetship at one of our great
service academies.

Yes; two of the wards in my district
are represented in the city council of
Chicago by Negro aldermen. Two of the
committeemen are Negroes, and there
are no better aldermen or better servi-
tors of the pubhc interest anywhere than
these committeemen and these alder-
men.

Yes: within the last decade or two we
did have in our Chicago a prejudice, and
we were practicing discrimination. Only
a few years ago. maybe 10 years ago. the
Chicago Bar Association lifted the ban
against entry into the Chicago Bar As-
sociation of Negro lawyers. A Negro
lawyer was elected to one of our higher
State courts. Within tlie last year the

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8865

Chicago Bar Assodation took a poll re-
flecting the esteem In which the city
Judges are held by the lawyers in Chica-
go, and this Negro Judge. Judge Wendell
Green, led all Judges sitting on the bench
in the esteem and approval of the law-
yers of Chicago.

Mr. DIES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Not for the
moment because I have waited for some
time to answer the suggestion of my dear
beloved friend frcan Texas that in Chi-
cago we are going to have a race riot. I
have only 5 minutes. In that time I wish
to tell my friend and my colleagues that
in Chicago we have learned to live to-
gether in real brotherhood, and we are
living together in harmony and mutual
helpfulness because the representatives
of the white race and of the Negro race
are all doing their best to contribute to
the building of a fine, wholesome climate
in which men and women and children of
all races, creeds, and stations can strive
together for the attainment of content-
ment. And in Chicago we have learned
to measure men and women only by
character and by their contribution in
practice and in example to their fellow
Americans.

I know the concern of you In the South.
You are accustomed to the old order; you
are fearful of what may happen in this
changing order. I want merely to give
testimony to what has happened in our
Chicago. It should allay your fears of
what will come to pass when the old order
completely has been replaced with the
new order of the new day of our genera-
tion. We have accepted the concept that
there cannot be a God In Heaven if His
children are to be measured by the color
of their hair or the hue of their skin.
That is our faith strengthened by experi-
ence, and that is why we say to you. our
beloved friends in the South, put upward
to the heavens your eyes, have courage
to depart from the status quo to follow
the broadening path of progress and faith
that as we work together in mutual re-
spect for the dignity and the rights of all,
our country will attain the purpose of
her destiny.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike out the requisite number
of words.

Mr. Chairman, I rise at this time to try
to get some information with relation to
paragraph (g) of this section, appearing
on page 3 of the bill, referred to by the
gentleman from Tennessee I Mr. Bass)
some time ago.

I would appreciate if someone would
answer the question as to whether that
section was not primarily put in there
for the purpose of protecting witnesses
that might appear before the Commis-
sion and If it is not* therefore, a good
section.

Mr. CKIIJKR. Yes ; I think the gentle-
man is correct in that statement.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ROOSEVELT. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Colorado.

Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. There was
a great deal of testimony by Members
who appeared before the subcommittee
who stated that Irresponsible Individuals
would be making wild charges. If they

cm 658

came before this Oommlashm and it waa
an open meeting and they made accusa-
tions against individuals which were un-
true and unfounded, or that may tend
to injure the reputation of certain peo-
ple, we then authorised the committee
to have an executive session and by hav-
ing an executive session they could evalu-
ate as to the responsibility of this par-
ticular individual and the testimony that
he might give. So. in order to make
sure that the rights of the individuals
would be protected, we provide that the
testimony shall not be released unless
the committee does so itself.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. May I ask the gen-
tleman from Georgia [Mr. Forrester]
whether he does not think this is prob-
ably a good section to leave in the bill?

Mr. FORRESTER. I will be glad to
answer the gentleman's question. He is
not talking about this provision referring
to circuits and with reference to which
an amendment is pending?

Mr. ROOSEVELT. I am talking about
section (g) on page 3.

Mr. FORRESTER. With reference to
that 8ectl<m, if I recall correctly, the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.
WaltuI suggested that as a safeguard
and it is my imderstanding it was put
in there as a matter of protection.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. I thank the gen-
tleman.

Mr. BYRNE of Pennsylvania asked
and was given permission to extend his
remarks at this point in the Record.)

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, I am
very happy to have this opportunity to
indicate my support of H. R. 6127. the
Civil Rights Act of 1957. This is a meas-
ure that deserves the support of every
single American citizen, and therefore,
I should say, it deserves most (tarticu-
larly, the sui^iwrt of every single Con-
gressman.

We have all come here to Washington
as the delegates of different areas and of
different people; our backgrounds are
varied: our points of view are widely
contrasted. But we have all come here.
I hope, with one aim foremost: the good
of the whole country. The Civil Rights
Act of 1957 is one of the most important
measures that has come before this
House and it is unquestionably a meas-
ure that is directed at the good of the
whole country.

In broad outline, this measure repre-
sents an attempt to insure that no per-
son may be denied the equal protection
of the laws in the exercise of any one
of his civil rights, and most particularly
In the exercise of his right as a citizen
of the United States to vote in the na-
tional elections. American democracy
has been based from Its very inception
upon the principle that every citizen
may vote. "No taxation without repre-
sentation" was the cry on the lips of the
men who first fou^t for our independ-
ence. It is equally appropriate today.
When a single Individual Is wrongfully
deprived of his rights. It Is a violation of
the Constitution. When a whole group
of people are systematically excluded. It
is a national shame and a crime.

In the Bible, it is clearly written "In-
asmuch as ye have done it unto one of
the least of these My brethren, ye have
done it unto Me." Tlie meaning of those

wonlB is Inscribed deeply into oar Con-
stitution, into our Bill of Rights, into
every great document of our liistory.
America as a country owes much of
ho- greatness to the q;>irit of this quota-
tion. It has been possible in this coun-
try for every individual to claim a posi-
tion for himself based upon his own
aWlities. Legally, every individual has
been entitled to the equal protection of
the laws. The civil rights of even the
most unpopular minorities have been
protected against the wrath of unthink-
ing majorities by the force and influence
of a Constitution conceived in a spirit
of religious and poUtical tolerance.

Today the United States is taking Its
rightful place as a leader of the free
world. We are insisting that every Na-
tion in the world is entitled to hold free
elections at which all citizens may vote
without fear or favor. But imfortu-
nately we are not taking the same in-
terest in our own American scene where
civil rights are bemg denied to various
groups on the wholly Illegal grotmds of
racial prejudice.

The Civil Rights Act of 1957 repre-
sents a moderate and carefully thought-
out effort to protect Important civil
rights. It provides for a bipartisan
commission to study the whole field and
investigate alleged violations of civil
rights. It provides the person who has
been discriminated against with the op-
portunity to appeal to the Attorney
General for assistance where he cannot
afford to hire his own lawyer. And it
provides for civil rather than criminal
punishments for those who are con-
victed. Surely there is nothing In this
bill that could offend any sincere or
loyal American.

This measure is not a partisan bill.
It is not aimed at any one region, al-
though there are some who appear to
have such guilty consciences about their
treatment of minorities that they are
prepared to look upon this bill as a per-
sonal or sectional insult. It is aimed
against any individual, anjrwhere in the
country who unlawfully attempts to de-
prive another of his rights. Our an-
cestors were prepared to fight a revolu-
tion to win these rights. It is only fit-
ting for us to make sure that they are
defended, wisely and well, wherever they
may be challenged. In this spirit, the
Civil Rights Act of 1957 was conceived,
and in this spirit, I ask that you give
your support to the measure.

Mr. METCALF. Mr. Chairman. I
move to strike out the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I had not anticipated
^peaking on this bUI. I rise in favor of
the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Tennessee, but I am going to vote
for the bill when it comes to final vote. I
feel that dragging a man a long way from
his home to testify before a commission
that may be a hostile commission la not
in the best interests of justice in this
country.

Mr. Chairman. I live in a district that
te incorporated in the Ninth Judicial Cir-
cuit. It is a huge district. It has been
described here. It is easio: to get from
Helena, Mont., to Washington, D. C,
than it is to get from Helena, Mont.,
to San Francisco. CaUf.. ^i^iich is the

"t

!}-'

%1

1%-^

I* M

4 si

■M

ill

ItIi

m

m^

r

II

8866

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

seat of the ninth circuit. This Com-
mission could hold a hearing In Los
Angeles, Calif., and It would be twice
as hard for witnesses or for people to
appear before that Commission in Los
Angeles as it would be for them to
appear in the city of Washington. It Is
easy for the chairman of the Commit-
tee on the Judiciary, it Is easy for the
gentleman from New York, to say that
the circuit In which he resides is small.
But, this bill. I believe, is not aimed at
the South. This bill has something to do
with the rights of people to vote in my
State, and the reason I am going to vote
for this bill is because I feel it will protect
the civil rights of people in Montana,
Washington, and in the Dakotas. But, I
want the people of Montana and Wash-
ington and the Dakotas to have an op-
portunity to appear before a commission
in the same region, in their home areas.
So. I feel that we should give them the
opportunity that the gentleman from
Tennessee has so eloquently asked for.
and I urge that this particular amend-
ment be adopted in order that, if there
are some charges, the defendant be
called before a commission in his home
community, in a nearby community, and
that he be tried and present his testi-
mony in that way rather than be dragged
off to Los Angeles or Tucson, Ariz.,
or other areas that were described by
the gentleman from Tennessee.

Mr. ABERNETHY Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?

Mr. METCALP. I yield to the gentle-
man from Mississippi.

Mr. ABERNETHY. I certainly want
to extend my personal thanks to the
gentleman for his deep and profound
sense of fair play and equity. We have
been on this bill now for 3 or 4 days, and
there are some in the House who sin-
cerely have been trying to bring to the
Members of the House amendments
which would treat people as human be-
ings and treat them fairly, particularly
with regard to the proceedings of this
Commission and the courts. And, I can
see in the gentleman's statement a little
ray of hop>e and a little ray of sunlight
that this House, before it concludes its
action on this bill, is going to rise to a
sense of fair play and high responsibility
and adopt amendments which some, deep
down in their hearts, know are right and
fair but on which, up until now, I know
they are wavering Uid say they do not
know whether they can vote for or not.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Chairman,
Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. METCALF. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. In view of that
statement, I would like to ask the gentle-
man whether he Is in agreement, how-
ever, that the previous proposition re-
garding jury trials, would injure the bilL

Mr. METCALP. Well. I wiU roll up
my pants when I come to that stream. I
will say to the gentleman.

Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. METCALP. I yield to the gentle-
man from Illinois.

Mr. YATES. The gentleman sub-
scribes to the argument of the gentle-
man from Mississippi, and I think es-
sentially the reason the gentleman from

Montana wants this bill and the gentle-
man from Illinois wants this bill is that
we are trying to provide the blessmg of
the Constitution for all Americans and
provide equal Justice under law for all
Americans. Is that not a fact?

Mr. METCALP. Exactly. And. I be-
lieve the right to vote is just as important
to certain minority groups in the State
of Montana as it is m the State of Mis-
sissippi. I feel that there are some dis-
criminations in the State of Montana,
but if this Commission comes out to the
State of Montana to investigate. I want
the witnesses that appear before that
Commission to appear in their own
communities, in their home environment,
and have sui opportunity to present their
testimony there rather than be dragged
off to the State of California where they
may be sitting in the Biltmore Hotel in
Los Angeles.

Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I
would like aeain to bring the problem
before us into its proper perspective.
We have heard, in the debate on this
amendment, atwut extraneous matters
which do not pertain to the exact prob-
lem before us, which is whether we will
change the wording on page 4 from "ju-
dicial circuit of the United States" to
•State." In other words, whether we
will require that any hearing of this
commission be held in the State where
the witness is supenaed.

Now. this particular provision was the
subject of considerable discussion in our
subcommittee and in the full committee.
Under the bill passed la.st year in this
body there was absolutely no limitation
upon where the witness could t)e sub-
penaed. and that was in accordance with
the manner in which all other commis-
sions are set up.

I have before me the provision relat-
ing to the Commis.sion on Government
Operations. It Is in line with that of
other commissions similarly constituted
and says that —

The Comml.sston or. on authorization of
the CommlMlnn. any 8iil)C()mn>lttee or mem-
ber thereof, may. for the purpose of carrying
out the provisions of thla act. hold such hear-
ings and sit and act at such times and places,
and administer oaths, and require by sub-
pena or otherwise, the attendance and testi-
mony of such witnesses • • * as the Com-
mission or such s'.itKommlttee or member
may deem advisable.

In Other words, the Commission on
Government Operations, the Commis-
sion for Government Security, the Ccm-
mission on Intergovernmental Relations,
and all other commissions that have been
created may require the attendance of
witnesses anywhere. Time after time
we have been confronted here in Wash-
ington with trials for contempt of those
who have been brought here from other
parts of the country.

The representation was made to us
that it was not fair to bring witnesses
from other parts of the country to Wash-
ington, that this Commission would only
sit in Washington, and that we should,
therefore, place some limit on the points
to which witnesses could be brought.
There was a lot of discussion whether it
should be limited to the State where the
witness resided, or to his Judicial district
or circuit, or whether there should be

any limitation »t all in the bill. This
provision was Inserted In the nature of
a compromise, m a eonceasion to the op-
ponents of this measure, and in recog-
nition of the unfairness, perhaps, of
bringing all of these witnesses to Wash-
ington and having all of the hearings
here. Even this, as I have said. Is an
exception to anything we have ever done
before.

It is sought by this amendment to
limit it to the State. I do not appre-
hend that the residents of Texas are go-
ing to t>e so terribly upset over having
their expenses paid to Miami Beach to
attend a hearing. I think it is no great
hardship when you limit it to the judicial
circuit. There are 11 of them In the
United States. There Is still a regional
limit. We have certainly bent over
backward to try to be fair in the matter.

Mr. CELT, PR. Mr. Chairman, will the
the gentleman yield?

Mr. KEATING. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.

Mr, CELLER. If we provided for
these hearings in every State, there are
48 States. Ordinarily there was the sug-
gestion to hold the Commission's hear-
ings anywhere and then there were sug-
gestions that we limit it to the United
States district. There are 96 districts. It
would make it difficult for the Commis-
sion to visit 96 districts just as it would
be difficult for the Commission to hold
hearings in 48 States. So we provided as
a compromise for 11 Judicial circuits, and
I think that is a pretty good compromise
and should prevail.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from New York I Mr. Kxat-
INCI has expired.

Mr KEATING. Mr. Chairman. I ask
unanimous consent to proceed for 2 ad-
ditional minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?

There was no objection.

Mr. VORYS. Mr. Chairman. wiU the
gentleman yield?

Mr. KEATING. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Ohio.

Mr. VORYS. I wanted to ask whether
the Committee on the Judiciary does not
thmk that the Federal Judicial districts
of this Republic are fairly well appor-
tioned to the population of the States,
so that that is a fair way to arrange such
a matter?

Mr. KEATING. That was the feeling
of the committee. I will say to the gen-
tleman from Ohio. This is a provision
in the bill where we gave recognition,
as the chairman has said, to the fact
that this bill probably could be improved
somewhat over the bill which passed this
House last year. I repeat, there was
nothing in that bill, and there has been
nothing that I am aware of in any legis-
lation creating any of these commis-
sions, which has ever placed any limit
on the places where witnesses could be
required to attend.

Therefore. It is my feeling that we
have gone as far as we should be asked
to go in taking account of the possibil-
ity that witnesses were going to be
hauled here and there and were going to
be inconvenienced by being taken from
one place to another. There would be

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8867

no inconvenience under the bill the way
it now reads, because they would all be
required to attend In the same general
part of the United States,

I therefore hope that the committee
will not accept this amendment, and
will agree with our committee that we
have already made all of the concessions
that we should In that regard.

Mr. DAWSON of minols. Mr. Chair-
man, almost 10 years ago. on June 29,
1947. a great President, President Tru-
man, stood befor the Lincoln Memorial
and with profound insight pointed out
that—

civil rights today means not only protec-
Hon of the people against th* Government,
but protecUon of the people by the Oovem-
ment.

I recall also President Truman's state
of the Union message to Congress, de-
livered In this very Chamber, on Jan-
uary 5. 1949, in which he said:

The driving force behind our progress Is
our faith In our democratic institutions.
That faith Is embodied In the promise of
equal right* and equal opportunities which
the founders of our Republic proclaimed to
their countrymen and to the whole world.
The fulfillment of this promise Is among the
highest purposes of Government.

Today, we who legislate for all the
people of our great Nation are engaged
in a truly historic debate on the clvil-
rlRhte bill. H. R. 6127, a debate which
will determine whether we really believe
in fulfilling that promise which is among
the highest purposes of Government.

What this Congress does on this bill
Is being watched not only throughout our
country, but all over the world. For this
is a day when the eyes of men everywhere
in the world are turned upon us, to see
whether we really believe In the democ-
racy that we profess.

A.«;k yourselves, my colleagues of the
Southland where I was born and grew
to manhood, ask yourselves: **How will
the people of other nations respond to
our efforts to stem totalitarianism
abroad. If we do nothing to protect and
strengthen the basic rights of citizenship
of our own people, right here at home?"

I say to you, with all Ihe candor and
seriousness I can muster, that our coun-
try Is not so strong, that the ultimate
triumph of democracy Is not so certain
and inevitable, as to permit us to Ignore
what the world thinks of us.

The right to seciu-ity of person and the
right to vote are perhaps the two most
fundamental rights of citizenship. No
democracy can exist without them. The
basic purpose of the civil-rights bill is to
protect these rights. It is a fair, mod-
erate, and proper way to deal with the
growing threat to law and order that is
developing in our country.

It is a bill, furthermore, which seeks
to prevent, rathn- than to punish, viola-
tions of law. It invokes Judicial reme-
dies in civil proceedings, rather than the
harsh method of criminal prosecution.
It will protect not only the cIvH rights of
citizens seeking to exercise their right to
vote, but also will protect the local offi-
cial who, under local pressures to dis-
criminate, must often choose between
commimlty ostracism and criminal
prosecution. It is, therefore, a bill

which is essential to the welfare of our
Nation.

The civil-rights bill win not deny due
process to anyone. Any defendant will
be entitled to a full hearing in open
court, in his own Judicial district, before
any injunction could be issued against
him. He will have the right to coimsel,
and the right to cross-examine wit-
nesses. If an injunction is issued, the
defendant can appeal to the circuit
court of appeals. If he disobeys the in-
junction, he will again have his day in
court, with counsel, before any order of
contempt is issued against him. and this
order also he can appeal to the circuit
court of appeals. I have full confidence
that the district courts, the coiuts of
appeals, and the Supreme Coiut, will be
most scrupulous in safeguarding the
rights of any defendant.

We are hearing, in this debate, a great
to-do about the right to jury trial. The
Jury trial proposal. I say to all of you,
insofar as this bill is concerned, is neither
fair, nor in accord with our traditional
system of American jurisprudence.

I say it is not fair because its basic
purpose in this bill is to give a privileged
position to local officials who not only
violate their duty to protect the consti-
tutional rights of citizens seeking to vote,
but also defy the orders of Federal judges
which are issued pursuant to the law of
the land.

I say it Is not in accord with our tradi-
tional system of American Justice because
there has never been a constitutional
right to a Jury trial in a civil case; be-
cause the right to a jury trial in a crim-
inal case is in no way altered by this bill ;
because it is unconstitutional for Con-
gress to deprive a court of equity of its
inherent powers to enforce its decrees;
and because the Jury trial proposal will
enable community prejudice to block
judicial enforcement of existing and
valid laws.

There is not a single State in this Union
which provides for trial by Jury in con-
tempt cases. There is utterly no prece-
dent in the legal history of a single
Southern State, or in any other State in
the Union, for such a proposal. I ask
you, my colleagues, why. oh why, are
you trying to impose a jury trial in con-
tempt proceedings \mder this bill? Is it
because you want to continue to deny to
men and women of Negro ancestry that
right of full citizenship which is theirs
both under God and under our Consti-
tution? Is such a purpose decent, or
moral, or right? You know in your heart
that that is not true Americanism. You
know that that \s not the way to make
America grow greater and stronger.

I speak to you as one American to other
Americans. I speak to you as legislators
who must carry and fulfill the great re-
sponsibility of voting for what is beat for
all America. I urge you to reject the
crippling amendments that some of my
brethren are mlsguldedly proposing, and
to vote for the civil-rights bill.

Mr. 6HUFORD. Mr. Chairman, I am
{^Tposed to H. R. 6127, the so-called civil
rights bill, for I do not think it is legis-
lation in the best interest of the Ameri-
can people.

All of us believe in the right of every
citizen to enjoy the privileges and im-

munities granted by our Constitution,
but the provisions of this bUl afford no
such giiaranty. The proponents of the
measure, apparently seeking to correct
some imaginary infraction of the elec-
tion laws of the several States, particu-
larly in the South, have looked only to
the political end they seek and have
failed to look to the method by which
they seek to obtain that end. The adage
that "the cure is worse than the disease-
certainly applies in this instance for this
bill win deprive the people of rights and
liberties of the highest order which are
very dear to them.

The bill provides for the useless estab-
lishment of an expensive Commission
supposedly to study civil rights questions,
and also creates another expensive and
liseless department in the Attorney Gen-
eral's Office, manned by an additional
Assistant Attorney General and staff.
The designated duties of this Commis-
sion and the new Assistant Attorney
General caimot help but impress one
that Gestapo methods may arise by
reason of their activities. Their powers
are broad, with no responsible super-
vision over their acts and conduct. Cer-
tainly, there is no place in the American
life for such provisions.

There is one part of the bill to which
I wish to address myself particularly,
namely, those provisions which will de-
prive the people of a right of trial by
Jury in criminal contempt proceedings,
thereby establishing government by In-
jimctlon. The bill gives to a Federal
judge the right to try criminal cases on
the civil side of the document and to
ranploy equity rules for that purpose,
thus dispensing with the constitutional
guaranty of the determination of the
issue of guilt or innocence by a verdict
of a jury. This "gimmick" was accom-
plished by transposing, almost word for
word, the Federal criminal statute, safe-
guarding the right of a person to vote,
to the civil section of the law and then
providing that in all such cases the
United States should be a party to the
action with the right to the Judge of a
district court to issue injunctions to re-
strain the anticipated infraction of the
law and the attendant right of punish-
ment for contempt in case the judge
deemed his restraining order violated in
any respect. This proceeding is not new
for it was tried in certata actions grow-
ing out of labor disputes and abandoned
as oppressive. Why. I ask. is this pro-
ceeding necessary? The United States
Oovemment has an adequate remedy in
law for the violation of the criminal
statute. Why, I further ask, should we
attempt to adopt a proceeding ttaX has
heretofore been tried and failed miser-
ably?

Recently, in a press interview, the
President of the United States quoted a
statement of former President William
Howard Taft as his authority for oppos-
ing an amendment to the bill permitting
trial by jury in injunction cases. The
Washington Evening Star took the Pres-
ident and Mr. Brownell, his Attorney
General, to task for calling in the late
President Taft as a witoess. I think it
well to quote this editorial in Its enttrety
to show how far afield the proponents
of this bill have gone in their endeavor

1

II ;

llfl

il

8868

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

to curb the civil rights of the American
people:

For reuons which are obscure to us. the
Attorney General has called the late William
Howard Taft as a witness in his behalf In
his opposition to the Jury trial amendment
to the proposed civil rights bill. And at his
prev conference last week the President
Joined Mr. Brownell.

Early this month the Attorney General
wrote to several Members of Congress arguing
against th« Jury trial amendment. And he
quoted the former President and Chief Jus-
tice to this effect:

**The administration of Justice lies at the
foundation of Government. The mainte-
nance of the authority of the courts is es-
sential unless we are prepared to embrace
anarchy. Never In the history of the coun-
try has there been such an insidious attack
r;pon the Judicial system as the proposal to
Interject a Jury trial between all orders of
the court made after full hearing and the
enforcement of such orders."

On tu face, this sounds impressive — and
It certainly Impressed Mr. Brownell. But
lets look a little closer. Mr. Taft made the
statement In a speech accepting the Repub-
lican nomination In 1908. It was a political
speech — a speech attacking a Democratic
proposal to provide for Jury trials of persons
acciised of violating labor Injunctions.

A year later, on September 16, 1909. Mr.
Taft made another speech, and we con\mend
It to Mr. Brownell's attention. For by that
time Mr. Taft had been elected, and It Is
fair to say. we think that his real attitude
toward Jury trials became clearer. The truth
Is that Mr. Taft. a former Judge even at that
date, did not think very highly of the Ameri-
can Jury system. He thought that "a Judge-
ship Is a great office and the man who holds
It should exercise great power and he ought
to be allowed to exercise that In a trial by
Jury." He deplored the practice of letting
Juries "follow theu- own sweet will, influenced
by all the arts of counsel " He spoke chld-
Ingly of the "weaknesses, the timidities, and
the Ignorance of Juries " In short. Mr. Taft
preferred the English system, where, as he
put It, a murder case would be disposed of
in 2 or 3 days, and where "the Judge con-
trols the trial."

But let us go back to the 1908 speech. Why
does Mr. Brownell cite It in support of his
current opposition to Jury trlal.s In clvU-
rlghts cases? For the plain fact Is that Mr.
Taft was mistaken. Despite his opposition.
Congress did provide for Jury trials In labor
cases. And the country did not sink Into
anarchy, nor did the provision prove to be
an Insidious attack upon the Judicial system.
In short. Mr Taft was Just about as wrong
as a man could be In 1908. Why does Mr.
Brownell call him to the witness stand in
1957?

Since the President and Mr. Brownell
have seen fit to quote then candidate
Taft. as above set forth, I do not under-
stand why they did not quote from Presi-
dent Taft's inaugural address of March
4. 1909, when he said: "What remains is
the 15th amendment to the Constitution
and the right to have statutes of States
specifying qualifications for electors
subjected to the test of compliance with
that -xmendment. This is a great pro-
tection to the Negro. It never will be
repealed, and it never ought to be re-
pealed. If it had not passed, it might
be diflQcult now to adopt it; but with it
in our fundamental law. the policy of
.southern legislation must and will tend
to obey it, and so long as the statutes
of the States meet the test of this
amendment and are not otherwise In

conflict with the Constitution and laws
of the United States it is not the disposi-
tion or within the province of the Fed-
eral Oovemment to Interfere with the
regulation by Southern States of their
domestic affairs."

Mr. Chairman, the pending bill will
not protect any rights that are not al-
ready protected by the Constitution of
the United States. We have ample stat-
utes to safeguard the citizens of this
great country of ours. I sincerely hot>«
that the measure will be defeated for It
is unnecessary legislation and not in the
best American tradition.

The CHAIRMAN. The question Is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Tennessee LMr. LosmI.

The question was taken: and on a
division (demanded by Mr. Ckller)
there were — ayes 106, noes 76.

Mr. CEIXER. Mr. Chairman, I de-
mand tellers.

Tellers were ordered, and the Chair-
man appointed as tellers Mr. Losxa and
Mr. Cii.r.CT.

The Committee again divided, and the
tellers reported that there were — ayes
116. noes 89.
So the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I move
that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the Committee rose, and
the Speaker having resumed the chair,
Mr. For AND, Chairman of the Committee
of the Whole Hou.sc on the State of the
Union, reported that that Committee
having had under consideration the bill
iH. R. 6127 > to provide means of fur-
ther securing and protecting the civil
rights of persons within the jurisdiction
of the United States, had come to no
resolution thereon.

I trust that this amendment will be
soundly defeated and that this House,
and this Congrest, will then go forward
to enact a measure which will go a long
way to protect our citizens, wherever
they may live and whatever their race
or religion, in their Inalienable right to
cast their ballot in freedom and dignity.

GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND
REMARKS

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within
which to revise and extend their re-
marks on the pending bill.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection?

There was no objectior..

Mr. REUSS. Mr. Speaker. I rise in
support of the civil-rights bill. H. R.
6127. I am opposed to all amendments
which would weaken this measure, in-
cluding the so-called trial-by-jury
amendment.

It has been claimed by the opponents
of this bill that its purpose is to de-
prive citizens of constitutional rights by
punishing them without a jury trial.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
The purpose of this bill is very simple:
It is to guarantee the sacred constitu-
tional right to vote of every citizen by
preventing attempts to deprive them of
their vote, rather than waiting to punish
the offenders when it is too late to give
the victims back the vote that they have
lost. The bill seeks to punish no one.
It is only those who would willfully defy
the protective orders of the Federal
courts who would choose to subject
themselves to punishment for their mis-
deeds.

THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

Mr. REBCE of Tennessee. Mr.
Speaker. I ask unanimous consent to
extend my remarks at this point In the

RCCOM).

The SPEIAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Tennessee?

There was no objection.

Mr. REECE of Tennessee. Mr.
Speaker, during recent weeks there has
developed in this country a grave situa-
tion which merits the most attentive con-
sideration of this Legislative Body, I
refer to the unbridled and concerted
attacks upon our ally and good neighbor
the Dominican Republic. A veritable
barrage of Insults and invective has been
leveled at this little country both on this
floor, in our press and on our radio and
television broadcasts. The language In
which these charges are couched has
been heretofore reserved for describing
our attitude toward warlike and fanat-
ical enemies.

I have to date refrained from raising
my voice In protest of these unwarranted
assaults upon our Dominican friends, in
the fond hope that some reason and
commonsense would replace emotion In
our national disposition toward this
affair. But events of recent days made
it clear that the proverbial head-ln-the-
sand attitude will not still this contro-
versy or heal the breach In our
long-standing good relations with the
Dominican Republic, which these as-
saults have produced.

In the vanguard of the severest critics
stands a Member of this body lending
the weight and dignity of his office to the
castlgation of this neighboring country.
Although the conduct of foreign affairs
Is the proper prerequisite of the Secre-
tary of State, every Member of Congress
has the imqualified right and, on occa-
sion, even the duty to voice his senti-
ments toward our Nation's management
of international relations. And it is our
prerogative to criticize, within bounds,
those responsible for the conduct of for-
eign affairs whether It be the President
of the United States, the Secretary of
State or the leaders of this House. But
a Member of this House has transgressed
all reasonable limits of authority and
propriety In waging his campaign of
vituperation against our Caribbean
friends.

On Sunday last, the New York Times,
a newspaper noted for its accuracy, car-
ried a story that this Congressman had
addressed a group of dissident, disjointed
and frustrated Dominican expatriates In
Puerto Rico. In the course of the meet-
ing, this United States Representative Is
reported to have expressed sympathy
with the revolutionary ambitions of tbl3

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8869

mob against the de Jure de facto govern-
ment of the Dominican Republic.

Words are not within my grasp to ex-
press the sickening, appalling horror that
I felt upon reading of such action by a
Member of this body. Search your
memories for a precedent In which an
American ofBclal, be he legislative or
executive, has openly supported the vio-
lent overthrowing of the government of
a friendly allied country. I have not
done so and It Is heartening to say that
I recall no such Instance. Visualize the
effect that such action could wrought on
our relations with other sovereign states
of the world, needless to mention our
friendly neighbors.

Like many another country In this
hemisphere, the United States was in-
strumental in freeing them from the yoke
of European oppression. The Domini-
can Republic has risen from the depths
of colonial depresstlon to a position of
material and spiritual well-being and
stability almost unequaled outside of our
borders. They have steadfastly support-
ed our policies not only In the Western
Hemisphere but throughout the world.
They have generously and eagerly given
up of their sovereign territory for the
installation of military bases essential
to our national defense and security.
They have encouraged American Invest-
ment In their country and have seldom
If ever sought American financial
subsidy.

If the government of a friendly and
allied country has acted In a manner
contrary to the best Judgment of the
United SUtes, It Is the right of the Sec-
retary of State to officially express dis-
approval and in extreme cases demand
retribution. But such Is a far cry from
attempting to undermine or overturn the
government of another country, partlcu-
lary an allied neighbor. Angry and de-
liberate protests were raised against Eng-
land and Prance for their recent action
In the Middle East, but never was It sug-
gested that the governments of those
countries should be toppled by revolu-
tionary or even democratic means.

It is the duty of our Oovemment, both
legislative and executive, to denounce
such brazen encroachments upon the
sovereign right of the Dominican Repub-
lic. Criticize we may, if warranted pro-
test we must, but never should we alien-
ate or seek to destroy the government of
a neighbor, an ally, and a friend.

SPECIAL ORDER TRANSFERRED TO
THURSDAY

Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr.
Speaker, I ask that the special order
granted me for today be vacated and
that I may have the same permission for
Thursday next.

The SPEAKER. Without objection. It
Is so ordered.

There was no objection.

REPUCA OF THE "MAYFLOWER"
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr.
Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to ad-
dress the House for 1 minute and to re-

vise and extend my remarks and Include
a newspaper article from the New York
Herald Tribune.

The 8PEABER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentlewoman from
Massachusetts?

There was no objection.

Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr.
Speaker, as the replica of the Mayflower
which came to this country years ago is
approaching Nantucket Light, I think all
of us who are descendants from those
gallant people who came over on that
little ship should ask ourselves what we
have done to carry on the courage and
self-sacrifice of those people. We owe
them a debt of gratitude that we can
never repay.

The article which I wish to include is
as follows:

SicNmcAirr Votacz
As MayfiovDer H slips under spring skies
toward Massachusetts Bay, she makes a
handsome and algnlflcant picture. Into her
building and sailing has gone the labor of
love — the bonds of affection between two
gTMit nations, the nostalgia of men who
have recreated the old sea ways of the day* of
oak, hemp, and canvas, the abiding respect
which a little group of pilgrims impressed
upon posterity. And above all, the little
craft with her sails bravely set above that
archaic huU brings a sense of history; of
the passage of centuries of atrlvlng; of
small beginnings that nourished mightily
through courage and faith.

How acctirately Mayflotoer II represents
her predecessor in detail, probably no one
will ever know. Students of ancient shlp-
wrlghtry have searched old books and
records for hints; the sum of knowledge
about the Pilgrim vessel Itself Is small In-
deed. The more than 8 centiiries that have
elapsed since the older Mayflower set her gal-
lant little band ashore at Plymouth have
left scant remnants of fact about her.

And so It is with the Pilgrims who sailed
In her to the New World. A few — Governor
Bradford, for a notable example — left clear
marks in history. But for the others. It is
hard to know which were of simple faith
and which ambitious; which were gnawed by
doubts and needed stiffening in crises: which
gave courage to the rest. With them It is
as with their ship— there may have been
cracked beams and unsound timbers In the
fabric, yet the Journey was made, the Job
was done.

In the misty places of history, legend
sometimes sheds a light that never was on
land or sea. Were there men and women
in the Plymouth Plantations who died de-
spairing; disillusioned with a land that had
brought them neither peace of mind nor
ease of body? It Is hardly posrible that all
could look back on the hardships of that
long voyage In a cranky little ship, on the
toils, the dangers, and the deprivations of
building a home upwn the harsh coast of a
vast, untraveled continent, with a sense
that It had been wholly worth while. Old
homes in England, exile in tolerant Holland,
must have been gilded In memory to some,
even when Pljrmouth was well established,
and colonies were springing up about the
bay. Freedom is not everyone's highest
goal.

If such there were, It does not greatly
matter. What is important Is that a group
of stalwart souls set out in a raw, new land
to worship God in their own manner and
to order their affairs by their own wUls.
And the seed they planted grew like the
corn Massasoit's Indians taught them to cul-
tivate. In time it mingled with the other
crops that were being, or soon to be, grown
on Uttle clearings hacked out of the wilder-

ness— at Jamestown, at New Amsterdam, and
New Sweden: in Rhode Island, where Roger
Williams seceded from the seoesslonistB of
Ifassachusetts; in Maryland, where Lord
Calvert's Catholics found refuge and gave
It; among Peniuylvania'a Friends and Geor-
gia's freed debtors. They all helped to build
here a land of the otherwise minded, diverse
in race and creed, united in hope. Divisions
there were; wrongs crept m, as In any human
society. But implanted in the very soU of
the patchwork community that grew up
unplanned was the fundamental thesis of
the law: no wrong without a remedy.

For 350 years, the American Nation has
been growing in size and in material
strength. And as It grew it sought to root
out the evils that it saw. As the growth
continues, so mtist the striving toward great
spiritual goals. For whatever fatUts the
people who sailed to this continent in ships
like the Mayflower may have poeseased they
left the heritage of a stniggle for freedom
and human welfare as their richest legacy.
It must never be dissipated in the time of
power and wealth.

ONE HUNDRED AND PIFTIETH ANNI-
VERSARY OF THE BIRTH OF ABRA-
HAM LINCOLN

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker. I
ask unanimous consent that the gentle-
man from Illinois [Mr. Mack] may ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
Record.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. MACK of Illinois. Mr. Speaker,
Springfield, HI., is Abraham Lincoln's
hcnnetown. It is the place where he
spent most of his adult life. It is where
he practiced law and where his children
were born. The people of Springfield
and surroimdlng counties elected him to
Congress in 1846. It was from Spring-
field that Lincoln went forth to challenge
Stephen Douglas in the famous series of
debates that so clearly defined the great
Issue of that time. It also was in Spring-
field that Lincoln in 1860 began a jour-
ney that was to place hiqi in a position
of unprecedented power as President of a
divided nation. He never saw Spring-
field again. But Lincoln lies buried in
Springfield and he Is so much a part of
that city that even now residents born
long after his death think of him as a
departed neighbor as well as a national
hero.

It Is fitting, therefore, that plans are
being made In Springfield for observing
2 years hence the 150th anniversary of
the birth of Abraham Lincoln. Because
of the national, and even international,
importance of this anniversary I have to-
day introduced in the Congress a Joint
resolution to establish an Abraham Lin-
coln Sesqulcentennial Commission.

This Commission would be composed of
19 members including the President of
the United States, the Vice President, and
the Speaker of the House. In addition,
there would be 4 Senators appointed by
the Vice President, 4 Representatives ap-
pointed by the Speaker and 8 public
members appointed by the President.

It woiUd be the duty of the Commis-
sion to make plans for the Lincoln
sesqulcentennial observance in 1959. In

il

!i

8870

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

prepAiing Its program, the Commission
would be directed to give consideration
to any plana submitted to It. and to cor-
relate the various plans of State and civic
organizations.

Mr. Speaker. I hope that the House of
Representatives will take immediate ac-
tion on thia resolution. It is imperative
that this resolution be approved before
we adjourn so that the Commission can
be appointed this year. We have only 2
years to plan the Lincoln Sesqulcenten-
niaL Thus, it Is important if we are to
do honor to this great President, that
Congress take the first step now.

THE CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY
AND ITS 22 ISSUES

The SPEAKER. Under previous or-
der of the House, the gentleman from
Florida [Mr. CkamxrI is recognized for
45 minutes.

Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker, on
Wednesday, May 22. the gentleooan from
New Jersey [Mr. Thompson! commented
on a study prepared by the Congressional
Quarterly, which purports to show the
support President HIisenhower is receiv-
ing from the Members of the 85 th
Congress.

If the gentleman from New Jersey had
addressed us prior to July 27. 1956. 1 could
well understand his accepting the data
presented by the Congressional Quarterly
as accurate, unbiased statistical material.
However, the Cohcressiowal Record, vol-
ume 102. part 11. pages 15067-15072, pre-
sents an exhaustive analysis of the Con-
gressional Quarterly's method of measur-
ing the support President Eisenhower
received from the Congress. It was pre-
pared by the senior Senator from Kansas.
This analysis is so completely docviment-
ed that it is difficult for one to be de-
ceived today by the so-called objective,
nonpolitical statistics prepared by what
my friend from New Jersey caUs the non-
partisan Congressional Quarterly of May
16. 1957. We have had several refuta-
tions by respected Members of the Hoxise
of these statistics by Congressional Quar-
terly in the past few days, but I would
like to expand on this subject because of
Its extreme Importance to every Amer-
ican.

The Congressional Quarterly was
founded by Nelson and Henrietta Poyn-
ter. who also publish the St. Petersburg
Times, a leading newspaper in my con-
gressional district. The Poynters arc
Democrats and have nearly always sup-
ported national Democratic programs
In the St. Petersburg Times, which, of
course, is their prerogative. They are
extreme partisans. I do not question
their sincerity, but I have never accepted
the Congressional Quarterly as an ob-
jective, nonpolitical. factual document.
When supposedly nonpartisan data Is
presented for use by the press of the
country whatever their political leanings
to show that the Democratic leadership
has given President Elsenhower more
support than the Republican leadership,
it becomes necessary to review such sta-
tistics with a great deal of care to deter-
mine the true facts.

Allusions to the Congressional Quar-
terly that would infer some official status
when quoted by newspapers across the
Nation is graphically illustrated in the
St. Petersburg Times of Sunday. May 19.
1957. on tlie editorial page where, under
the byline of HenrietU and Nelson Poyn-
ter — as before noted oa'ners both of Con-
gressional Quarterly and the Times — the
statement is made "The extent of the
Congressional revolt Is demonstrated in
the Congressional Quarterly siu-vey of
support of the President in the 85th
Congress." Such unqualified reference
is, with the tie-in of the word "Coiigres-
sional." an out-and-out attempt to mis-
lead as to authority and source.

The Poynters article, deviously Intend-
ing to Indicate a GOP revolt by such
members as Minority Leader Josiph
Martin. Representative Charles Hal-
LECK and Republican Whip Leslie
Arxnds. also Included an evaluation of
support of the President by the Florida
delegation. I am shown as in support
of the administration programs 32 per-
cent of the time as opposed to my sup-
port In the 84th Congress, according to
Congressional Quarterly. 79 percent of
the time. I might point out that the
President has never called on me as a
Member of the House of Representatives
blindly to support any of his proposals
at any time and I do not anticipate I
shall ever be called upon to quahfy any
of the convictions that I hold. This I
would never do. However, the figures as
prepared by Congressional Quarterly are.
in my opinion, completely misleading
and false as to my actual conviction and
belief that the programs presented by
the President are In the great majority
sound and have received my support. I
have and shall continue to vigorously
support a great percentage of this pro-
gram presented by President Eisenhower.

The Congressional Quarterly analysis
of the 85th Congress attempts to meas-
ure our support for President Elsen-
hower's program by recording the posi-
tions we took in the House of Repre-
sentatives on only 22 rollcaUs. The Con-
gressional Quarterly study included a
mixture of House and Senate rollcalls.
The Congressional Quarterly release
states :

The weakening of Republican support baa
caused the President aome legislative loaaeai
His poaitlon was upheld on 19 of the 31
rollcall votea In 1957 for vox average ol 61
percent. In the Democratic 84th Congresa
(1956-56), the President's winning average
waa 72 percent: in the Republican 83rd Con-
gress (1953-64) It was 83 percent.

The mixture of House and Senate votes
completely confuses the issue. In my
remarks I will make no attempt to dis-
cuss votes in the other body. I feel
confident that some Members of that
body win see that the facts are correctly
presented.

President Eisenhower In the various
messages he has sent to the Congress,
including his budget message and the
state of the union message, made more
than 60 legislative proposals, more than
a score of them of major Importance.
It is absurd to attempt to measure the
support we are giving President Eisen-

hower by recording votes on a few roll-
calls, while the major portion of his pro-
gram is bottled up in commitlees under
Democratic chairmen. I need not re-
mind this body that the Democratic
Party has a majority on every committee.
The Democratic leadership de<:ides the
form in which legislation will be re-
ported to the Congress and whether it
will ever even come before us for a vote.
Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. CRAMER. If the majority leader
would permit me to finish. I will be
deUghted to.

Mr. McCORMACK. Leave us Demo-
crats out, and we will let you alone.
But. when you start talking about bills
being bottled up in committee, I cannot
sit here and take that Idly.

Mr. CRAMER. I wUl be delighted to
yield to the majority leader Juit as soon
as I conclude my remarks.

Mr. McCORMACK. I have said aU I
want to say.

Mr. CRAMER. To cite from a later
Isstie of Congressional Quarterly — for
week ending May 31 — In which they
again flatly state the decision on Items
for consideration was their own. only
6.6 percent of the President's lequests to
the 85th Congress had been approved
and 3.53 percent rejected with an amaz-
ing 40 percent not even having been con-
sidered In any way by this democrati-
cally controlled Congress. I challenge
anyone to deny that, with these their
own flgtires. the analysis of support was
badly based on a very low number of
votes — and by assuming such editorial
position In the light of democratically
controlled committees and Congress
highly indicative of who is .-iupportlng
whom.

On April 17 our friend, the gentleman
from Indiana [Mr. HallkckI saJd that
"with the 1st session of the 85th Con-
gress Just about half over, the score-
board of accomplishment is still almost a
complete blank." He further observed
that "after 3 '^ months of this session, I
can only conclude that the Democrat-
controlled committees of the House and
Senate have been indulging in a political
turtle derby to see who can stall the
longest on vital legislation."

The only way one can measure the
support accorded the President is In
terms of his entire program and on the
basis of enough rollcalls so that a few
votes on two bills do not completely dis-
tort the picture. Contrary to their sup-
port statements even Congressioiial
Quarterly seems to recognize this fact in
the progress of the President's program
as Indicated above.

Last August the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. Simpson 1 prepared
an exhaustive review of the support
President Eisenhower recei\ed In this
body during the 83d and 84th Con-
gresses. Unlike the Congressional Quar-
terly, he did not attempt to compile this
record on the ba&ia of & few issues. He
waited imtil the books were closed and
all the votes had been counted. This
study appeared in the CoifCRissioHAL
Racoao, volume 102. part 11. pages
15670-15678. I am inciudin^t the tabla

CQ^9

rmsrnRESSiONAL record — HOUSE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8871

prepared by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania in my remarks, so that we
may see where the record stood when

the Congressional Quarterly started
compiling statistics on the 1st session of
the 85th Congress:

AU. Eisenhower rollcalls

N'umher
of votes

Eisenhower position

Opposed to Eiscnbover posiUoa

ConcTcss

Republicani

Democrats

Democrats

Repabllcans

Vot« cast

Pprcent

Votes cast

Percent

Votes cast

Percent

Votes cast

Percent

8*1

123
128

Ift.PM
IT.lwe

61 f.
ftS.O

12.408
14.725

38 S
45.0

9.717
11.718

71.7
68.5

3.833
fi.394

Mlh

28.3

31. 5

Total

262

37, M4

68.2

27,223

41.8

21,435

OB. 9

9,227

aai

Let me summarize the statistics by
quoting from the remarks by the gentle-
man from Pennsylvania [Mr. SikpsonJ :

After eliminating procedural votes and
votes on Items which were not a part of
President Eisenhower's program, there were
123 vot»8 Involving his program In the 83d
and 129 votes in the 84th Congress — a total
of 253 such votes. On the 352 votes. Repub-
licans cast 37.954 of the votes for President
Eisenhower's program, or 58.2 percent of the
total. The Democrats cast 27,223 such votes,
or 41 8 percent of the total. On these 253
issues, the Democrats cast 21.435 votes In
opposition to President Elsenhower, or 69.9
percent of all the opposition votes.

Now let us examine the substance of
this so-called analysis by the Congres-
sional Quarterly of support for President
Eisenhower, to which the gentleman
from New Jersey referred on May 22. It
is based on 22 House rollcalls. Actually,
we had an opportunity to record our po-
sition on 30 rollcalls through May 12,
the terminal date of the Congressional
Quarterly study. By the selection of
rollcalls to be included In the President's
program, the Congressional Quarterly
can prove anything that It wishes. They
attempt to give the impression that they
are merely reporting our votes as re-
corded by the Clerk of the House. How-
ever, the Clerk of the House does not de-
termine which votes measure support
for President Elsenhower and which are
in opposition to his program. This is
solely an act of editorial Judgment on
the part of the Congressional Quarterly.

Yet. when these tabulations are re-
peated in newspapers throughout the
land, as was earher pointed oat In the St.
Petersburg Times quotation, they are re-
ported without any reference to the fact
that the judgment of the Congressional
Quarterly on the question of issues
chosen and the basis for determining
Presidential position or party position
on each given Issue is the sole and decid-
ing factor. Nor Is any weight given to
the Importance of respective votes,
whether on minor or major Issues — on
S50 million or a proportionately small
$30,000.

There is. further, no consideration
given in regard to the position taken by
party leadership on given issues which
surely would reflect party position as
well as support of £he President.

Eight rollcalls were omitted by Con-
gressional Quarterly, Three of the
omitted rollcalls Involved House Reso-
lution 190, a resolution which requested
the President to "indicate the places and

amounts in his budget where he thinks
substantial reductions may best be
made."

It would be absurd to think that this
resolution had the President's support
and unanimous opposition to the resolu-
tion was given by the Republican leader-
ship of the House. The strict party line
support of the Democratic side of the
aisle certainly justifies Inclusion of these
three votes In any tabulation on support
of the President. Congressional Quar-
terly arbitrarily has omitted this vital
declaration of supix)rt or nonsupport.
The seriousness of such omission is dra-
matically highlighted when publication
of my own record was made by the 6t
Petersburg Times in the first district of
Florida which I represent. Although I
supported the President on the occasion
of these 3 votes in the House on H. R.
190 and the entire Florida delegation
unanimously opposed the President,
7 of the 9 Democratic Members of the
delegation are therefore cited by Con-
gressional Quarterly as having better
records of support than have L

Many of us remember that we spent
the entire day on March 12 debating the
passage of House Resolution 190. Three
rollcalls were taken: One on the rule to
consider House Resolution 190; one to
recommit the resolution ; and one on the
adoption of House Resolution 190. Only
10 Republicans voted for the adoption
of this resolution. One himdred and
seventy-flve opposed It. The significance
of this resolution In terms of the Presi-
dent's budget can only be appraised by
the remarks of Members during the gen-
eral debate. For example, the gentle-
man from New York [Mr. Multer] pro-
posed a 10 percent across-the-boards
reduction of the entire budget. He fur-
ther said :

The Elsenhower administration by its bud-
get proposes to increase Federal employees
to 3,447.933, an Increase of almost 76,000
over the year 1956. Let tis put a limit on
this administration of 3 million Federal em-
ployees. That will be 1 Federal employee
for every 83 men, women, and children In
the country. That should be enough.

In Other words the gentleman from
New York proposed that we eliminate
447,933 Federal employees, a reduction of
18.3 percent of the total recommended
in the President's budget.

"nie Democratic leadership can hardly
be recorded as approving of the Presi-
dent's budget when they took the tm-
precedent step of virtually asking him to

submit an entirely different budget. Yet
we now find Democratic Members advis-
ing the President that they have been
supporting his budget, while those of us
on this side of the aisle are supposedly
opposing him.

By omitting these three rollcalls the
Congressional Quarterly completely dis-
torts the current controversy over the
President's budget. These rollcalls gave
the Democrats an opportunity to record
themselves in favor of economy. Their
votes on the specific amendment se-
lected by the Congressional Quarterly
now give them an opportunity to show
that they support the President. The
Congressional Quarterly is completely
partisan by omitting three appropria-
tion votes of the greatest significance.

They selected 22 rollcalls to measure
support for President Eisenhower, and
15 of the 22 involved amendments to
appropriation bills.

Mr. Speaker, In other words, we have
only 7 rollcalls. other than these 15 ap-
propriation measures to reflect support
for the President. This is an absurd-
ity.

Let me list those seven rollcalls for
the Record. Congressional Quarterly,
Incidentally, did not see fit to let the
Nation's editors or the public know Just
what the issues were on which it based
its tabulation of the record votes in the
House and that It l.ad chosen to demon-
strate purported support of the Presi-
dent's program. These are from the best
Information I can gather the Issues and
the President's Indicated position:

One. Adoption of the rule to consider
Mideast doctrine. A yea vote for the
President

Two. Passage of the Mideast resolu-
tion. Yea vote for the President.

Three. Agreement of the House to
Senate amendment of Mideast resolu-
tion. Yea vote for the President.

Four. Defeat of motion to recommit
com bill. Nay vote supported Presi-
dent.

Five. Defeat of com bill. Yea vote
supported President.

Six. Adoption of resolution to author-
ize Patman investigation of monetary
policies. Nay vote supported President.

Seven. Passage of joint resolution to
defer interest payments on British loan.
Yea vote supported President.

Now let us examine the 15 rollcall
votes on amendments to appropriation
biUs which the Congressional Quarterly
selected for their analysis. Fourteen of
these rollcalls were votes on amendments
to H. R. 6287, the appropriation bill for
the Departments of Labor and Health,
Education, and Welfare. The 14 rollcalls
were on proposals to effect reductions in
this appropriation bill totaling $68,282,-
100. The significance of these votes can
only be appreciated in terms of examin-
ing the President's original budget re-
quest.

On March 26, as we opened debate
on this bill, the gentleman from Rhode
Island [Mr. Fogakty] said:

The budget the President requested Con-
gress to enact this year totaled $3,981,277,581.
We have allowed this year 13382 JK)3.881. or
a eut tn the Presldenti budget of about
•119 million.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RBCdtD— HOUSE

8875

'!!

t

t
1

11

8872

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

This cut ol $119 miUiOD waa made
by the AtHProprimtlooa Cotninittee. It
consiats of 50 members, 30 of whom are
Democrats and only 20 are Republicans.
Certainly this $119 million cut in the
President's budget was the result of
votes by the Democrats. Yet the Demo-
cratic members of the Ap{»t>priationB
Committee who thus cut the budget are
not shown as baring failed to support
President ElsenhowCT.

The amounts involved in the 14
amendments on which rollcall votes
were recorded total $68^83,100. This is
57.4 percent of the amount which was
cut by the committee. Yet the Con-
gressional Quarterly makes no comment
regarding the action taken by the mem-
bers of the Appropriations Committee.

I should say that the amount involved
In 13 of these amendments totaled only
$18^82.100. Oca of them involved a cut
of only $30.0C0. another was for $50 mil-
lion, nearly 3 times the total of the
other 13 amendments and yet all the
amendments were equally weighted in
the Congressional Quarterly tabula-
tions. In reference to this $50 million
item. I might point out that Republican
whip of the House, the Honorable Leslie
Arends — most imjustly and unfairly
shown by this publication as only a 50-
percent supporter of the President — said :

Because of lack of support from the other
side oX the alale, the amendment to eliminate
$50 mllUon for grants-in-aid for sewage dla-
poeal plants was defeated. In ali the amend-
ments this was the largest single cut pro-
posed. The record shows that 81 percent for
the cut were Republicans, but around 84 per-
cent who voted against It were Democrats.
Bere ts a program the administration did not
Initiate. It was Initiated by the Democratic
84th Congress, and once on the statute books,
the administration had to budget It. Here
was a chance to save $50 mllUon. but we find
voting against tbe cut those very same Mem-
bers on the other side of the aisie who so
enthusiastically called on the administration
to recommend places to reduce ezpendltxires.

Again the selection of votes for the
purpose of tabulation by Congressional
Quarterly shows what I believe to be bias
in what is piuT>ortedly a nonpartisan
service. This type of reporting tends to
follow the line of Democratic leadership
which would fool the public into believing
theirs is the party at economy — yet such
is not the case nor has it ever been.

Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
MuLTEB] suggested a 10 percent across-
the-board budget cut when we discussed
House Resolution 190. I was interested
in examining his votes on the 14 amend-
ments to H. R. 6287. 1 find that he voted
9 times against any reduction in the
budget. On the other 5 votes he was
absent. I have great respect for the
gentleman from New York, and I am not
citing his record to cause him any em-
barrassmenL His votes follow those of
the Democratic leadership. They are
attempting to completely confuse public
understanding with regard to the budg-
et. They preach economy. They sug-
gest impossible reductions, and then vote
against every amendment which would
reduce the amounts appropriated. For
this performance the Congressional
Quarterly gives them a high support
score.

Let us examine the one other vote on
an appropriation bill selected by the
Congressional Quarterly, an amendment
to H. R. 6871 providing appropriations
for the State. Justice and Judiciary for
the fiscal year 1958.

The President asked the Congress to
appropriate $227,714,552 to operate the
Department of State. The Appropria-
tions Committee recommended $180.-
352.743. This Is a reduction of $47.-
331.809, or 20-8 percent of the amount
requested. Yet. once again, the Con-
gressional Quarterly selected an amend-
ment proposing a reduction in this ap-
propriation bin of $7,039,958 to measure
support for President Eisenhower.

I believe we should go still further In
examination of issues and votes selected
by Congressional Quarterly and the rela-
tive partiality that has been demon-
strated. Here are the first three votes
on the Middle-East resolution— House
Joint Resohition 117:

First, Adoption of rule to consider,
passed. 262 to 146: Democrats for, 118;
Democrats against, 95: Republicans for.
144: Republicans against. 51.

Second. Passage at Mid-East resolu-
tion. 355 to 61.

Third. Agreement of House to Senate
amendments. 350 to 60.

Here in only 1 of the 3 votes is any
partisan Issue involved. In the first and
test vote the Republican Memtwrs are
clearly in greater support of the Presi-
dent than the Democrats. In the other
two votes Uttle opposition is Indicated by
either party. This most graphically illus-
trates the weakness of the standards
used by Congressional Quarterly. The
complete error of such type of measure-
ment was. as earlier mentioned, well
documented by Senator Schokppc. of
Kansas, in his remarks of last year and
at which time he deplored "the Congres-
sional Quarterly s method of showing
support in percentages makes It impos-
sible for any editor to determine what
the true facts are." I concur with the
Senator wholeheartedly. Issues are in-
cluded even when there is Uttle or no
dispute — as plainly illustrated above —
between the Democrats and Republicans
of the House, as expressed by the party
leadership, and of course this tends to
give the Democrats a much higher base
scare going into the true test votes on
controversial or contested issues. After
determination of such as the test vote
on the issue above and where the Re-
publicans are shown bgr far the greater
supporters of the President, certainly the
near routine concurrence in the other
two should not weigh as much in overall
tabulation.

Mr. Speaker. I know of no way of
weighing votes. By examining the rec-
ord for an entire Congress, which waa
the procedure followed by the gentleman
from Pennsylvania [Mr. Simpson], It is
possible to get a fair picture, providing
the Democratic leadership of this House
permits us to vote on the President's
procram.

Tabulations sneh as tbeae prepared
by the Coogrca^ooal Quarterly, baaed on
a few vote*, are bonod to distort the tme
Q>easure of snpport the Piesklent is re-
eeivinc from the two parties in the
Congress. It 1$ for this reason that I

hesitate to suggest aoy other fToup of
votes so early in the session. However,
in view of the prominence given the
Congressional Quarterly's distorted tab-
ulation, I have prepared support scores
for the Republican and Democratic
leaders and myself compared to the dean
[Mr. Sncis] of the Florida di.'legation
based on the 7 votes used by the Con-
gressional Quarterly, other than the 15
votes on amendments to the appro-
priation Mils I have discussed. I have
substituted 3 votes on House Resolution
190. asking the President to virtually
submit a new budget for these 15 votes.
In other words, I have prepared sup-
port scores based on 10 votes, 3 of whieh
reflect the attitude of Members toward
the President's budget as a whole, as
against the specific minor budget Items
selected by the Congressional Quarterly.
Here are the support and opposition
scores based on these 10 votes:

Supported

OpfOMd

Rcraf^"<"'>n"*:

.Marlia

MW

0

A|TTI<i« _ _

K»

fl

lUik^

lt«

9

Criin^^ iFIortaii)

100

0

Pcinnrmts

Mrfannaek _

CO

«

Albert

at

«>

>)lki!a (Klufi'l&j

■.u

3D

To be perfectly fair and to better In-
dicate to you how omission or inclusion
of certain items such as the 15 votes
of amendments to appropriation bills can
affect tabulations such as these I would
further like to include a tabulation of
these record votes on the appropriation
bills. In addition to the 10 used above.
In this Instance, however, on the 14 votes
that would have cut still further funds
for the Department of Health F..ducat.lnn,
and Welfare the amendments are con-
sidered in toto — If the Members record
showed that he supported 8 or more of
these cuts he is in opposition to the Pres-
ident. If he has opposed eight or more
he Is in support of the President Wc
win also Include the other vote Included
by Congressional Quarterly on the defeat
of the amendment that would have cut
an additional $7 million for International
Organizations from the appropriation for
State. Justice, and Judiciary funds. This
places 12 votes in the record.

Sapported

OppOHd

Bepnhtleins:

Mailla .

03

n

S3

m

«

26

I

An-ri'ls

HaUpck

C'ramw .

8

S
17

DemofTHUi:

M

Albert

SUU9

M

7«

Mr. Speaker. I am not suggesting that
any Member be rated on 10 votes. 11
votes, or on 22 votes, but all of as who
are familiar with the debates whkb bava
taken place duriac this session of the
Congress I am sure will agree that these
10 voles in the first chart or the 13 In
the second are more significant and pro-
vide a more reasonable weighing than
those selected by tbe
Quarterly.

11'

8874

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSfONAL RBCOltD— HOUSE

I do not data that the abewe tabida-
tions show the correct snpport seorea 1$

does clearly show what you ean do with
statistics by selecting Issues trxmt the
very few rollcall votes available far anal-
ysis so early in the session.

Mr. Speaker, it is significant that the
cutoff date of May 12. selected by the
Congressional Quarterly, excludes two
Important roUcaHs which have already
taken place, which further alter the
support scores of the Republicans and
Democrats in terms of President Eisen-
hower's position.

On May 15 we voted on the Harrison
amendment to H. R. 7441, the fiscal 195&
appropriation for the Department of
Agriculture. The passage of this amend-
ment bars the use of funds for the soil
bank acreage reserve program on 1958
crops. The Congressional Quarterly
says that a nay vote on this issue sup-
ports the President's position. The Con-
jiressional Quarterly shows that only 4ft
Democratic Meml>ers voted nay on this
measure. One hundred and forty-one
Republicans voted in support of the soil
bank.

Even more recently we had another
opportunity to measure support for Pres-
ident Eisenhower. On May 29 we re-
corded our votes on H. R. 7665, the De-
parlment of Defense appropriation bill
for 1958. We all remember that the
Republiean leadership stressed the need
of restoring some of the cuts made by the
Appropriations Committee in this meas-
ure, which so directly afiects national
security. A motion was made to recom-
mit this biD with instructions to increase
the appropriations for national defense
by $313 mifMon. This motion was de-
feated. It represents a blow to our
national security and has a far greater
signifleance in terms of support for Pres-
ident Eisenhower than the many votes
selected by the Congressional Quarterly
on other appropriation measures. On
this rollcall 203 Democrats voted in op-
position to President Eisenhower. May
I point out that the leadership of the
Democratic Party who were opposed to
reducing minor appropriations for social
security and welfare programs had no
hesitancy in disregarding President
Eisenhower's urgent request for these
defense funds.

If we add these 2 votes to the 18 I used
In the ffrst chart alKrve. making a total
ol 12. which the Congressional Quarterly
concedes are Important votes to the
President, the score of the Republican
leaders and myself remains 100 percent.
The vote for the Democratic leadership
and the dean of the Florida deiegatioa
drops.

Supported

Opposed

Al.HKKT

bIKKI 11 "'

42
42
M

Yes, Mr. Speaker, when aB the votes
are In, I am satisfied that the Republican
record will reflect substantial support for
the President's program. It will not be
lOO-percent support on every roUealL
The President does not expect us to act
as ruM»er stamps. It is a disservice to
the country and to the entire Free Work!

to atlea«4 lo give the hnprcssleii, aa the
Congressional Qaarterly docs, tkat the
RepeMfean Party, as represented in tte
Ctrngresff. Is a group apart from the ex-
ecutive branch, and that we reject the
President's leadership. Nothing couM
be farther froa» the- tnUh.

Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of ttie
Hoase, It grieves nse that Z shonld feel
called upon to expose these matters
today. To me It is apparent that through
the deception of this pubncatlon a liberal
political philosophy completely opposed
to that of the President is being foisted
upon the Nation. I hope that respon-
sflole members of the in-ess and the public
are aroused at this time and choose to
seek the true facts — not those of the
highly prejudiced Congressional Quar-
terly.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

By unanimous consent, leave of ab-
sence was granted as follows:

Mr. SMITH of California, for the bal-
ance at the week, on account of official
business.

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

By unanimous consent, permission to
extend remarks in the CoKoasssioNAi.
Record, or to revise and extend remarks,
was granted to:

Mr. Aifvuso (at the request of Mr.
EbMOKBsoif) and to hiclude extraneous
matter.

Mr. Sreehan.

Mr. SMrrH of Virginia, the remarks he
made in Committee ef the Whole and
insert a brief extract.

Mr. BoLAVB (at the request of Mr.
TAiriK> M3d bielude extraneous matter.

Mr. Oarmatz.

Mr. Vam Zawdt (at the reqiiest of Mr.
Bauiwih).

Mr. BcaNS of Hawaii in two Instances
and to Include extraneous matter.

Mr. Breeding (at the request ef Mr.

MCCOKIUCK) .

8875

ref crenee to ttie proper

Mr.

ADJOURNMENT
McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I

move that the Hoise do now adjotim.

The motion was agreed to; accord-
ingly (at 5 o'clock and 52 minutes p. m.>
tmder fts pievluos order, the House ad-
journed until Thiu-sday, June 13, 1W7,
at 12 o'clock, noon.

EXBCUnVE COMMUNICATIONS. KIC,

944. Under clause 2 of rule XXIV, a
letter from the Secretary of the Navy,
transmitting a draft of proposed legisla-
tion entitled "A bin to amend title 10.
United States Cilode, with respect to agree-
ments for length of service of graduates
of the UnKed States Military, Naval, and
Ah* Force Academies, and fco: other pur-
poses" was tak«i from the Speaker's
table and referred to the Committee on
Armed Services.

Cerpriaiiaca
calendar, as fottows

Mr. (30RD0N: (Committee on Forrign Af-
ftitre. Beport on foreign policy and nmtual
— eutlty pmwwB* to Bouot B— olirttun a»;
without amendment (Rept. No. 651). Re-
mrad to- the CenmHtoe of the Whole House
on the State of the Union.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRI-
VATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule Xm. reports of
(jommittees were delivered to the Clerk
for printing and reference to the proper
calendar, as follows:

Mr. EMOLS: Committee on Interior anil
Inenlar AOaiza. H. R, 3807. A taill to vali-
date a patent issued to Carl E. Robinson, ol
Anchor Point, AlaaEa. tor certain land in
Alaska, and for otiier purposes; wfttiout
amendment (Rept. Mo. MS). Referred to
the Committee of the Wliole House.

Mr. COOLET: Cbmmlttee on Agrlcttlture.
S. 44. An act to autborloe the Secretary of
AgrlcultHze to ezchan^ certain lands In tha
State of New Mexico; with amendment (Rept.
Ho. Md') . Referred to the Committee of the
Whole House.

Mr. CCX3LEY: Committee on Agriculture.
S. 1C34. An act to authorize and dijtect the
Secretary of Agriculture to convey to the
University of Miasoutl. for agricultural pur-
poses, certain real property in Callaway
County. Mo.; without amendment CRcpt. No.
550). Referred to the CTonunlttee of th«
Whole House.

REPORTB OF COMMITTEES 0!f PUB-
LIC BILLS AND EESOLUnONS

Under elauie 2 of rule xm, reprnts oi
eommtttees were delivered to the OeiH

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 4 of rule XXIf, public
bills and resolutions were introduced
and severally referred as follows:

By Ur. AI£CRT:

H. R. 8081. A hill to provide for an emer-
gency acreage reserve program In areas de-
termined to be ma)or disaster areas; to the
Committee on Agriculture.

H. R. 8052. A hUl to provide for Innnaasrt
participation in the acreage reserve program
toy pnKtucera of basic commodities In major
disaster areas; to the Committee on Agrl«
cnltvse.

By Mr. ANDISSON of Montana:

H. R. 8053. A bill to authorize funds avail-
able for const! McUun of Indian health facili-
ties to be used to assist in the construction
of community hospitals which wlU serve In-
dians and non-Indians; to the Committee oa
Interstate and Foreign Ccmmerce.
Byi Mr. BABTLETT:

H. R. 8054. A bill to provide for the leasing
ef oU and gas deposits In lands bezieath in-
land navigable waters in the Territory of
Alaska; to the Committee on Interior and
•yngiiioi. ^flairs.

By Mr. BATES:
E. B. 8055. A t>ill to promote the increase
and diffusion of knowledge of the polar re-
gions, the Arctic and Antarctic; to the (X>m-
znlttee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
By Mr. BENTLET:
H. R. 8056. A bill to amend title n of the
Social Security Act so as to permit the State
of Michigan to provide for the extension oC
the insurance system established by such
title to service performed by certain pohoe-
raen and firemen In such State; to the Com-
mittee on Whys and Mtans.
By Mr. BOTKIN:
"H.R.BOtn. A MU to amend the lAgratory
Bird SimtlBg Stamp Act of March 16. 1964.
as auieudM; to the Committee on Merehant
Marine and Rsberles.
BfMr.BOVlX:
H. B. 8068. A bill to reqaln tiM flKretary
of Btatta, Mactkm. and WeUan to its a
•f »A pemat battarfaS

t

-- i

• ■'

li

*
*

A"s

i '.

11^

-'1

■ J

%

^^i

t^

\^

\

;f;=5

i5J7

CONGAESSIONAL RECORD— HOUSE

8875

m

lii
m

i

ill

\m

I

8874

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

1SS7

for whole milk; to the Commltt«« on Inter-
•t«te and Foreign Comxn«rc«.
By Mr. BREZDINa :
H. R. 8059. A bill to proTlde an ImproTed
(arm program; to tbe Committee on Agrl*
culture.

By Mr. BTBNX of Pennaylvanla (by re-
quest ) :
H. R. 8060. A bin to prohibit the mlUtary
department* from entering Into contract*
with certain penont; to the Committee on
Armed Services.

By Mr. COLE:
H. R. 8061. A blU to amend the Service-
men's and Veterans' Sxirvlvor Benefits Act to
provide that all retired members of the uni-
formed services who served not less than 35
years on active duty and who thereafter die
ahall be considered to have died service-con-
nected deaths; to the Committee on Veterans'
AHalrs.

By Mr EDMONDSON:
H. R. 8062. A bin to amend the public-
assistance provisions of the Social Security
Act to provide that the value of restricted
Indian lands shall not be taken Into account
In determining the need of any Indian for
such assistance; to the Committee on Ways
and Means.

H. R. 8063. A bill to provide for an emer-
gency acreage- reserve program In areas deter-
mined to be major disaster areas; to the Com-
nUttee on Agriculture.

H. R. 8064. A bill to provide for Increased
participation in the acreage-reserve program
by producers of basic commodities In major
disaster areas; to the Committee on Agri-
culture.

By Mr. FTNO:
H. R. 8065. A bill to provide that cigarettes
sold in Interstate commerce shall be pack-
aged and marked so as to show the nicotine
content of each package; to the Committee
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
By Mr. HILLINGS:
H. R. 8066. A bill to authorize the restora-
tion of times taken from patents covering
Inventions whose practice was prevented cr
curtailed during certain emergency periods
by service of the patent owner in the Armed
Forces or by governmental controls; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. JARMAN:
H. R. 8067. A bin to provide for an emer-
gency acreage-reserve program In areas de-
termined to be major disaster areas; to the
Committee on Agriculture.
By Mr. KILDAY:
H. R 8068. A bill to provide Improved op-
portunity for promotion for certain officers
In the naval service, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. MORRIS:
H. R. 8069. A bill to provide for increased
participation In the acreage-reserve program
by producers of basic commodities In major
disaster areas; to the Committee on Agricul-
ture.

H. R. 8070. A bill to provide for an emer-
gency acreage-reserve program In areas de-
termined to be major disaster areas; to the
Committee on Agriculture.

By Mr. ROBESON of Virginia:
H R. 8071. A bill to authorize the Secre-
tary of the Army to convey an easement over
<?trtaln property of the United States located
in Princess Anne County, Va., known as the
Port Story Military Reservation, to the Nor-
folk Southern Railway Co. in exchange for
other lands and easements of said company;
to the Committee on Armed Services.
Bv Mr. SI3K:
H. R. 8072. A bin to provide for the dis-
tribution of the land and assets of certain
Indian rancherias and reservations In Cali-
fornia, and for other purposes; to the Com-
mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
By Mr. STEED;
H. R 8073. A bill to provide for an emer-
gency acreage reserve program In areas de-

termined to be major disaster aress; to th*
Committee cm Agriculture.

H. R. 8074. A bill to provide for InereMCd
participation In the acreage reserve program
by producers of basic coounodltles In major
disaster areas; to tbe Committee on Agri-
ctilttire.

By Mr. TEAOUE of Texas:
H R. 8075. A bin to amend the Veterans'
Readjustment Assistance Act of 1053 so aa
to make the conditions governing the pay-
ment of education and training allowances
under that act more nearly uniform with
the conditions applicable to the payment of
educational assistance allowances under the
War Orphans' Educational Assistance Act of
1966; to the Conunlttee on Veterans' Affairs,
H. R. 8076. A bin to provide for the termi-
nation of the Veterans" Education Appeals
Board established to review certain deter-
minations and actions of the Administrator
of Veterans' Affairs In connection with edu-
cation and training for World War II vet-
erans; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Bv Mr. ANFU30:
H R. 8077. A bill for the relief of certain
relatives of United States citizens and law-
fully resident aliens; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.

By Mr. DAWSON of Illinois (by re-
quest) :
R R. 8078. A bin to further amend the
Reorganization Act of 1949. as amended, so
that such act will apply to reorganization
plans transmitted to the Congress at any
time before June 1. 1959; to the Committee
on Government Operations.
By Mr. DEMPSEY :
H. R. 8079. A bill to amend the act of June
20, 1910, to give the State of New Mexico
greater flexibility In the Investment of
moneys derived from lands held in trust by
virtue of such act; to the Committee on
Interior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr HALE i by request ) :
H. R 8080 A bill to provide a method for
regulating and fixing wage rates for em-
ployees of Portsmouth, N. H., Naval Ship-
yard; to the Committee on Armed Services,
By Mr. HAYS of Ohio:
H R 8081. A bill to Improve the foreign
policy of the United States by amending the
United States Information and Educational
Exchange Act of 1948 (Public Law 402. 80th
Cong ) ; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
By Mr. lULLINGS:
H R. 8082. A bill to authorize the payment
of compensation for certain losses suffered
as the result of the outbreak of poliomyelitis
foUowlng the early use of poliomyelitis vac-
cine; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr FA.SCELL:
H. R. 8083. A bin to provide for Improved
methods of stating budget estimates and
estimates for deficiency and supplemental
appropriations; to the Committee on Gov-
ernment Operations.
By Mr BATES:
H. J Res 356. Joint resolution to author-
ize the Secretary of Commerce to sell cer-
tain vessels to certain citizens of the Federal
Republic of Germany: to the Committee on
Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
By Mr. MACK of lUlnols:
H. J Res. 357. Joint resolution to establish
a commission for the celebration of the 150th
anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln;
to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. ALLEN of nUnols:
H. J. Res. 358. Joint resolution to establish
a Lincoln Sesqulcentennial Commission for
the purpose of celebrating the 150th anni-
versary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln
(1809-65), 16th President of the United
States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr FLOOD:
H. J Res. 359. Joint resolution to provide
for a commission to make available Informa-
tion as to the basic differences between the
theories and iiractlces of the American way
of life and the theories and practices of

atheistic eomtnunlsm; to the CommittM on
Education and Labor.
By Mr. JUDD:

H. J. Um. 840. Joint resolution designating
the com tartirl aa tbe national floral emblem
of the United States; to the Committee on
Bouse Administration.

By Mrs. ROGERS of Maaaachusetta:

H. J. Rea. 381. Joint resolution providing
for the revUlon of the Status of Forces
Agreement and certain other treaties aiul
International agreemenU, or the withdrawal
of the United States from such treaties and
agreements, so that foreign countries will
not have criminal Jurisdiction over American
Armed Forces personnel stationed within
their boundaries; to the Committee on For-
eign Affairs.

By Mr. SCOTT of Pennsylvania:

H. J Res. 362. Joint resolution authorizing
an appropriation for the participation of the
United States In the preparation and com-
pletion of plans for the comprehensive ob-
servance of that greatest of all hletorlc
events, the sesqulcentennial of the birthday
of Abraham Lincoln; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.

By Mr. ROGERS of Florida:

H. Con. Res. 187. Concurrent resolution ex-
pressing the sense of the Congress with re-
spect to the revision of so-called "status of
forces" agreements contained in treaties and
other International agreements to which the
United States Is a party; to the Commute*
en Foreign Affairs.

MEMORIALS

Under clause 4 of rule XXIT. memorials
were presented and referred as follows:

By the SPEAKER : Memorial of the Legisla-
ture of the State of Oregon, memorializing
the President and the Congress of the United
States requesting enactment of legislation
slmnar to H. R. 2239. 85th Congress;
to the Conunlttee on Merchant Marina
and Fisheries.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 1 of rule XXU, private
bills and resolutions were introduced and
severally referred as follows:

By Mr. BLATNIK:
H. R. 8064. A bin for the relief of Toklko
Takahashl; to the Committee on the Judi-
ciary.

By Mr. DOLLINGER:
H R 8085. A bill for the relief of Joeo
Grgas Orando; to the Committee on tbe Judi-
ciary.

By Mr. HILLINGS:
H. R. 8086. A bin for the relief of Henry
Bouvler; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By My. LANHAM:
H. R. 8087 A bill for the relief of Tuko
Azuma; to the Committee on the Judiciary,
By Mr. ROBSION of Kentucky:
H. R 6088 A bill for the relief of Miss
Mame E. Howell; to the Conunlttee on the
Judiciary.

By Mr WAINWRIGHT:
H. R 8089 A bin for the relief of Angela
Porrino, to the Committee on the Judiciary.

PETITIQNS, ETC.

Under clause 1 of rule XXII.

277. Mr PATMAN presented a petition of
Mmes. J. B. Strong. H. W. Segers, L. H. Segers,
Alton Garrison, Sam L. Lunsford, S. L. Gran-
ger, and J. R. Moore. 8r., members of the
Woman's Missionary Union, New Hope Bap-
tist Church, Marshall, Tex., favoring the
passage of H. R 2542 and H. R. 3663 and re-
questing that hearings be held on same which
was referred to the Committee on the Judi-
ciary.

COlNiGAESSIONAL RfiCORD— HOUSE

EXTENSrOWS OF REMARKS

8875

SUfaMftf F«KM

KXTEMaiOM or REMARKS
ov

HON. WTLUAM E. JENNER

or INOlAMA

IN THE 8BIATB QT TRK VtHtOOi STATES

Tuesdttv. Jttne 11, 1957

Ur. JENHER. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the CoKG&BS&ioMAL RECORD a statement
prepared by me on the Status of Forces
Treaties.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as £ailaw&:

STATTTS-Or-POHCES TkEATTES

(Statement tay Senalzy Wn.LX4ic E. Jzvhci)
The explosive issue of what legal Jurisdic-
tion our servicemen wlli be subjected to. If
charged with crime In foreign countries, has
now erupted Into dangerous International
crl.ses. In Japan, Free Chliui, and Korea.

This problem has been seething, below the
surfare. for several years. Just a year ago
I appeared before the Senate Foreign Rela-
ticms Committee to ask them to hold hear-
ings on a reeolutton of mine, and a similar
resolucioa by fieaator McCarthy, on this

My resolntlon caned on the Executive to
tnvoke the clatrees in the Status of Forces
Treaty, which permitted our Government to
revise article 7 of the treaty or to abrogate
It In proper dlplooiatlc fonn.

The case of Army Sp3c. WUllam 8. Glrant
Is the most important fnAlcation of whera
ve are going.

This American serviceman was engaged In
practice firing, on the firing range. Japa-
nese clth^ns had been warned to stay off
the flrtng range because It was dangerous.

There was no personal quarrel between
the American soldter and the Japanese citl-
■en. He was taiToIved tn no rowdytanx. crtmi-
ual act. or personal hoetility. He was «i-
gagad In duUaa conoeeted with a clearlf
military action.

Under the treaty the American Govern-
ment and the host government have con-
current Jurisdiction over offenses arising In
connectton wttt mlRtary tfatles or mllMary
property, with prtaoary Jtjrfsdlction resting
with 118. The recent argument that In the
pauses to rest between flrli^ rounds, Prlvata
Otran* lost his rote to a mlHtary operation,
and was engaged la Maia-c-tims actliritls*
fc pare nonsexiss. To surrender Jurlacflc-
ttaB STcr hlai is a ptirr potttlcal sTOTcnder.
Someone was aW» tv oreirule the Beentaij
ef Defenoe. who qtifte properly wlataed Xa
give our ftg***:«'^ men tizU eoafidence tha€
vm Government stood sdtli Ihem.

Sonseone was wllHng to laato aa Amcrleaa
•ohtter a pawm In moves en tAs intema-
ttonat cheasboarct bowvvcr dlsastronaJy !•
would aCect the oorale ot am agtittng men.

The aksurtflty U this daefcion to high-
nghted by the State Dspartatent'k equally
abswd posftlon. tn rsTBrse. tn Tt— China.
■crs the aoldtar was ctearly aot sagaged h>
Bilittary aetivtttaa. Ws kaew tha Chlaesv
GovtraoMnt had lo«ght for a hundred yctvs
■gaiaatarUtary and mjwt Ivpcaltloa oT
extratsmtoslar rtgbia tj Mrslga govsm-
**>ita sogagad only la trade. But wa 1g-
■oKd tha obttgattoa to tiaat tha Chtause aa
tetrly aa aar o«h«r aUlca.

Ih a brief presented a ysar age to the Sen-
■ta Foreign Relations Committee, X stun-

lari/iad. tb* Judicial daclalons deaUn^; with
this Issue.

"T^ere Is a Idng record of declstons gotng
bact to CWef Jus lice Marshall emphasising
tlwBialn point at Issue tha troops «( a
tnmoOif paw »l«fttag forrtgn eountrles.
partake of tha oaewe of the eovCTeigjrty.
and ase treated la law like a visUing sover-
eign. The same principle explains th* legal
Immunity granted to diplomats by every law-
abiding nation.

The enormity of the 8tatus-of -Forces Trea-
ttes Is this. The State Department gave up
the Boveseign rights of this country, and the
dignity of our scUUcb as part of our national
sovereignty, but the^ did not see any reason
for giving up tbe Inununlty granted oar
diplomats.

Let me point out another aspect of this
treaty which win rise to plague us someday.
The Status of Forces Treaties surrender
American Jurlsdietlon not only over our
fighting men, but over their wives and chil-
dren. They also sturender Juriscfictton over
what Is lightly called civilian components of
our Armed Forces. How many civUlans are
today subject to trial and impxlaoiunent In a
foreign cotmtry, perhaps for nothing more
serious than reacting to Communist at-
tempts to start street fighting? How many
Americans might suddenly find themselves
abroad and subject to a foreign court in the
event of an emergency?

AU Americana regret the deaths of any cit-
izens of other countries as a result of any
act of oiu fighting men. We know that large
ntunbers of visiting troops always create
problems. That Is normal among all nation-
alities. We understand the desire of other
nations to retata all the marks of full sov-
ereigntjr. L am sure they win try to do their
best to give our men a fair trial. But we
cannot ask our young men to serve their
country in foreign lands, and then take from
them the protection of our Constitution.

It Involves no diplomatic problem what-
ever for the Ettate Department to open nego-
tiations for a change in these treaties, to
give American lighting men and their wives
and chllfk'ea the pcatectloa ot Amexiean hiws.
The procedure for reopening this question
was put Into, the tvcafcy a* a safeguard for
an nations. As I said a year ago. If Ameri-
cans are willing to surrender tbsli Constitu-
tion they certainly should not begin with our
fighting men.

Kamehamelia I: A Great Leader

EXTENSION OP REMARKS

or

HON. JOHN A. BURNS

DECEGATX FBOM HAWAQ

m THE HOUSE OF REPBESSKTATIVXS
Tueadatf, June 11. 1953

Mr. BURNS of Hawaii. Mr. St)eaker.
today, June II. is set aside in Hawaii as
KamHiameha Day— a Territoria! holi-
day—in honor of the yreat Hawaiian
Sngr, Kassehameha I. It is a day in
which the people of Hawaii pay honor
and ferihtrte ta this Ih^ king of aB the
Btajor HawaifaB Islands, the king who.
fti the eariy deeades of the 19th century,
united the major islands fmr the first
ttme under one mlM*.

It te a day in whieh the people of
Rawaif reflect opon, honor, and ex«

pretf-4ii least aad cclcbraUoo— their
profound g xatltudc fox the generosity,
tbe tolerance, the almost boundless bu-
■lAnity and frieodship whleh the native
Hawaiian, more than anyone else, is re-
sponsible for in present-day Hawaiian
liXe, and which characterizes that life as
democratic and as American in tbe deep-
est senses at those words.

Kamehameha I is perhaps best known
generally as a g. eat warrior king, but be
was an even greater leader in peace —
in fact bis exploits as a warrior will be
completely misunderstood if they are
not viewed as his attempt to realize for
all the Hawaiian people a perpetual and
joyful peace.

When TCflmphftmp>ift 'vas a young
chief, already controlling the t-tianfi of
Hawaii and showing signs of the great-
ness to come, a famous Hawaiian
kahuna — or priest — appeared before Hini
and prophesized: Kamehameha was to
conquer and unite an the islands, there-
after to enable his people to Eve in a
lasting and prosperous peace.

That this was his motive and his vis-
Ion, Kamehameha gave full evidence at
the very first opportunity — immediately
after gaining full control of the island
of Hawaii. Among other things, he or-
dered the planting of foodstuff on all
available land, and began the develop-
ment of an irrigation project considered
by later viewers as a most amazing ac-
complishment.

In his first official act when he had
gotten control of all the islands, he told
his people to go home and stop fighting,
to turn from war to the bnJMing of an
enduring peace.

He promulgated the famous Law of
Mamalahoe which I give here in transla-
tion:

O my people, honor thy goda. Be^wct
alike the rights oX men both great and
humble; see to ft that the aged and the
children may go their ways In peace, and Ua
down to sleep by the roadstds without fear
•it ham.

He set up projects to Increase food pro-
duction, and became his own best ex-
ample to bis people by establishing sev-
eral food farms of his own which he
personally worked. To insure free medi-
cal service to all he set up a school for
medical kahunas, and he set up schools
of training for arte and crafts — ^f ree for
all people.
Hie issued another famous edfet:
There shall be no Idle person in the land.

The Hawaiian workday was 4 hours;
Kamefaameha made plans lor occupying
the rest of the time with healthful games
and phor. Ptrxn tiae immemorial the
Hawaflians had observed the makahiki
season, lasting tnm October through
Jacwary, a* a tine of reereatiao and
rest. The aeaMm was dcdkated to Lono,
the god of fertility; it was tbe harvest
time In whicft warfare and contention
were abaohitely forbidden. It was un-
thfnfcaMe to the Hawaiian that in hsr-
Test, the time of Mfe and growth, men
dioultf kS eaeh other and their means

•

«ll

Wl

'«h

m^

1

8876

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

of subsistence. First the harvest was
gathered, then the taxes collected, and
the remainder of the time the people
spent In feast and celebration. It Is to
be noted too that before the coming of
the foreigner the Hawaiians had no in-
toxicating liquor, and the energy and
Joy that animated their festivity had
and needed no artificial inducement.
For this season too Kamehameha pro-
vided plans to enhance the leisxure occu-
pation of his people.

Blamehameha I embodied fully the
hopes and aspirations of the people; he
was in the deei^est sense a man of the
people. Often he walked among them
disguised to study the efficacy of his
government, to ask questions and to
solicit suggestions. In work and in play
he led his people toward that full life,
without bitterness or greed, which he,
and his people, saw as their destiny.

The motto of Hawaii — Ua Mau Ke Ea
O Ka Aina I Ka Pono — the life of the
land is preserved by righteousness —
while it was proclaimed by the later
Kamehameha m, is most really the ex-
pression, in everything he did, of this
greatest Hawaiian King. Kamehameha I.
When he died in 1819 — the year before
the missionaries arrived — a great keen,
such as never heard in Hawaii before or
since, arose over all the islands.

Things did not come true exactly as
Kamehameha I visualized them. But
his people are great, their generosity and
their tolerance vitally characterize
American democracy as it exists in Ha-
waii. Kamehameha I is to his people,
and to the people of Hawaii generally.
"first in war. first in peace, and first in
the hearts of his countrymen." An In-
spiration and an ideal to all, particularly
to his own.

For these reasons, and many more, the
people of Hawaii honor today — as many
communities in America today honor
their own great men of the past — the
native Hawaiian people and their great
leader, Kamehameha I, for all they have
given and mean to Hawaii.

Personally, and on behalf of Hawaii's
people whom I have the honor to repre-
sent. I express to the native Hawaiian
people on this Kamehameha Day the
deep gratitude and affection of the
people of Hawaii for you. and for all you
mean, and will mean in greater measure
in the future State of Hawaii, United
States of America.

A Tribute to a Marylaiid Veteran :
Wm. R. Clay

held In Baltimore, Md.. presented to Wil-
liam R Clay a certificate of recognition
for outstanding service to the veteran*
of our State.

Mr. Clay, a 38-year-old Government
career attorney as well as a civic and
veterans' leader, received the highest
citation which the E>lsabled American
Veterans award, for "his years of out-
standing service in the field of veterans'
legislation in the interest of the veter-
ans of the State of Maryland."

His many friends know this leader as
"Honest Bill Clay," the veteran's friend.
He has been active since 1944 in the
DAV and the American Legion, having
held national. State, and local offices in
both organizations. Over a period of
10 years he has addressed thousands of
veterans in our State and in the District
of Columbia relative to programs of
interest to both organizations.

For the last 7 years. Mr. Clay has
served as department legislative officer
for the Disabled American Veterans,
and since 1953 has been a member of the
committee for the American Legion,
serving as department legislative chair-
man during the years 1955-56.

At the present time he is vice chairman
of the Allied Maryland Veterans Council
whose membership comprises the Veter-
ans of Foreign Wars, the American
Legion, Disabled American Veterans,
Military Order of the Purple Heart,
AMVETS. Jewish War Veterans. Span-
ish-American War Veterans, World War
I Veterans. Catholic War Veterans, and
29th Division Association, whose com-
bined membership represents well over
60.000 veterans of our State.

As a result of his knowledge of rights
and benefits of veterans and their de-
pendents and his legislative background,
he is considered by veteran leaders,
members of the State legislature, and by
the Maryland Congressional delegation
as a complete and dedicated veteran's
friend.

Domestic Parity Plan for Wheat

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. EDWARD A. GARMATZ

or MARYLAND

IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday. June 11. 1957

Mr. GARMATZ. Mr. Speaker. In May
of 1957. the National Commander of the
Disabled American Veterans, the Hon-
orable Joseph F. Burke, on the behalf of
the department of Maryland at the
Stat« convention of this organization

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. J. FLOYD BREEDING

or K.\NSAS

IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday. June 11, 1957

Mr. BREEDING. Mr. Speaker, under
leave to extend my remarks. I would like
to call to the attention of my distin-
guished colleagues my Introduction of
legislation to provide a domestic parity
plan for wheat.

We are all concerned with overproduc-
tion of our agricultural commodities.
We all want to find an adequate and
profitable outlet for our overproduction
above our domestic needs. We need this
two-price plan in order to maintain do-
mestic prices at the desired level and at
the same time sell our surpluses on the
foreign market.

Under the two-price plan, which could
apply to commodities other than wheat,
each producer would be given an allot-
ment covering his share of the domestio

consumption of his product at full parity.
The remainder could be sold on the world
market or carried for future use.

In Introducing this bill It is my desire
to fill a serious need for a farm program
tailored to a specific commodity and
which will at the same time fit Into the
overall agricultural picture. I am sure
many of you are familiar with it. It
appears evident that with the passage
of time more serious consideration must
be given to the relative merits of a new
farm program. The domestic parity
plan is a workable plan for the agricul-
tural producers of our Nation to salvage
and build anew a sound economy.

The domestic parity plan for wheat is
highly favored by many people of the
Fifth Ehstrict of Kansas. It Is my sin-
cere Intention to work for the passage of
this blU.

Orf anizatioa for Trade Coopcratioa

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. JACOB K. JAVITS

or NXW TOIK

IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED STATES

Tuesday. June 11. 1957

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President. I aak
unanimous consent to have printed In
the Congressional Record a letter
which I wrote on June 6. 1957. to the
Committee on Foreign Trade Education,
Inc. This organization has recently
published a research study entitled "The
Returns Are In." which provides new
evidence of the great importance of our
national foreign-trade policy to the suc-
cess of United States foreign policy. In
my letter I have stressed the importance
of Congressional approval of the Organ-
ization for Trade Cooperation this year.
Failure to authorize membership In the
OTC would seriously jeopardize the posi-
tion of the United States as world leader.

There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

I am very Impressed with the committee'*
research study. "The Returns Are In" which
I have just finished reading. You provide
new evidence of the vital lmportanc#» of our
national foreign trade policy to the succeu
of United States foreign policy.

And. as you point out. whether the United
States win assume membership in the pro-
posed Organization for Trade Cooperation la,
right now. solid proof that our country seeks
to maintain the economic leadership of the
Free World. I note that your research study
brings this out clearly, as you report that
more than 88 percent of the leading foreign
newspapers surveyed agree that Congres-
sional failure to authorize membership In
OTC would seriously compromise United
States world leadership.

The overriding Importance of positive ac-
tion on OTC Is also spelled out by the fact
that 89 percent of the Asian editors In your
sample Indicate that the Communists have
already used our Inaction on OTC for a
"special line of propaganda" against the
United States. I can corroborate this from
my own experience. In my trip through the
Asian countries early last winter. I again and
again found evidence that where our foreign
economic policy has an Isolationist tinge,
the Communists have picked It up as "proof

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8877

of America's duplicity and Inability to do the
Job."

I know, therefore, by firsthand experience,
tliat trade policy Is an all-Important factor
In the success of our foreign policy. And I
am sure that Congressional approval of OTC
tlUs year Is the next Indispensable step In
making clear to the world that we are deter-
mined to maintain our leadership for free-
dom.

OTC has great Importance to the prosper-
ity of our economy as well. By giving the
General Agreement on Tarlils and Trade a
continuing, day-by-day administrative arm,
the agreement will become more effective
and do more to promote the Interests of our
American exports. OTC Is. therefore, as Sec-
retary of Commerce Weela has tol \ the Con-
gress, "absolutely essential If United States
agriculture, labor and Industry are to receive
maximum benefits from GATT."

It Is Important to remember that exports
are vitally Important to the growth of our
prosperity. In 1957 exports should reach
the neighborhood of 920 billion. These ex-
ports mean prosperity and Jobs to the people
in my own State. And similarly exports
promote the livelihood of people throughout
our Nation — roughly 4.600.000 families now
being directly dependent on export trade for
their Incomes.

By backing down on OTC, GAIT could suf-
fer seriously, opening the door to the Euro-
pean neutralists and perverting the new
common market and discriminating against
United States exports.

Down to essentials, then, the question Is
whether we will have OTC or whether we
will revert to obsolescent protection theo-
ries of the 19208.

You can, of course, be sure that I will be
In the forefront of those fighting In behalf
of the President's recommendation of OTC.

But, to be realistic. I must say that win-
ning the battle on OTC during this session —
during the next 8 weeks — Is only possible If
the Congress feels that the people wish us
to keep our world trade InltlaUve.

You have endeavored to demonstrate that
everyday people, having no self-serving In-
terest In trade, can be mobilized to build a
stronger trade policy — to make our foreign
policy more effective and our prosperity more
solidly based. Your Committee on Foreign
Trade Education. Inc., has grown In 3 years
from a handful In New York to an organiza-
tion that maintains chapters and affiliates In
many of our cities and that has a bipartisan
volunteer memt>ershlp In 36 of our States.
You are called now to the field of national
responsibility In the grassroots fight for
winning United States adherence to OTC.

I am. with all best wishes for your suc-
cess, assuring you of my cooperation In yoiu:
objective.

Sincerely,

Jacob K. Javtts,
United States Senate,

United States Exhibits at World Fairs

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. EDWARD J. THYE

or MINKESOTA

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

Tuesday, June 11, 1957

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in the
Congressional Rxcord an article which
was published yesterday in the Washing-
ton Post and Times Herald, entitled
"Poles Crowd United States Display at
Trade Fair."

I brought this subject to the attention
of President Elsenhower in the winter of
1954, following my visit to Bangkok,
Thailand, where I witnessed an interna-
tional trade fair, at which the United
States was endeavoring, but not very suc-
cessfully, to show a picture of what Amer-
ica has done not only in the field of ma-
chine development but also in the fields
of culture, art, and human relations.
Both the Soviet Union and Japan had
very impressive exhibits.

Later in 1954 President Eisenhower
wrote a letter to the Committee on Ap-
propriations recommending that $5 mil-
lion be appropriated for United States
exhibits at international trade fairs.

At that time I Issued a press release
with reference to the appropriation.

Therefore, Mr. President, I ask unani-
mous consent that both the article and
my statement of August 2, 1954, be
printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the article
and statement were ordered to be printed
in the Record, as follows:

[Prom the Washington Poet and Times
Herald of June 10, 1057]

Poles Crowd Untted States Display at
Trade Fair

(By Colin Frost)

PozKAN. Poland, June 9. — ^Tbousands of
luxury-starved Poles stampeded the United
States exhibits at the opening of the Poznan
International Trade Fair today. Scores of
extra police were called in to control them.

The American display of the products of
300 firms gave a dazzling answer to the now
diminished propaganda that capitalism
means poverty. By nightfall about 50,000
Poles had seen it.

Twenty-nine cotintrles packed their prod-
ucts Into the 40-acre grounds. Western
nations dominated the show.

The United SUtes Is taking part In the
fair for the first time since World War n.
Its exhibition Is calculated both to boost
business and to show the Communist world
bow the United States lives.

It Includes a typical American home
packed with the household appliances that
most homemakera In this part of Europe
can only dream of.

There were displays of textiles, radios,
household gadgets, sports goods, toys, frozen
foods, and all the other consumer goods that
crowd United States store windows but are
rarities here.

Premier Josef C3rranklewlcz and other of-
ficials were among the earliest visitors.

The Premier told United States trade of-
ficials: "I am glad to see you here and I
hope we shall be doing good business to-
gether In the future."

The reaction among most Polish visitors
was sheer amazement. "We cannot even be.
lleve that things like these exist," said one
woman.

"Is It true that ordinary people can buy
these things abroad?" asked another.

"Suren," a Pollsh-speaklng United States
Embassy officer told her.

Some private visitors wanted to buy —
especially the toys. A few pulled out wads
of dollars — part of the great undergroimd
reservoir of greenbacks that Is almost a sec-
ond currency In Eastern Europe.

West Germany's exhibit — covering the
whole range of booming German Industry —
is the largest. It takes more than twice
the space of either the British or United
States.

The United States exhibit is in a huge
pavUlon buUt of aluminum and cowed witti
plastic.

Senator Thte Uecbs ExmsTTS by United
States in World Fairs

Senator Edward J. Thyx expressed strong
approval of action taken by the Senate Com-
mittee on Appropriations In connection wltli
the supplemental appropriations bUl in meet-
ing the request of President Elsenhower for
additional funds to permit participation by
the United States In International fairs and
expositions during the coming year. Tho
President had advised the committee that
there will be approximately 75 such Interna-
tional trade fairs and that the administra-
tion feels that participation in at least 30 of
them would be tiseful in drawing attention
to American products and the benefits of the
free enterprise system. The Senate Com-
mittee on Appropriations allowed $5 million,
for this and related purposes.

"I am convinced that American partici-
pation in these International trade fairs Is
of great Importance to this country In Its
international affairs and I azn very much
pleased at the action taken by the Senate
Committee on Appropriations of which I am
a member. It wlU enable our Government to
help in coordinating American exhibits and
make possible a better rounded and more Im-
pressive picture of what America has done
not only In the field of machine development
but also In the field of culture, art, and hu-
man relations.

"When I returned from my trip to the
Orient last winter one of the first things
I did was to bring to the attention of
President Elsenhower my Impression of a
visit to a trade fair being conducted at Bang-
kok in Iliailand where I saw the extensive
and well displayed exhibits of the Soviet
Union In a building which dominated the
falrgroimds. The automobiles and farm
machinery displayed did not In any manner
compare with machines and equipment of
American manufacturers, and I question
whether some would be serviceable in actual
field operations. But they did capture the
Imagination of the people and thousands saw
this exhibit and passed through the Soviet
building.

"I know that the totalitarian Government
of Russia can simply commandeer the ma-
terial for such exhibits and is willing to
spend thousands to set them up. but I am
certain also that American Industry and
business under the encouragement of our
Government could far exceed anything the
Soviet Union can do In this field.

"It seems to me that the United States
should assume reasonable participation In
international fairs both In our fight for mar-
kets In the International field and In show-
ing to the people of the world what has been
achieved in the United States under our free
enterprise system and oxir democratic prin-
ciples of government. I am sure that much
good will flow from this effort and I sti^sngly
endcH-se It on the basis of my own observa-
tions In the areas where It Is bo Important
that America be imderstood and appreciated
by the people."

Proposed AmendmeBt to Natural Gas Act

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. EDWARD P. BOUND

or >IASSACHT7SETr8

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, June 11. 1957

Mr. BOLAND. Mr. Speaker, imder
leave to extend my remarks in the
Record. I Include the following state-
ment made by me to the Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce today

u

f»

lit

'

m

g878 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE June 11

^ *K« r^^rs^^m^ •m«.TiHmpnt H R. 6790 prior knowledge of Uie poUUc* o« th« of tho«« In favor of the Republican foreign

on the proposed amendment, H. R. 6780, P^";,^"^"^ ^^ *^ poUcy increased to 5«.9 percent, and In 19M.

totheNatXiralOwAct: ^^ ^ „ political phlloaophy that, ai a to eaj percent— the year In which you and

Hon. Oant Hauxs. Congressman It Is my duty to speak to the the Republican Party had a great victory In

CKairman. House Interstate and For- congress and to vote the Issues before the the SUte of DllnoU.

eiffn Commerce Committee. Wash- congress on the basis of the will of the ma- 'The present 1»67 percentage has dropped

ington, D. C. Jorlty of the people In my district. aaaimUng to an alltlme low. 1. e.. only 35ii percent In

Dub Ma. CHAntMaw : May I take this op- ^^^ people are Informed as to pertinent facU favor of the Republican foreign policy. la

portunlty to testify in opposition to H. R. ^^ ^^ issues and their will Is not contrary my opinion, thla means that since last No-

6790. the bill before your committee that ^ ^^^ general welfare of the country. In vember, our policies have lost most of their

would amend the Natural Oas Act so as to Qtjjgj, words, my vote on Issues before Con- appeal to the type of voter residing in my

remove Federal controla over the sale of gas gresa will be predicated upon the will of the congreealonal district,

at the wellhead. ». - ♦ majority of my constituents unless the wUl •The yearly trends are as follows on quea-

I am very deeply concerned over the effect ^j ^^^ majority la not clearly discernible; tlon No. 4, Do you approve of the Blsen-

of such legislation which would mean higher ^^^^^ ^ Congressman must use his own wis- hower admlnlstraUon to date?'

gaa bills for the consiuner— the little man ^q^, ^^^ conscience In voting for whatever ..y-ar- Percentaae anvrnval

who is now feeling the pinch of Inflation. ^^ be^t j^ ^Is constituents, bearing In mind ,"^- Percemage apprwal

Mr. Chairman. I represent the Second DU- ^^^ general welfare of the whole country. VrXZ" " tl n

trlct in Massachusetts which U hundreds of ^^ ^^^ j ^.^^^j ^^ ^^^^ conscience. tllZ r?" °

miles away from the section of the country ^^^ ^^j ^j ^^^ majority of my people ttt^ ^^l

where natural gas Is obtained. My constltu- ^^^j^ ^ ^^ ^^^ ^a^ls that I knew of facts "„- ll*

enta are captive consumers of natural gaa. ^^ circumstances which were not known to ^"'" '^ "

They buy It from a distributing company ^y people, or that, by following the will of "Tou wlU note that the previous low point

which In turn buys from a gas transmls- j^y constituents, I would be voting against In 1954 thoued very disastrous resvUU for

■Ion line company. If the controla are re- ^^ greater good of the country as a whole, the RepubUcan Party in the elections held

moved, you can readily see who Is going to j^^ ^^^ event. It would be Incumbent upon In Illinois. The present survey al«o ahowa

dig down Into their pockets to pay for the ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^^ ^ ^^ people and explain to an allUme low for support of the Btenhower

Increased costs of this gaa to the gas trans- ^^^^ ^jj^ clrcximstances and conditions of admlnlstraUon to data, and I would be very

mission line company at the weUhead— the ^hich I knew, and of which they had no fearful of the restUU of any elections held

little consumer, of course. The Intermediary knowledge at thla time.

consumers wlU merely pasa the added coats it i, to be noted that a rather stable per- "It Is to be fervently hoped thnt by the

down the line. centage of the people In the llth Congres- time the November 1»58 elections roll

Remove the Federal regulations with this ^^^^^^ District, varying from 64 to 73 percent around, the Republican foreign poUcy and

leglalatlon and you wipe out the price pro- ^^^^ ^^^ ,^^ ^ y^^^ ^^ overwhelmingly In the domeaUc aapecU of our administration

tectlon that the gas user now has and la en- ^^^^^ ^j ^^^ xjxMea States continuing as a wlU be changed In order that tiae people

titled to under the Supreme Courts ruling n^gj^ber of the United Nations. There has of the llth Congressional District, and the

^.^» ^'if ♦ , ^*^ ^^ v",: *^ been a very noticeable and decided" lessening State of lUlnols will again support the

PhlUips Petroleum Co. That d«:i3lon con- ^^ support for the forelgn-ald program, so policies which had been received with such

cluslvely stated that the Federal Power Com- ^^ ^^^ ^j^^^» ^^^ high point of wide acceptance up untU the election of

mission doe. possess regulatory authority ^ ^^'^ ^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ opposing November 195«.

^To^rrirSe'ToSSuron-s^ilSorlty to the proposed ^.4 blUlon fore^'outlay'^Th. -Reepectfully.

control natural gas prices at the wells would ^"^^^i!"^, 'I^ °"'° V ?^ ^^ ! °' T "TmoTHT P. Bh«haw.

be a direct flnaiiciiS blow to the end con- IHh District In answering the questionnaire "Member of Congress.'

sumer. This bill before your committee clearly shew their low regard of this program.

•""^'sSce^iw 'e^uS "^^ ""'^' ^'^""^ op" '- Vo'll ort'hrt'y^T?he°'v:r?tr.; ^-^^^^'^^ "^-^-« acknowledged m.

Sincerely yo^^jwAan P Boland »°^°"°t ^^ comments we^t from people an- letter of May 28 as follows:

Member of Conaress swerlng the questionnaire, who put their Thb Wnrm Hodsc.

views on the side, on the back, and frequently Wtuhtngton, May i'9. 1957,

attach many other pages of comments stat- ^he Honorable Timotht P. Bhxkhak.

—^-•^^^-^— ing their views on the questions. It U to be Hoiue of Representatives.

noted that quesUon No. 11, "Do you favor Washington D C

Prtddent Eisenhower'. Reply to Conreis- ^°",!^*^"*J: 'Zln^lTL ThJ^nnftl^ ^* ^ 8k«han : Tour poll n^ind. me

_, . . , ... .... . closure to the public and to the United .. . .^,, , , .«_ _i..,., ,■...

»». Sh^lu.'. Lrtt« ... 1 1th IU..U 8t.,.. o„,™.,„t o, ^. «p.r.t.on C union ^'J" "^^ i^^'H.™ ."«' tt^ o'^I^Tb"

Duwc. Pri,ik opw.. p.n £ts« ArL'Z"' r^L r.r.ro,'s: ?rn -r :s"^ "■• ''"^•° " °°'

the 15 questions on the poll. Thla question D""^*"^ „ ."^T^' . »w * , * ♦».- ».

PTmrvqTON OP RFMARirq '^^ ^^^^^ the least amount of people. 3 0 . ^o""" P°" tn'il^tes that »"tye" *^fj^;

EXTENSION OP REMARKS ^^^ ^^ ^^ ^ ^^^^^ ^^ t^i^bject. "°" L °r'«^ P^"*^ ''" '"'^l ^^T?^.

WUh reference to quesUons No. S and No. 4. *''°-"}^» ? ^'^/.*^n!^n ind ca^Uo

HON. TIMOTHY P. SHEEHAN '^, ^- •'pp-- .° '^.^^ ^•p-'*"-- ^-^ "p^n%ron. tSr? J°r«7^«rb;^

policy In general? Do you approve of the j^ ,«-/

or nxmoa Elsenhower administration to date?" I have ,^VV" , , _, ^^.^ —.,....♦ .^.«w.h.«L

IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVIES written a similar letter to both President .b^^^ L s7m. f Si.7n ??? aSSSS!

Elsenhower and the Honorable Meade Alcorn, f'^"* '"^ ,„ "J^" .Tl^n. *^ XT^T^rL

Tuesday. June 11. 19S7 national chairman of the Republican Party. ^^^^ SlinS^al'to'Te^JatronU •inS;^.

Mr. SHEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, on ** louows. .^^^ alternatives to our present efforts are

May 27 I released the results of my "President Dwtght D Bmikhowe». grim. They are. In this order, a fortresa

annual public opinion poll— see daily "The WMte House. Washington. D.C. America, then a bankrupt America, then a

RrrOHn nf Mav •>q na?p A41fiq At the "^^'^ ***" P»«sn)»:NT: Knowing from pre- regimented America — Anally, a defeated

RECORD or May -9. page A4169. At tne ^^^ ^^p^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^, congres- America. My beUef U that most cltl«ns

same time I sent these results, with a gional pubUc-oplnlon poUs. I am respect- ^^ well aware of these alternatives. I

letter, to President Eisenhower, and the fuiiy calling to your attention the results of think our people will hold faat ii\ the effort

contents of this letter were embodied In my 1957 survey. ^^ ^^^p yjj^ Nation on a sound rond in world

my news release of May 27, as follows: "As a RepubUcAn. I am most deeply con- affairs.

In each of the 7 years that I have been "'T*^ ^!^^ ^^t/'^rT, ^ ''"""o^-^O" » As for our domestic policies, these con-

xij. ^a.^.u ui uijc ,c a ^^^ ^^ ^ results of whlch you can observe ,„,.„ ,„ »>,. „i^„„ „» .>;. o-r,Mh i«-«r. Part*

m congress, I have polled a cross section of ^^^ enclasp copy of my extension of ^°'^ '° ^^^ ^ 5~ tL^lS?tn^i^ i^^I

the people In the llth Congressional Dls- „marka to appear to the CoNoaaaaiOMAi. ^ '** platform adopted 9 months ago In San

trlct of Illinois to ascertain their vlewpolnu b^comd on May 27 Francisco and to ray own campaign com-

on important questions of the day. -you will note" that on question No. 8. mltmenta baaed on those Pl«<»«««_ I b»7*

I attempt. In every possible way, to make .^ you approve of the Republican foreign ^° Uitentlon of welching on my own or the

this poll impartial, and thU year, sent ap- poUcy m general?' In 1953. 78.6 percent of the P^^ty s word. I think no loyal Republican

proximately 120 questionnaires Into every people replied favorably: and In 1954. only "iiould. For us to do so would be. In my

voting precinct In my district; so that, ap- 52.9 percent agreed. And you will further opinion, a long step toward party defeat and

proximately 1 of every 4 voters In the area note that In Cook County. 111.. In 1954. the dissolution,

received the questionnaire. In selecting Republican Party suffered one of Ita worst Sincerely,

the names from the poll sheets, we have no defeaU In 20 yeara. In 1956, the i>ercenta(e Dwwbt D. Km*

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8879

Family ReimificatioB Immifration Bill

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. ViaOR L. ANFUSO

or NXW TOKK

IN THX HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, June 11. 1957

Mr. ANPTISO. Mr. Speaker, I am to-
day Introducing a bill to reunite the fam-
ilies of certain United States citizens and
lawfully resident aliens in this country.
I call this measure "the family reuni-
fication immigration bill."

One of the basic tenets of our immigra-
tion policy and immigration laws
throughout the years has always been
the principle of uniting families. It is
logical and humanitarian. It makes for
better citizenship. It makes sense.

I am not the original author of this
bill. That credit belongs to our distin-
guished colleague from Pennsylvania, the
Honorable Francis E. Walter, who is the
chairman of the House Immigration
Subcommittee. His bill is based on the
traditional American principle of uniting
families. In introducing this measure,
our colleague has shown that he pos-
sesses a keen imderstanding of the prob-
lems and devotion to the best ideals In
American life.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this oppor-
tunity to extend my sincerest congratu-
lations to Congressman Walter for his
wise action in this matter. In fact. I
am going a step further in associating
myself with his action by introducing his
bill in order to give it added strength. I
hope this will encourage others in Con-
gress to do likewise by associating them-
selves with Congressman Walter In his
efforts to unite these families.

Briefly, the bill provides that relatives
of United States citizens and lawfully
resident aliens, who are eligible for sec-
ond and third preferential status under
the Immigration and Nationality Act.
shall be admitted as nonquota immi-
grants. This applies specifically to
parents, wives, and children imder the
age of 21 of such citizens and resident
aliens. It is these people, these sepa-
rated famihes, whom this bill would unite
without any quota charge.

I am informed that the total number
of people involved in this bill, and by
that I mean the number of people
abroad who would be eligible for admit-
tance to this country if this bill is adopt-
ed, is estimated at about 17,000 to
19.000. Of these, about 11.000 would be
from Italy, and the remainder from
Greece and other European countries.

These are mostly people who had ap-
plied for entry to the United States un-
der the Refugee Relief Act of 1953, but
for various reasons remained behind
when the breadwinner of the family
came here first to establish firm eco-
nomic roots. In the meantime, the Ref-
ugee Relief Act expired at the end of
last year and the families remained sep-
arated and stranded. In most instances
they were from Italy and Greece, and
the quotas of these two countries are
heavily oversubscribed so that no other

relief Is possible for the reunification of
these families.

Unless we take action along the lines
advocated by Congressman Walter In
his bill, these families face many long
years of separation and great hardships.
It would be most heartrending and in-
humane to continue such separations.
I believe it Is morally incumbent upon
Congress Jo take early steps for the en-
actment Of this legislation and reunifica-
tion of these families, and in this way
correct some of the faults and frustra-
tions of the Refugee Relief Act.

Mr. Speaker, the proposed legislation
Is a step in the right direction and a
laudable beginning. We are faced with
a pressing situation and it should be
dealt with promptly. It cannot wait un-
til we have had a thoughtful and com-
plete reexamination of our immigration
policy. For this reason, I strongly urge
that action be taken on this measure at
the earliest possible moment during the
current session of Congress, and thus
save these families needless hardships
and long delays.

Dob BlaBdiBf

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. JOHN A. BURNS

OZXZCATZ nOM HAWAn

IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES

Tuesday, June 11, 1957

Mr. BURNS of Hawaii. Mr. Speaker,

the people of Hawaii and his friends in
every part of the world mourn today the
unexpected passing of Don Blandlng,
poet laureate of Hawaii, who died on
June 9 in Los Angeles.

His love of adventure and his lust for
life led him to many parts of the world.
He fought under foreign flags in revolu-
tionary wars; in World War I he was a
pilot in France. He established his rep-
utation in New York as an artist and in-
terior decorator and poet, but his spirit-
ual home, until the day of his untimely
death, remained in the islands.

No matter where he pursued his rest-
less talents it was always to Hawaii and
to the people of Hawaii, for whom he had
an overwhelming affection, that he re-
turned.

Donald Benson Blandlng was bom 62
years ago on his father's ranch in King-
fisher, Okla. The world beckoned and
at the age of 17 Don left Oklahoma, never
to return. Soon thereafter he was fight-
ing in the small wars of revolt plaguing
the Central American Republics at that
time. When World War I came he be-
came a military pilot and flew with the
American forces in France. Returning
to the United States after the armistice,
he paused in New York. There he wit-
nessed an event which was to alter his
life and shape the course of his destiny.

This was his attendance of a revival of
the stage production Bird of Paradise,
whose locale was the exotic South Seas
islands. That night, Blandlng has told

UB, he heard the call of paradise, and ha
responded eagerly.

Hawaii did not disappoint Don Bland-
lng. Under its tropical skies Blanding's
great artistic gifts and creative capacity
were energized and inspired. His first
Tolume of verses about Hawaii appeared.
Then another and a third. Vagabond's
House, which sold 150,000 editions and
established Blandlng as a major poet.

His artistic versatility grew. As an
artist, he illustrated his own published
works. He staged Hawaiian pageants,
designed the colorful Poljmesian cos-
tumes and stage sets.

In 1928 Blandlng originated Hawaii's
famed Lei Day, which is celebrated an-
nually an May 1 and has become an in-
ternationally noted event. One of Ha-
waii's most delightful festivals and the
only one of its kind in the world, it is
dedicated to the lei as a symbol of Ha-
waii's hospitality, aloha, and wealth of
beauty.

Travelers from all over the world came
to witness its annual celebration.

Because he knew Hawaii and her peo-
ple so well, Don Blandlng loved them
both.

A dozen volumes of his verse attest to
this love and understanding which he
tried to communicate to the world. But.
he rhymed, it was not enough to read his
poems in order to become one with the
gentle peoples of Polynesia. In Vaga-
bond's House, Blandlng warned, you will
never know Hawaii :

•TU you've seen the lunar rainbow's phantom
arch across the blue
And having watched the Southern Cross
dip In the sea;
Tll the singing boys have stabbed your heart
with music through and through
TU you've raced the sliver surf at WalkikL

Don Blandlng was in every sense of
that meaningful Hawaiian word a true
kamaaina, son of Hawaii.

He left to the people of Hawaii, and to
all of us, a legacy of the love of laughter
and beauty, of wisdom and wit. With
him go the appreciation, the love and the
deep aloha of all that knew hiwi.

Dedication of Altoooa (Pa.) Memorial
K4 Steam Locomotrvc at Horseshoe
Oirre on the Pennsylvania Railroad
System

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or

HON. JAMES E. VAN ZANDT

or PEinrsTLVAinA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRE8ENTATIVB3

Tuesday. June 11. 1957

Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, on
Saturday, June 8, 1957, it was my privi-
lege to participate in the dedication of a
K4 steam locomotive as a memorial to
the long history of faithful service of
steam locomotives and those who built
and operated them over the Nation's
ribbons of steel.

This K4 steam locomotive No. 1361
was presented to the city of Altoona by

1i:HM
MM

ill

■

ii

}

i

•till

i

m

ri

8880

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

1957

the PMinsylvmala TUIlnmrt Co. nam per-
manent monument to the historic part-
nership between the community, the
railroad, and the tcxja horse.

Old No. 1361 was one of the earUest
of the 350 K4's built at Altoona. Pa. It
was placed In service May 18. 1918. and
for more than 35 years It hauled trains
<rf the great Pennsy passenger fleet over
the mainline between New York. Harris-
burg, and Pittsburgh. Countless of Its
trips were around the famed horseshoe
curve which Is oae of the great triumphs
of railroad engineering. When old 1361
was flxially retired to make way for the^
modem diesel No. 1361, It had rolled up^
nearly 2^ minion miles — the equivalent
of nearly 100 trips aroimd the world.

K4 locomotive No. 1361 is an espe-
cially appropriate memorial for the city
of Altoona. Pa., where 5 generations of
skilled workmen built a total of 6,783
steam locomotives for the Pennsylvania
Railroad.

The following program marked the
dedication of the K-4 memorial locomo-
tive during which time I delivered an
address on the historical development of
the steam locomotive:

PUOOKAU

Presiding. Howard W. Llndanum. director
of water, parks, and public property, city of
Altoona.

Music, massed bends, Altoona public and
parochial schools.

National Anthem.

Flag-raising, color ^ard. Blair-Bedford
Council. Boy Scouts of America.

Invocation. Rev. Cadrlc TUberg, First
Lutheran Church.

Presentation, Pennsylvania Railroad.
George R. Weaver, assistant manager, heavy
repair shops; Walter W. Patchell, vice presi-
dent, research and development: MorU)n 3.
Smith, vice president and regional manager.

Acceptance, Mayor Robert W. Anthony.
Deborah Herspergvr. kindergarten, Adams
School: Martin Hughes. Jr.. flrst grade. Holy
Rosary School.

Prayer of dedication, Rabbi Nathan Kaber,
Temple Beth Israel.

Remarks, the Honorable James E. Van
Zandt.

Benediction. Rev. Father John P. Manning.
6: Leo's Church.

Taps. Kenneth Woodrtng, WtlHam Mackey.

Civic committee: Howard W. Llndaman.
chaiman: Mrs. Samuel Albright. Miss Helen
Barclay. Thomas Bloom. Robert W. Boyer.
Irancls T Brown. Dr. A. Bruce Dennlston.
George P. Gable. Robert L. Hlte. J B. Holt-
ringer. Mrs. Lynn Hunter, Will Ketner H L.
Kimble. Etevld M. LangJcammer. Mrs. Harold
McCullough. Rev. Francis A. McNeils. Mrs.
Matilda Madden. Dr. Fred Miller. LouU H.
M'irray. Sdward Lcala. C F. Schick, Lawrence
Schrentc. Mrs. Luke Sill, Capt. William
Stephens, Roy Thompson. O. R. Weaver.
Gerald P. Wolf. Hon. James K. Van Zandt.

Rrmabks or Tm Hoi*cmubl.s James X. VA!f
Z\.vDT. Mkmbcx or Co.vGRms. 20rn Dts-

TRICT OF PnfNSTLVAIVTA. AT TBM DEOICATIOIf
CKftCMONUES OF THK K-4 LOCOMOTIVB AT TH«

HoBSKSHo* CtravB, Alioona, Pa_, Junx 8.
1957

This Is an historic occasion.

My contribution to this program Is
summed up in the well-known saying. Time
Marches On.

Yes; time has marched on, because It was
In the year 1804 when a steam locomotive
was developed whloli could hmul loads over
a njced track.

However. tb» steam locomotive which was
to serve as a model for many years was not
developed until 1829.

Therefore. It la proper to say that this
K48 loeomotlve. No. 1861, built In the Penn-
sylvania Railroad shops by the Ingenuity and
the hands of Altoona residents. wlU stand
lor yeairs to come as a monument to ttie era
of steam locomotives.

History tells us that back in the year 1830
the locomotive, that was to serve as a model
for many years, was the famous Rocket
built by the Stephenaons In Kngland. It
weighed but 5 tons and was the first locomo-
tive with a horiaontal tubular hollar.

BiiTTiing wood for fuel. It hauled 88 car-
riages, with a total of 00 tons weight, at a
speed of from 12 to 15 miles per hour. Under
favorable conditions, and If the carriages
were unloaded, the speed could be increased
to 28 miles an hour.

From alx>ut 1830. locomotives were Amer-
ican built, the first being Peter Cooper's
Tom Thumb, which weighed less than 1 ton.

In December 1830. the locomotive named
"Best Friend" was built In New York City
and started regular service on ths Charles-
ton ft Hamburg Railroad. It was the first
locomotive to haul a train of cars In regular
service.

The first coal-burning locomotive was bunt
In 1852.

Prom that time until the torn of the cen-
tury, improvements were made, until loco-
motives with 6 pair of driving wheels, weigh-
ing over 100.000 pounds and burning coal
were developed for heavy duty railroad trafilc.

During this same period, air-brake equip-
ment was developed, together with track
tank and scoop for taking water on tenders.
Among the inventions of the period was the
automatic coupler. The first bituminous
coal-burning locomotive made Its appear-
ance.

Be<;lnnlng in 1900. locomotives became
larger and more p<-iwerful Their designs
were different, and their hauling power and
speed were increased.

In 1939. locomotives equipped for both
freight and passenger service continued to
become larger and to keep pace with the
march of time — they were streamlined from
ccupler to ccupler

The last sicam locomotive, built by the
American Locomotive Co., was completed In
1948. after 97 years of continuous prtxtucUon.

Since that date, this plant and other out-
standing locomotive producers has converted
to full-scale diesel electric production.

The year 1950 marked the end of conimer-
clally built steam locomotives for mainline
service in the United States, and the switch-
over of railroad power to other forms, prln-
clpaily diesel. had lu beginning.

The flrst diesel electric -powered train waa
the Burlington "Pioneer Zephyr." with a 600-
horsepower locomotive, which twas about
one-fourth the size and one-fifth the weight
of the steam er-.gine (if the same horsepower
in 1933. The flrst diesel for road freight was
put Into service in 1941 by the Santa Fa
Railroad.

Thus the trend toward complete dlesellxa-
tfcn was marching forward. From the early
1940*8 to the present time, many improve-
ments have been made in railroad motlv*
power.

Not only have the powvr and speed of tha
diesel been Increased considerably, but also
electric motors have been Installed and gas
turbine electric power has t>een developed.

Challenging the present diesel electric era
of railroad motive power is the gas txirbine
locomotive equipped with a ao.OOO-galloa
tender, supplementing the 7.500 gallons of
fuel carried In the locomotive body tanks.
This gas turbine locomotive is capable of
traveling almost 1.500 miles without refuel-
ing. This type of locomotive provides oper-
ating Improvements and decreaaed malnta-

naoe* coats that intflcat*— It coulA prove t*
be the locomotive of tomorrow.

Speaking of tomorrow, and mindful of tha
fact we are living la the niKlHv age. one may
find 10 to 15 years from now atom, c- powered
locomotives that depend on a an' all charge
of atomic fuel in a nuclear reactor nnaller
than a good -sized trunk, capable of provid-
ing enough energy to power the ocomotlve
a distance equal to more than ore* around
the earth at the Bquator.

At this moment, five of the Nation's larg-
eat railroads, together with some limil doasn
large manufacturing corporatlona. ar« apon-
aortng ths construction of the atomic-pow-
ered loconMtlve.

This locomotive will generate as much
steam as the biggest conventional 8".eam loco-
motive now on the rails. Instead of steam
being produced by coal or oil. sevei-al pounds
of uranium will do the job.

Yea. time marches on.

In 1804 the steam locomotive waa bom.
Then came the diesel electric Ixsomotlve.
followed by the gas turbine locomctlve. And
now, the atomic -powered locomotive Is "Just
around the comer."

Truly, in dedicating this Pennsylvania
Rallroed K4S locomotive. No. 1381. «• give
lasting recognition to one at the moet excit-
ing chapiers in the history of the railroad
industry.

At the same time w* P«y » marked tribute
of respect and esteem to railroad employees
who built these locomotives and those who
manned them as they traveled oounUeas
miles over ribbons of steel.

May "Old 1361" also p>rove a ocnstaat ra-
minder, not only of the greatn'saa ai the
America of yesterday, but also of .he strong,
modem America of tomorrow — as time
marches on.

CCWGRESSIONAL RECX)RD — HOUSE

8881

Address by Hod. Cfiford P. Case, •!
New Jwscy. at RoUbs Collcf e, Wiatsr
Park, FU.

EXTENSION OF REMAIIKS
or

HON. H. ALEXANDER SMITH

or imr rtMSKX

IN THE SKNATB OF THB UNITID BTATKS

Tuesday. June 11. 19S7

Mr SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Pres-
ident, on Prtday. June 7, at the com-
mencement e.xercises of Rollins College.
Winter Park, Pla., my colleague, the
distlngiiished Junior Senator from New
Jersey [ Mr. Cass I , received an honorary
degree and delivered the address of the
occasion. I ask unanimous consent that
his address be printed in the Rscord.

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the Rxcoto,
as follows:
Ajwbrss DixnrcBxs bt Sknatob Cask or Nrw

JXBSBT OM THS OCCASION or RBCXXTT Or AM

Homobabt DacazB or Docroa or Lawa at

THB ROLUMS COLXBCB COMMKNCKMUfT,

Wrama Pabjc. Fui., Jdnb 7. 1957
One of the great Issues of our time la
posed by the development of nuclear and
thermonuclear weapons of truly awful ca-
pacity. We have created forces capable of
destroying all living things. We cannot al-
low a sltuaUon to arlae, or circumstances to
develop. In which we are at the mercy of
such forcea instead of In oommand of them.
We can. and we must, keep them under
conscious control.

This means flrst of all. I beUeve, that we
cannot afford to rely wholly, or almost

wholly, on the threat of unlimited nnelear
retaliation for the defense of onraelTea or
the Free World. Either we keep ouraelTes
prepared to fight little as well as big wars,
and In varloiis parts of the world, or we
may face a choice l)etw«en alow strangula-
tion by gradual Communist encroachment
and unleashing an allout thermonuclear
catastrophe. And it is generally agreed that
in such catastrophe the chances of our sur-
vival would be negligible.

la the second place. It confronts us with
the question, no leas dtfflcult but equally
of essential Importance — Is there no way in
which we can put an end to the sterile and
senaely competition hi weapons of total de-
str'iction?

Deep concern as to the possible hazards
to our own and to future generations from
radioactive fallout has been expressed by
responsible scientists In the current hear-
ings before the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy. They are not agreed as to the
degree of danger, but to xis as laymen the
importance of their testimony Is the added
urgency it gives to efforts to limit nuclear
competition.

There are other considerations which im-
pel sttentlon. There are now three nations
which have demonstrated their capacity to
produce thermonuclear weapons. Surely no
one will welcome the entry of other nations
Into this field. Nuclear weapmns in many
hands could not help but create new tensions
and dangers. But. In the absence of sonye
limitation internationally agreed to, Is ft
realistic to expect that other nations will
r.ot proceed with nuclear weapon develop-
ment on their own?

Ignoring the recent series of Soviet tests.
Communist propaganda has stepped up its
eSoru to excite fear and apprehension
among the people of the world. We can
recognize the propaganda for what It is.
But this does not, cannot. Justify failure on
our part to search out every path that offers
promise of lessening world tensions and
lightening the dark cloud of potential catas-
trophe that now hangs over the world.

As the President put It at a press con-
ference a few weeks ago:

•It seems to me that the more any intelli-
gent man thinks at>out the possibilities of
war today, the more he ahould imderstand
you have got to work on this biislness of
disarmament. • • • I think our first concern
should be making certain we are not our-
selves being recalcitrant, we are not being
plcayunish about the thing. We ought to
have an open mind and make It possible for
others. If they are reasonable, logical men. to
meet tu half way so we can make theae
agreementa.

"Now. on the other hand, any nation ttuit
la facing a government which has a history
of breaking treatlea, and so on. that we have
encountered in our dealings with the Soviets
over these past years, we have to be eapeclally
careiul of the Inspection systems, systems
in which we can have confidence. We must,
at the same time, though, keep our minds
open and keep exploring every field, every
facet of this whole great field, to see if some-
thlug can't be done. It Just has to be doiw
In the Interest of the United Statea."

And that Is what the United SUtes Is
d< tng In the disarmament talks now going
on la London.

I'he very fact that serious negotiations are
t iking place provides some ground for liope
that the unhappy Impasse in which we have
been living for some years now may finally
be broken.

Let me emphasize I am not suggesting
wc can or should expect full blown dls-
srmament. Practical and political obsU-
cles preclude any such poeslbUity. Rather
what we seek to achieve U a first step that
would serve to Impose some degree of control
over armamenta and that could provide a

era 650

baae for later steps. Thus the news re-
ports indicate our representatives are ex-
ploring such poosibllltles as establishment
of mutual aerial inspection zones and some
measure of ground inspection, some limi-
tation on the tasting of at least the larger
nuclear devicee as well as of nuclear stock-
piles through the diversion of future outptit
of flaslonable material to peaceful uses. In
addition, there are suggestions looking to-
ward reduction in conventional arms and
forces.

It has l>een suggested ttiat our policy up
to now has been to consider no agreement
which was not to our net security advan-
tage. I doubt that this is in fact a true
statement if by it is meant that we would
consider no agreement unless we believed It
would improve our position in relation to
our enemies.

But whatever the situation may have been
In the past, we surely cannot let any such
narrow limitation control our future pol-
icy. The security of tills country must
always be our flrst objective. But surely
the attainment of that objective requires
our willingness to explore all avenuea and
all possibilities which have any reasonable
promise of reducing the awfta threat wtiich
nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons pose to
all mankind alike.

Of course, no agreement should impair our
relative position In regard to our enemies.
But true progress can only be made, and this
should be otir goal, by reaching agreements
which are to tiie muttial advantage of all
nations and all peoples. Especially in this
vital area, no agreen^nt is possible unless
all parties are convinced, at the outset and
at the end, that Its attainment will leave
them in no worse position in relation to
other nations.

The administration needs to be upheld
in what I Iwlleve it is trying to do in the
direction of a limited, flrst-step agreement.
The path is diiflcult. For example, as the
President suggested at his recent news con-
ference, we must Include our allies in our
delllMrations at the same time as we get
down to serious negotiations with the Rua-
alana. But the wlU is there, I beUeve, and
we ought not miss any chance to negotiate.

Whether at this time real progress to-
ward disarmament can be achieved I do not
know. In view of the stakes, the effort to
reach agreement is surely worth making.
Indeed a nation under Ood and dedicated
to peace can do no less.

Tribute to die Late Senator McCarthy

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. WILUAM L JENNER

or nfSUiTA

IN THE SENATE OF THB UNITED STATES

Tuesday. June 11. 1957

Mr. JENNER. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the CoNCRissioNAL Record the text of
a radio broadcast by me on May 19, 1957,
In honor of the late Senator McCarthy.

There being no objection, the broad-
cast was ordered to be printed in the
Rscoao. as follows:

OramcszfT bt SnraTOs JafNm

Ify friends. I should Uke to talk to you
about the Senate of the United States.

On the nuMTiing of May 6, the rostrum in
the Senate Chamber waa banked with
flowers, white and a glowing red. The casket
m front ot the rostrtim was covered with
the American flag, and a liarine guard stood

at attention. The chaplain of the Senats,
the Bererend TnAtritt Brown Harris, of the
Methodist iralth. spoke of Senator Joe Mc-
Carthy's great courage in exposing "cunning
toes who plot the betrayal of our freedom-"
The Reverend WUIlam J, Ewalt, who married
Senator McCarthy Just 4 years ago, read tiie
CathoUe service of sorrow for the dead, and
hope for tlieir triumphant entry Into their
heavenly home.

I am not going to speak to you about
Senator Joe McCarthy's great flght to tm-
cover the secret enemies of our country, nor
of the way his life was destroyed by ttie
venomous, vengeful, unremitting attacks ot
his foes. You know the story.

I wish to speak today about the Senate.
There were 40 Republicans and 37 Demo-
crats present. These men were not present,
most of them, for any official act of mourn-
ing. They were present aa human beings,
sorrowing for the tragedy they liad wit-
nessed, and in which they had had a part.

All of the Democrats (except the newly
elected Members) liad voted for the censure
resolution. Ttie DemocraUc Speaker of tha
House, from Texas, and the Democratic ma-
jority leader, from Massachusetts, were also
present to pay their respects.

Nearly half of the Republicans who at-
tended had voted for the censure, but they
too came as human beings, only too well
aware how deep waa tha suffering now
ended.

One Cabinet member, Secretary Summer-
fleld. was also present.

I wish to say to you, my friends, that a
terrible breach in the American civil order
began to heal on that day. We liad come
nearer than any of us guessed, to a break-
down in the American genius for political
self-control.

Only one who lived throtigh it can imagine
the fierce pressure that was txrougbt to tiear
upon the Members of the Senate 3 years ago,
to accept the Communist myth ahout Joe
McCarthy. According to their character
assaaelns, he was violating the traditions of
American fair play by asking witnesses ques-
tions. He was "helping the Commtinlsts**
because he did not falter in his efforts. He
was acctused of all kinds of personal indiscre-
tions, some charges too odious to mention
among gentlemen. All of these Communist
charges were of cotirse put forward by inno-
cents and secret collaborators who did not
hear the brand of their master.

Joe McCarthy has been completely vindi-
cated of all the personal charges hurled
against him, especially of the baseless slander
that he had not paid the income taxes he
owed. But my story today is of how the
Senate is freeing itself of the poisonous in-
fluences that beclouded its Judgment wher-
ever di^ulsed Communist influence was at
work.

The attack on Joe McCarthy was managed
at every step Uke a military campaign, ex-
cept that the Communists use wordM, in-
stead of btillets, because words are more
deadly.

Fulton Lewis in his broadcast stated what
I lielleve to l>e true, that most of the Re-
publicans who voted against Senator Mc-
Carthy were sorry they had done it, but
had been unable to resist the overwhelming
pressure. It is Important, to the American
people, to flnd out who put that irresistible
pressure on the Senate, and why.

The Communist attack on the Senator
from Wisconsin was in part an attack on the
Senator as an individual. l>ecatise, like Oen-
eral Patton. he had dared go forward after
each contest. He had come so cloee to the
citadels of their power that he must be de-
stroyed.

But the attack on Senator McCarthy was
also an attack on the Senate. The Com-
munists knew the friends of Senator Mc-
Carthy wtn loyaL The autl-Oommunlsts

Hi

il

m

\i^i

4

8882

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8883

knew how gr«at wm the trtumph won by
the enemy In the censure vote. The Com-
munlBte believed they could etlr up. in the
American Senate, a bitter factional batUe,
like that which haa turned many a parUa-
ment In Kurope Into a milling crowd impo-
tent to lerTe their country.

During the debate on the cenaure reeolu-
tlon. I pointed out again and again that the
real attack waa against the Senate of the
United States. I pointed out that the Bol-
ahevlka had a weU-establlahed policy of re-
ducing parliamentary proceaaes to Impo-
tence. I eald the attack waa managed by a
conspiratorial general staff, and no one man
could fight a conspiracy. I pleaded with the
other Senators to see the danger, and to
Join ranks In protecting our Nation.

It was too early, the pressure was too
great, for moat Members to see.

The censure vote split the Republicans tn
Congress down the middle. It placed the
Democrats as a body in opposition to the
Republicans. What a setting for the favor-
ite Communist device of pouring gasoline oa
the little ftrea of controversy.

Americans can hardly imagine how fortu-
nate a thing It was for our country that that
factional split was avoided. We have to look
at the parliaments of Europe from pre-
Faaclst Italy to present-day France, to know
how great was our danger.

Joe McCarthy made no effort to rouse the
passions of his followers and make his
humiliation Into a bitter national battle.
No man In American political life ever had
so great &n opportunity for demagoguery. or
refused so gallantly to take advantage of It.
But the split In the Senate was avoided
also because of some deep Instinct within
the membership, to keep our political sta-
bility at all costs. The American people are
the heirs of 700 years of self-government,
that Is. of political responsibility. That
deep-ingrained sense of political responsi-
bility held us firm while the Communlts used
their most brilliant leaders, their cleverest
Btrategems, and their most helpful stooges
to make the Senate keel over.

Joe McCarthy was a victim of that silent
struggle from 1954 to 1957. tjecause he did
not realize how many people were coming to
see his charges were true. The struggle was
with forces too vast and too hidden to be
managed normally.

This struggle, within the ranks of the Sen-
ate, between the cleverest attempts at sub-
version of Its Members and the deepest na-
tional Instincts of political stabiUty, waa too
new In America, too close to political life or
death, to be expressed In words. Every
nation of Europe, subjected to such pres-
sure, has caved In. Our inner struggle had
the dimensions of a fight for preservations of
the last stronghold of representative govern-
ment In the world.

I hope we have won through. Only a few
weeks ago. the same forces which like a
mighty bellows, turned the disagreements
over Joe McCarthy Into a consuming flame
of hate throughout the country, tried to
repeat every one of their murderous strata-
gems to make the Norman case into a similar
attack, to split the Senate Into factions, and
make it Impotent to protect our Nation.

This time the Senate was ready. All the
blasts the Communists could turn against
us, all the Ilea and smears, were ready to be
hurled. If the Senate leaders had shown the
slightest Indecision. The Senate stood firni.
Our country Is still In danger. The Ameri-
can peopl-! look to the Members of their Con-
gress to be the watchmen on the city wall,
to warn them of attack. I believe the Mem-
bers of the Senate can now recognize the
enemy with a clarity they did not have 3
years ago. I believe that never again • ill
disguised Communists be able to rout the
Congrees when It must stand fast.

I do not know anything which would
hrtng more happiness to Joe McCarthy than

to know his sacriflee has not been in Tain,
that the watchmen on the wall will stand
guard, however dark the night, or however
insldloua the enemy.

The day when the Senate met to pay th«
laat honors to Senator McCarthy may be the
day when our country began Its slow and
painful upward climb out of the polaonou*
morass of Communist seduction, to the light
of American honor, and dignity, and loyally
oX true Americana for one another.

Sonic Boom

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. FRANCIS CASE

or SOUTH D/VKOTA

IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED STATES

Tuesday, June 11. 1957

Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
President, I ask unanimous consent to
have printed in the Concrissional
Record an Interesting article on the
sonic boom, the new sound of air power,
written by the junior Senator from Ari-
zona [Mr. GoLDWATERl. whlch appeared
in the May 29 issue of Planes, published
by the Aircraft Industries Association of
America. Inc.. Washington, D. C.

As my colleagues know, the Senator
from Arizona is the only qualified Jet
pilot In the Senate, and we are proud of
him.

I commend It to the attention of the
Senate.

There being no objection, the article

was ordered to be printed in the Record,

as follows:

Sonic Boos*

(By Hon. Bakkt M. GoLDWATm, of Arizona)

(EDiToa's NoTT — Senator Basrt M Oold-
WATHi, of Arizona. Is a colonel In the United
States Air Force Reserve, and the only Mem-
ber of the United States Senate who Is a
qualified Jet pilot. He haa flown nvDSt of
the supersonic fighters In the Air Force In-
ventory Senator Ooldwati31 Joined the Air
Force In 1941 and during World War II
served In the Far East with the Air Trans-
port Command. He attended Staunton Mil-
itary Academy and the University of Ari-
zona. Senator Goldwati« was elected to the
city council of Phoenix In 1949 and reelected
In 1951. He was elected to the United States
Senate In November 1952. He Is a memt>er
of the American Legion and the Veterans of
Foreign Wars. Senator Goldwatdi Is chair-
man of the board of Goldwaters, of Phoenix )

A new sound of air power progress will
become more apparent as America opens
Its doors to the summer season, and more
supersonic aircraft are delivered to the mili-
tary services. This sound Is the sonic boom —
manmade thunder. It Is one of the mi.«t
widely misunderstood phenomena of high-
speed flight, and has been blamed for dam-
age that couldn t have been inflicted by an
atomic bomb.

The United States Air Force recently re-
ported some Initial findings of a study of
sonic booms to find out how they are caused,
the damage they can do and. even more im-
portant, the damage they cannot do. The
study was made by scientists and structural
engineers of the Wright Air Development
Center, largely based on investigations of
claims from citizens who thought, correctly
in a few cases and Incorrectly In most cases,
that their homes had been damaged by the
•onlc boom.

The researchers found out many things,
but It should be a matter of relief to the

elttmnry that the study proved the sonic
boom, from usual operating altitude*:

Cannot crack foundation walla or pave-
ment.

Canno' crack plaster walla Installed ac-
cording to most building codes.

Cannot cause roofs to buckle or crack.
Cannot do any structural damage, but un-
der some circumstance* can danukg* glass
panes and Improperly Installed doors.

There is nothing mysterious about the
sonic t>oom. In fact, mulesklnners In my
State of Arizona once created booms of a
minor variety when they crackled their whip*
over ths teams. The tip of the whip actually
exceeds the speed of sound and causes the
characteristic sharp crack.

Basically, sound is wave lengths of various
pressure* hitting the ear. and they result
from any surge of energy. The strong arm of
the muleeklnner provides the energy that
creates the crack of the whip. The wave
lengths can be compared to the ripple* cre-
ated by a rock to*sed Into a still pond. Ordi-
nary conversation is a series of pressure
wavelets pulsating against the ear like ripples
of water slapping the shore of the pond.

An explosion is no more than a very strong
pressure wave created by a sudden release
of energy. These strong waves of pressure
are known as shock waves because of their
intensity.

The sonic boom can also be explained by
this established law of sound. Shock waves
are not visible except under laboratory con-
ditions where highly specialized photo-
graphic equipment can catch their distinc-
tive shape. If the shock wave created by a
supersonic aircraft in flight were visible,
it would resemble a shallow dish as It at-
tsches to the airplane at the exact speed
of sound. The speed of sound varies ac-
cording to altitude and temperature. At
sea level, it is 760 mile* per hour, and at
40.000 feet the speed of sound Is MO miles
per hour.

When the plane exceeds the speed of
sound, the waves are swept back from the
noee at sharp angles until they form the
cone shape of a funnel. Her* is th* making
of a sonic boom.

The shock wave travels through space, but.
unlike the ripples of water that It basically
resembles, there are only one or two ripples.
This wave, which has been formed by the
tremendous energy of the aircraft flying at
supersonic speed, reaches the ground at
the speed of sound. However, the shock
wave la obstructed by anything It comes
aRslnst — trees, buildings, automobiles — any-
thing It touches. The power It possesses Is
constantly dissipated at It passes through
the air. It Is robbed of Its energy by the
friction It creates In Its passage through the
air and on the ground. Oulded missiles
create a sonic boom as they move throuKh
the air. as do aircraft capable of supersonic
flight during climb. But this sonic boom
never reaches anyone's ears since It dissolves
in Its upward flight.

However, when the Increase In preesure
occurs at the eardrum, we have a sound.
Anyone In the path of the cone's high pres-
sure air will hear the sound as the cone
passed over him. The aircraft dragging the
cone along is travelling at a very high rate
of speed, and, since the high presstire Is
concentrated in a very small volume, this
sound Is a sharp crack which sounds much
like a thunderclap.

This, essentially. Is all there Is to the
cause of the sonic boom. It is man-made
thunder with the aircraft playing the role
of an electrical discharge or lightning.

A loud thunderclap can generate a pres-
stire of about a half-pound per square foot,
and a loud sound from a boiler factory will
produce a pressure of about one pound per
square foot. The noise of a sudden thun-
derclap will startle or frighten people whUe
the boiler room noise, which Is continuous,
will do neither, simply because it Is expected.

Reducing th* analogy even ftirther, a pcraon
shouting "boo" behind a man will startl*
him more than a "boo" shouted by some-
one he sees before him. It's only fair to
note, howsTcr, that th* degre* of surprise
depends on who Is doing th* booing.

The Wright Air Development Center engi-
neers and scientists made a thorough In-
vestigation of representative cases of the
damngee alleged to have been caused by the
boom. They had a sulMtantlal background
of experience In shock waves caused by ex-
plosions to draw upon In arriving at their
conclusions.

First, the engineers and scientists observ-
ing the effect of shock waves generated by
atomic explosions never detected structural
damage to the flimsiest structures at pres-
sures less than 70 pounds per square foot.
In tests where aircraft have dived from 35,000
feet, exceeded the speed of sound, and then
pulled out at 25,000 feet, the pressure of
the wave created has been no greater than 5
pounds per square foot. Even when the air-
craft descended to 10,000 feet before pull-
rut, the pressure did not reach 10 pounds per
square foot. Supersonic operations are rare-
ly performed at altitudes less than 20,000
feet since the pilot requires this altiture as
a safety factor for recovery from the dive.
The Air Force even carried its recording In-
struments to a mountain top to obtain a
prPFf ure reading. They registered an aircraft
f. ying at supersonic speed 280 feet away and
th? maximum reading was 33 pounds per
square foot. The Jet pilots I know are much
t >o wise to attempt supersonic flight at an
altitude of 280 feet except for the most
urgent operational reasons.

Air Force regulations also state that sonic
and supersonic speeds during straight and
level flight will be commenced and termi-
nated at altitudes above 30.000 feet over land
areas, and above 10,000 feet over water areas.
Sonic booms are not Intentionally performed
during tactical missions, and when training
programs require speeds that could produce
a sonic boom, the flight must be conducted
over specially designated areaa under close
supervision. These regulations governing
training missions are also applied by the air-
craft Industry in conducting test flights of
new aircraft.

By simple arithmetic, the pressure pro-
duced by the usual sonic boom is less than
one-twentieth the pressure required to cause
structural damage to a flimsy structure. The
behavior of homes and industrial buildings
of brick, block, and frame construction tested
by nuclear explosions reveals that it takes
pressure on the order of 150 to 300 pounds
P"r square foot to cause damage ranging
frim plaster cracks to wall and roof cracks.
Tlie WADC engineers made a calculation
s''idy of a wood stud wall with a plaster In-
side surface. The walls were between 8
and 10 feet in height and constructed from
2 by 4 studs. Suppoee we overlook the
strength contributed by the sheathing, sid-
ing, and plaster and asstime that the stud
t r.kes an the load. On a single stud the load
Is about 67 pounds. The maximum tension
In the stud at the middle Is 200 pounds per
square inch of stud.

Most building codes require that the stud
be fastened to the plate by three 12-penny
nails. These nails provide the shear resist-
ance. The shear strength of the nails Is
atacut 300 pounds and the tensile strength of
the wood la at least 1.000 pounds per square
inch. Building authorities say that In order
to prevent plaster cracks, the deflection at
the middle of the beam should not exceed
1 360th of the span length.

As long as a 10-foot stud does not bend
more than one-third of an inch at the middle
from Its normal position, the wall plaster will
nt crack. By calculation, the deflection of
our wall stud under the heaviest load Im-
posed by a sonic boom would be only SO per-
cent of the deflection required to crack th*
piaster.

Calculations of this Und can be extended
to varloua elements of the house — roofs, side
walls, and porches. The sonic boom falls far
short of causing sufflcicnt load to crack plas-
ter, floors, roofs, and walls. The force ex-
erted by the boom is like a giant giving the
whole bouse a very light and very quick
touch.

Bo far the structure has been discussed as
If It had no openings. Now let's take a look
at the windows and doors. The sash and
frame of a window, of cotirse, are more than
strong enough to withstand the relatively
minute force of the boom.

Tte window glass Is another matter. Glass.
In one sense. Is a strong material, but It is
brittle compared to other building materials
when used In thin sheets. The methods by
which It Is manufactured are apt to produce
Internal lockup stresses. In addition, the
glass may be bent ever so slightly when it
Is Installed. Thus a light, sharp blow can
shatter a glass pane.

I do not want to Imply that a sonic boom
will always break windows. Ordinary win-
dow glass, properly Installed, will break at
pressures of 18 to 70 pounds per square foot,
a much greater force than the boom pro-
duces. In fact, the Air Force, In a recent
demonstration, directed some booms at a
large plate of glass held in a frame. Five
successive sonic booms failed to shatter the
glass and only when the glass was loosened
In Its frame did the boom cause It to shatter.

Doors, with the exception of their glass
area, are strong enough to resist boom
forces. The weak points are the lock and
hinges. If a lock is loose fltting, the Impact
of the boom may be sufllcient to Jar the
opening and cause the door to slam against
the wall. Under this condition or If the
door Is slightly ajar, the hinges might pull
loose or cause a split In the door Jamb.

Bricks, plaster, and mortar do not have
any measurable ability to creep or move
along Its surface. When laid up Into walls
or ceilings, they also get locked up stresses
which are caused by curing of the mortar
or plaster, shrinkage due to the drjrlng out
of mortar or plaster and the effect of expan-
sion and contraction between hot stmuner
and cold winter temperatures.

These materials have very little give
or resilience. They stand these force com-
binations Indeflnitely or fail after 1 or a
seasonal cycles. If the boom forces were
appropriate, brick, block, or plaster stressed
near the point of failure by a combination
of locked up or seasonal forces might be
overloaded; but since the boom force on
a structural element Is far less than a good
stiff windstorm or. In most cases, less than
that of a healthy boy Jumping on the floor.
It Is difficult to see how a wall could remain
poised Just at the point of failure for any
length of time without being tipped In or
broken by other more frequent forces.

Ground vibrations are another matter
subject to misunderstanding for very good
reasons. For example. It was reported to
the Air Force that structtxres were shaken
violently and the ground was Jumping up
and down an Inch or two when large air-
craft flew overhead. Even the scientists sent
to Investigate the matter admitted to this
feeling. Yet, measuring devices with the
most sensitive Instruments available indi-
cated no movement, but slamming a screen
door drove the measuring device completely
off the scale.

Ilie scientists fotmd that we get false per-
ceptions of movement because the sense
organs In the skin only require pressures
measured In a millionth part per square
Inch to cause a sensation of movement. It
Is difficult for anyone to believe there Is no
vibration, but the most exacting scientific
tests have proven there is none.

The sonic boom will not cause ground vi-
brations, that could damage basement walls,
floors, or concrete walks and driveways. In-
Testlgatlons of nuclear explosions which
produce many times the preesure of a sonic

boom «how that there la very little effect oa
the ground near the pdnt of impact or oa
pavements, pipes, or foundation footings.

The question then arises as to why struc-
tural damage Is claimed after a sonic boom.
Basically, this Is because the homeowner,
after hearing a sonic boom. Is certain that
the noise mtist have caused some damage.
He makes a careful Inspection of his home,
probably the first time he has gone over
ttx6 house looking for damage In several
years. And, of course, he finds crack after
crack, llie immediate conclusion Is that the
boom caused ths wall and celling cracks.
The owner Is convinced that the cracks did
not exist before the boom occurred. This is
a completely natiu-al reaction. The cracks
hadnt been detected before, simply because
the householder had never looked carefully
for them.

A simple test will prove this point. Take
a flashlight and go over your walls and ceil-
ings. You will find ntnnerous cracks that
you dldnt know existed. It Is also possible
to check whether the cracks are recent or
not. Where the plaster has parted, the
edges of the rupture will be gray or weath-
ered on an old crack and the plaster will be
white on a recent crack.

The Air Force has a dual responsibility on
damage claims. It is the policy of the Air
Force to make prompt payments for damage
caused by its operations. At the same time,
the Air Force has a tremendous obligation to
the taxpayers to expend each dollar appro-
priated In a proper manner. The great bulk
of the claims received are from people who
are honestly convinced that the damage was
caused by Air Fores operations. The Air
Force completely respects the right of the
citizen to claim this damage, and a thorough
Investigation Is made. But the sclentlflo
knowledge acquired by their Investigations
of what a sonic boom can do and cannot do
must be considered in denying or ai^rovlng
the claim. This Is evidence that cannot be
Ignored.

There are. of course, cases where the claims
are patently ridiculous. During a recent
demonstration, several sonic booms were de-
liberately made. One mac's residence was
located 13 miles from the airport where the
boom was directed. The atomic bombs
dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not
cause damage to Japanese residences beyond
an 8-mlle radius. This fact, however, dldnt
stop the owner from claiming damage from
a sonic bocm at almost twice the damage
limit of an A-bomb.

Another man with two business establish-
ments and a house located in a triangle 7,
6 and 2Vi miles apart, with the closest comer
of the 3 buildings located 4 miles from the
airport, promptly put in a claim for dam-
age on all 3 buUdlngs.

The Air Force, like all Government agen-
cies in a democracy, is highly responsive to
the demands of the public it serves. Protests
to the commanders of air bases across the Na-
tion and to the Pentagon are given prompt
attention and remedial action Is sought. In
many cases, a simple fix is possible ; in other
cases, the Air Force cannot eliminate th*
cause of the protest without serious damage
to operations.

It is difllcult to readily Identify the air-
craft causing a sonic boom. This is due
to the high altitudes where most supersonic
operations are conducted, and a sonic boom
created at high altitude may be heard 20
to 30 miles away from the path of the plane.
Atmospheric conditions play a significant
part In the propagation of these sound
waves.

Although Air Defense identlfioatlon Bones
are In existence, aircraft operating within
them, once identified as friendly, receive no
further attention. These sones are estab-
lished to identify aircraft entering the Eone
trom an outside point.

Absolute Identification of the aircraft
causing the sonic boom Is ftirther compli-
cated bf the fact that, except for certain

i?i-i

'-" i^l

5 Mi

V? \tA

HI

III

ill

! I

!:i

8884

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

June 11

required position reports en route, a Jet air-
craft may not be known to b« In a designated
area at a certain time.

The Air Ft)rce now has under consideration
the development at an Instrument that
would automatically record the time, posi-
tion and flight direction of a plane when It
exceeds the speed of sound. Such an In-
strument will be vital In fixing the reapon-
slblllty for any damage a boom may cause.

The noise created by turbojet engines Is
a thorny problem In the relations between
the Air Force and the citizens of cities they
defend. But the Air Force started an in-
tensive program of public education on Jet
noise.

Community leaders were Invited to nearby
alrbases for tours; they talket". to the com-
manders and the pilots of the Jet aircraft.
Landing patterns were rearranged so that
the least Inhabited areas were In the flight
path. The Air Force explained that a Jet
talcing off at 2 o'clock tn the morning was
net prompted by the desire of a pilot to get
his Qylng time. An unidentified plane had
been reported, and the Jet was ordered to
make an Interception.

Once these points were explained, the
complaints on Jet noise dropped. In fact.
Jet noise complaints apparently reached
their peak last year, and the Air Force
estimates that fewer complaints will be
received this year despite a growing number
of aircraft entering service equipped with
high-thrust Jets. The noise of the jet planes
BtlU exists and will continue to exist tcr
many years, but the annoyance has t>eeu
lesdened through public understanding

Public appreciation of cause and eifect.
of necessities that far outweigh inconven-
iences Is an Invaluable national asset. Cer-
tainly we would not want to equip our Air
Force with supersonic aircraft and then
forbid the pilots to fly at these speeds.
Pilots must know the performance capabili-
ties of their aircraft If they are to be em-
ployed Bome day against the enemy.

The eonlc boom Is a new noise that we
must accept as part of freedom's price.

Problenif ia Forci^ Relations

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. WIUIAM F. KNOWLAND

or C.^LIrOHNIA

IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED STATES

Tuesday. June 11, 1957

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, on
June 9 I had the privilege of participat-
ing in a broadcast of the proeram en-
titled "Pace the Nation." and I ask unan-
imoas consent that a transcript of the
broadcast be printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the broad-
cast was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

Face thi N\tiov

(As broadcast over the CBci Television Nef-
worlc, June 9. 1957. 4 to 4 30 p m , CBS
Ra»lio Ne'work. June 9, 1957, 9 30 to 10
p m : guest, the Honorable William F.
K.NowLAND. United Stales Senate. Republi-
can of California; nuxlerator, Gnfflng Ban-
croft; panel. William H. Lawrence, New
"i'ork Times; Walter Cronklte. CB8 News;
James Shepley, Time-Life; pnxlucer, Ted
A"ers; associate producer. Beryl Denzer i
A.NvorNCER Senator KNowtANo. face the
Natldn. You are about to see the Republi-
can leader of the United States Senate, Wil-
liam F. KvowLAND. face the Nation, with
question? from veteran corre«pt>ndent8 rep-
resenting the Nation's press: William H.
Lawrence, Washington correspondent for the

New York Times; Walter Cronklte. of CBS
News; and James R. Shepley. chief of the
Washington Bureau of Time and Life. And
now. substituting for Stuart Novlns. the
moderator of Face the Nation, from CBS
News and Public Affairs. Grlfflng Bancroft.
Mr. Banckoft. Senator Knowland Is a man
of many responsibilities. A California news-
paper publisher and Member of the United
States Senate for 12 years now. He Is not
only the Republican floor leader, but a mem-
ber of perhaps the three most Important
Conunittees on Capitol Hill — on Appropria-
tions— on Atomic Energy — and on Foreign
Relations. So. Senator Knowland. you
have to cope not only with budgetary and
political wars here at home, but with the
cold war overseas as well. So. let's get
started with our first question from Mr.
Shepley.

Mr. SHrPi.ET Senator Knowland. your
colleague, Ltnix)n Johnson, of Texas, the
Democratic lender of the Sen.ite. proposed In
a speech last night that following the ap-
pearance of Chairman Khrushchev on this
program la.st week, that United States and
Russian leaders should have equal time on
the opptisite radio and TV networks, each
and every week of the year. You, as Re-
publican leader of the Senate, endorse this
prop<i«;a; .'

Senator Knowland Well. I thought Sena-
tor Johnson had made a constructive and
Interesting proposal. I certainly would
think we would want to be sure that the
American representative got equal time and
was not Just limited to being looked at and
heard by the CommunLst hierarchy in the
Soviet Union. If he could assure real equal
time, that the people of Russia were getting
the information. I think It might be helpful.
Mr CRONKrrE. I>j you think. Senator
Knowland. that In the case of the Khru-
shchev interview last week on this program.
Face the Nation, we should a.-k for equal
time to answer that particular broadcast?

Senator Knowland. Whether we should
Rsk for equal time ui answer th.^t particular
broadcast. I think It may be a little late Uj
do that now. The time to have dr.ne It was
perhaps before the broadcast was made, but
over a year at?o I suggested that at the United
Nations, where they pet a wide distribution
by television and radio of the proceedings,
that before the Soviet Union was able to take
advantatje of the American audience that he
and his government should agree that equal
t.me would be «(iven U:> Ambassador Lodxe
and the spokesmen of the Western World.
aioi.g the same general line

Mr LAwarNCE Senator, do you get the Im-
prej^si.jn that there has been any net change
In the climate or In the relations between
the United States and the Soviet Union as a
result of events In the last week or 2 weeks?
Senator Knowland I perst)nally. Mr Law-
rence, do not believe the St)vlet Union has
changed Its lonxj-term objectives. I am con-
cerned that they may be interested for propa-
uand.i purposes ot talking about a new agree-
ment, but I h.ive no confidence that they will
live up to this new a^jreement If they enter
Into It. any m-'re than they h.ive the whole
strini? of agreements thn' they have vlol.ited,
and it sf«f*ms to me that what the free Rovern-
ments of the world should do is to Insist that
they at least live up to some of the agree-
ment.s they have already m^de. For In-
stance, the 10 resolutions passed on the Hun-
gary sit'iatlon have n^r been abided by. by
either the Sovie' Union or by the captive
government of Kad.ir in Hungary and ap-
parently, now the Soviet Union Is using the
smokes»-reen of some interest in disarm.*-
ment in order tt) make the World lorget
atx-iut the atrocities in Hungary.

Mr Lawhencx. You brought un this Hun-
garian revolution and I was Interested In
Khru.^hrhev's assertion — that Is all It wa.s.
It was hardly a statement of the fact, but
his assertion — that the Russians would b«
Willing to withdraw their troops from the
captive — from the countries of Eaatera

Europe, the satellltea— captive countries. If
we would withdraw our troops from Europe
and be expressed the l>ellef that even If
Soviet troops left, that these countries would
still remain under the Soviet type of govern-
ment. You agree with this?

Senator Knowland. I do not agee with Mr.
Khriishchev'8 statement. I do not believe
that the Kadar government of Hungary
would last a day or week IX the Soviet troops
were withdrawn.

I do not believe that we should try to get
a settlement of the withdrawal from all of
Europe or perhaps from all of Eastern Eu-
rope at one time. I think a good test of
the gixxl faith of Mr. Khrushch-iv and If
he was speaking for the Soviet Government,
would be to say. "All right, let's take a test.
Hungary Is the place. This Is the lime. The
United Nations has passed 10 resolutions.
Now comply with those 10 resolutions.
Withdraw your forces, let there be free elec-
tions. You said that communism Is a great
success. You had an opportunity to Impose
communism In Hungary for over 10 years.
Now let the world see whether the people
m free elections would vote for communism
or would not."

It seems to me that we ought to put Mr.
Khrushchev on the spot, focus world atten-
tion on that Issue. He has opened It up
for us, and I don't think we ou'^ht to let
him build a smokescreen now by talking
about other agreements when here Is a spe-
cific case where they can demonstrate
whether the people of Hungary really want
communism.

Mr. LAwax:«ci! In your view, would ther«
be a quid pro quo fur this? 1 mean would
we. In return for their withdrawing from
Hungary, Is there anything that we would
do or should do?

Senator Knowland. Personally, I would b«
willing to agree, provided It met the ap-
proval of our allies, to say you have talked
aoout a Baltic neutrality situation. If Nor-
way Is willing to work with us on this sit-
uation, that Norway would Join the neutral
bloc of the Baltic states In exchange for
your pulling out of Hungary and giving the
pet)pie of Hungary a chance to determine
by free elections whether they want com-
munism. Now here would be a test It
would be a limited test. It would be a quid
prci quo and would give a chance to see
whether Mr. Khrushchev's appearance was
only propaganda which I think It was, or
uhether he was speaking In good faith for
his Government and the world would un-
derstand.

Mr CsoNKiTE Senator Knowland. Is any-
thing being dime to put that suggestion of
yours Into effect "'

Senator Knowland I have written a let-
ter to the Secretary of State suggesUng that
that be done.

Mr Sheplet Senator, would you add that,
for the purposes of the lest, any other coun-
tries, say Pol.Aiid, for example?

Senator Knowland. I don't think that you
can stilve all these problen^ at once. Per-
sonally. I thlnK we should always seek to
get a withdrawal ultimately of the Soviet
forces from Poland. Rumania and Bulgaria,
and the other captive nations, but we are
not going to do that all at one time, and
here Is a chance to test out Mr. Khrush-
chev's alleged olTer. and his statement that
communism could exist If Soviet troops were
withdrawn. I think we could. If he doesn't
want to take Hungary as an example, we
could offer him the alternative — let him
withdraw from Latvia. Lithuania, and Es-
tonia, to live up to the agreements that the
Soviet Union signed In 1939. Let them be-
come ft part of this so-called Baltic neutral
bloc In exchange for Norway t>ecomlng a
member of the so-called Baltic neutral bloc.

Mr. Shefley. Your proposal of Norway as
a quid pro quo for Hungary Is very Inter-
esting, and I was wondering If you had
thought of a quid pro quo later for Poland?

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

8885

Senator Knowland. No; but If you were
taking country by country. If he waa willing
to test whether the people of theee captive
nations really liked communlam and felt it
was a paradise as he visions it, why, then,
maybe we could try and aay that we would
be willing to withdraw our forces from, let
us say, Greece, so that we would try coun-
try by country and let'a see how It works
out.

Mr. BANCRorr. Senator Knowland, have
you had any reply from this letter?

Senator Knowland. No; I have not be-
cause the letter was Just written on Satur-
day.

Mr. BANcaorr. When did you write the
letfer?
Senator Knowland. Just yesterday.
Mr. CsoNKmc. Senator, a moment ago. In
discussing disarmament you seemed a little
le.ss optimistic about the sincerity of the
Ru.sf;lans In this particular case than do
Secretary of State Dulles and Harold Staa-
sen. Do you feel that they are too opti-
mistic?

.Senator Knowtjiwd. They are more opti-
mistic than I am. I certainly wish them
every luck. There Is no man In the world
todpy and the people of Russia must under-
stand this, there Is no man in the world
tiday more devoted to jieace than Is President
Eisenhower. He will take any honorable
steps to try snd gain a real peace In the
w'.rld and try and gain a limitation of arma-
ments, but I think the Government and the
ptopie of the United States have a right. In
view of the unbroken record of violations of
their prior agreements, to insist, as Senator
Johnson said on yesterday, that there be
8<ime Ironclad guaranties, some brassbound
gtiarantles. that this Is not Just going to be
some «ords without any deeds following It
up. and I Just don't believe that the Soviet
Union has any Intention of agreeing to an
effective system of Inspection, and without
It. I think we would Jeopardize the security
cf this Nation and perhaps the freedom of
the entire Pree World If we merely took their
word without Insisting on effective guar-
anties.

Mr SHiyLET. On that point. Senator, what
Is your understanding of the statiu of the
disarmament talks between Mr. Stassen and
the Russian delegate In London?

Senator Knowland. So far as I know there
have been preliminary conversations with
our allies first, so that they would under-
stand some of the proposals that the Govern-
ment of the United States has In mind. I
have no doubt there have tjeen preliminary
discussions with Soviet represenUtlves. I
bin not In a position to go Into any details of
It nor do I have any up-to-the-minute latest
Information.

Mr. SHEPLrr. Is It your understanding
that these safeguards and controls of which
you have Just spoken are, indeed, part and
parcel of the new American proposals?

Senator Knowland. I believe that to be
the case. I believe that that has been the
pf)sltlon of our Government in the past. I
have no reason to believe they would change
It I think It would be a very serious mis-
take to merely take the Soviet word without
effective guaranties, and I don't believe that
either Democrats or Republicans In or out
of the Congress would support a proposal
that merely gave us another scrap of paper
with the signature of the Soviet Union with-
out some effective guaranties on It.

Mr Shetlxt. Well, sir, both the President
and Mr. Khrushchev have mentioned a gen-
eral agreement with the proposition of going
on with some initial step, some first thing
fcrst without awaiting an entire disarma-
ment package. Do you have any idea what
th.-it first Initial step might be?

.'enator Knowland. No; and I have no par-
ticular objection to trying It piecemeal, be-
cause we are not going to solve all the prob-
Irms of the world at one sitting, so to speak,
but I do believe that we have a right to ex-

pect a fair quid pro quo. Beeondly, I think
we have a right, based on the tindlsputed
record of Soviet violations of their treaty obli-
gations in the past, to make sxire that what-
ever is agreed to, can be effectively inspected.
Mr. CaoNKm. Senator, if I may change the
subject at the moment with the agreement of
you gentlemen, most of our competitors for
world markets are about to resume trade with
Red China. You have been an outstanding
spokesman for Nationalist China and for Fot-
mosa, for the policies of alliance with them
in the past. Do you think that the time
might be ripe now for ub to review our poli-
cies toward Red China trade?

Senator Knowland. I think on all foreign
policy, no one can freeze their thinking and
you have to, obviously, deal with the facu as
they exist and as they change from time to
time. Personally, I think it is a mistake un-
der existing world conditions to open up the
trade of strategic materials with Communist
China.

Now. there is argtmaent sometime as to
what strategic materials are, but in the recent
British annotmcement it indicated that lo-
comotives, trucks, perhaps entire rubber in-
dustrial plants would be shipped. To me
they are strategic and to the British Board
of Trade they may not be. I, sometime ago,
during the Korean war, I told a British friend
of mine that I would be perfectly willing to
accept the proscribed list of the British or-
dera-ln-coimcil of World Wars I and n if
there was any dispute as to what would help
an unfriendly country.

Now, we have to keep In mind that Commu-
nist China only has a truce in Korea. There
is not a peace treaty yet in regard to that
country. They have violated the armistice
terms in Korea; they have violated the armis-
tice terms in southeast Asia; they are still
holding American civilians in Communist
prisons in violation of their pledged word at
Geneva Just a year and a half or 2 years ago;
they are still making threats to take over
Formosa by force of arms. In these condi-
tions, to build up a potential aggressor in
that area of the world, it seems to me to be
as Imprudent as the businessmen who were
willing, for dollars, to ship scrap metal and oil
to the war lords of Japan in 1939, in 1940,
and early 1941, that came back at us, at our
battle fleet at Pearl Harbor on the morning
of December 7.

I hope those that are pursuing this course
don't flnd that the end result is the same.

Mr. CBONKrrz. According to Mr. Lawrence's
esteemed publication, in a repxirt today some
of your own constituents are urging that
course, importers and exporters in the San
Francisco area.

Senator Knowxawd. Yes; some of them
dealt in sending scrap iron and oil to the
Japanese war lords, too, but I think they
have lived to regret it and I think the coun-
try learned and lived to understand that
that was a shortsighted policy. For tempo-
rary profit, this Nation was endangered and
a potential enemy was built up so he could
make war, drive us out of most of the
Paclflc. overrun all of China and get down
and knock on the doors of Australia.

Mr. Lawxkmcx. Senator, I wonder if I could
ask you a few questions of a domestic char-
acter. You announced some time ago that
you would not be a candidate for reelection
in 1958.

Senator Knowland, Yes; that announce-
ment still stands and I have no intention
of changing it.

Mr. Lawkencx. Well, I was about to say
that some of my friends in California tell
me that your friends, quite a few of them,
are urging you to change it.

Senator Knowland. There has been some
suggestion, but I have written to them and
told them that my decision is going to re-
main what it was.

Mr. Lawkknck. Well, what will be your
future political role, if any? Do you have
any plan to run for governor?

Senator Knowlamc. I have no plans at the
present time. As I announced before, when
this session is over I Intend to return to
California, to get over the State from the
Oregon line to the Mexican border, a dis-
tance of about 1,000 miles to consult with
the people of California and following that,
I will make a decision.

Mr. Lawskncx. But you would be— ■what
Is the purpose of this survey trip? Get re-
acquainted with your State?

Senator Knowland. No, I generally get
out there after every sesssion to acquaint
them with some of the problems here in
Washington. It wiU be partiallly that and
partially to have a chance to talk with the
people of California regarding 1958.

Mr. Lawkemcz. You are aware, of course,
that a great many people are talking about
you running for governor?

Senator Knowland. I am aware that Cali-
fornia will elect a governor and a United
States Senator in 1958, and I think they
will elect a Republican governor and a Re-
publican Senator.

Mr. Shkplzt. Senator, may I pursue that
question Just a little bit? People also say
that the reason you are interested in the
governorship Is because it would considera-
bly enhance your chances for the Republi-
can nomination for the Presidency. Can
you tell us now whether you are interested
in the Republican nomination for the Pres-
idency?

Senator Knowland. 1960 is a long way*
off and the bridge of 1958 in any event
would have to be crossed first. I believe the
record of this administration is such that
the American people will elect a Republi-
can administration in 1960.

Mr. Sheplxt. You are not saying that
you are not a candidate for the Presidency?
Senator Knowland. No, I am not at this
point making any statement in regard to
1960. I have no crystal ball that looks that
far in advance.

Mr. Ceonhtte. Senator, I don't think you
need a crystal ball for this one. In March
1956, you said — that was, of course, during
the primary periods before the last elec-
tion— you said that the party must be uni-
fied and greater representation must be
given in the campaign, if poesible, and
afterward certainly, to the Taft wing of the
Republican Party. You feel that those oon-
ditlons have been met?

Senator Knowland. Well, I had reference
particularly to the campaign of 1956 at the
time. I think that throughout the country,
members of all groups in the Republican
Party were taken into the campaign organ-
ization. I think in the various State or-
ganizations they did not discriminate be-
tween one Republican and another. Per-
sonally, I don't beUeve In hyphenated
Republicanism. I have said before I am a
RepubUcan — period. I think the label "Re-
publican" is sufficiently broad that men
may have honest differences of opinion and
still consider themselves as Republicans
without having to hyphenate the term.

Mr. Croniute. You mean modem Repul>«
licanism?

Senator Knowland. Well, any kind of pre-
fix to a Republican, I don't think is neces-
sary. I think in and of itself it tends to be
divisive and anything which divides our
party I think is a mistake.

Mr. CsoNKiTZ. You think that the present
leadership of the party, under Chairman
Meade Alcom, is giving adequate representa-
tion to the so-called Taft wing of the party?
Senator Knowland. I beUeve so. I have
great confidence in Mr. Alcorn. I think he
did an outstanding Job as chairman of the
arrangements committee. Having served on
the national committee and on the arrange-
ments conunlttee when I was on the na-
tional committee, I think I know something
about the problems. His going out to the
grassroots has been highly helpful. It haa
given people a chance to express themselves.

*J:'"if^

■;■':

I. K mi

';■*

U'

iiil.

'.

i

i

! -

li

li 4

88S6

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June IS

•ad I think Ur. Aleom Is to be eominended
In the Job be la trjing to do.

Mr. Lawvzmcx. Senator, leCi go beck li we
may to tbla buslneee at differences of opinion
which you mentioned Jtut e moment ego.
Mow the President made a speech on Friday,
thla National Bepubllcan Conference, In
which he said, among other things, that It
was the duty of Republican leaders In the
Congress and In the party to see to It that
the platform pledges of 1950 were enacted
Into taw and that men should not let pref-
erence for detail or differences about detail
between them and the administration keep
them from carrying out these platform
pledges. Now you have often disa^^eed with
the President on vital and Important matters.

Senator Knowi.ano. I know of no basic
platform pledges upon which I differ mate-
rially from the President. As a matter of
fact, according to Congressional Quarterly,
I stand among the six highest RepubllcanR.
percentagewise. In support of the President's
program, both domestic and foreign, with
the percentage. I think, of 89 percent. There
are three others who have that percentage.
There are 2 that have 100 percent. But out
of that e. we are the top 6 out of 47. I
think that is a pretty good batting average.

Mr. Lawvxnck. Well, I did not really mean
to put that Into the personal sense of a quar-
rel between you and the President, but I
was getting at this business of getting the
platform enacted Into law. and the duty of
the leadership to see that It Is done. What
are the chances of the school-aid program
going through this session, the way the
President wants It?

Senator Knowlanb. There are lots of
problems connected with the school-aid
legislation. In the first place, Democratic
leadership has Indicated that that will not
be taken up until after the clvlI-rlghts leg-
islation Is disposed of; depending on what
happens on the clvU-rlghts legislation, may
depend on whether the so-called Powell
amendment Is offered to the aid-to-educa-
tion bill. Some people believe that if that
was added In the House or In the Senate,
that might klU the legislation. There are
various alternatives that have been sug-
(ested. Some favor, as you know, grants
JvMt to the needy States; some want to ex-
pand It to grants to States whether they
are needy or not. which Is far beyond the
purview of the President's original recom-
mendation; some believe that the needy
States could be amply taken care of with-
out grants, but with a kind of educational
RFC funds where needy school districts
had difficulty In noating their bonds or
floating them at a reasonable interest rate
might borrow from the Federal Government
to repay the entire amount and have no
obligations otherwise to them, at the same

Interest rote that ttie Pe<leraJ 0<yv«rBm«nt
Is able to borrow funds, and this wouid not
get Into the dlfScultlee that might follow
granta-ln-akl where the Federal Oovemment
ultimately woukl want controls.

Mr. CBomuTx. Senator, getting back to
more specific political-type questions, if we
may. How widespread do you believe the
disenchantment Is among the conservative
Republicans over the Klsenhower budget?

Senator Kmowland. I think there has been
concern throughout the country. I think
the grassroots conferences to which we re-
ferred that Mr, Alcorn has had. has Indi-
cated that there Is a feeling that every
effort should be made by the Congress with-
out hurt to our national defense, to reduce
the t71.8 billion budget, and personally.
I believe the budget should be reduced.
I believe the Congress will reduce It by at
least $3 billion. I favor them doing that
and I think that will be done at this ses-
sion of Congress, and can be done without
harm to our national defense.

Mr Banckoft Senator Knowlawd. on that
13 billion, do you count in that, then 12'^
billion out of defen.se?

Senator Knowi.and No; I don't believe the
ultimate defense budtret will have as deep a
cut as the House proposed.

Mr Bavchoft But you are now supporting
virtually all of the foreign aid program, are
ycu not?

Sei\ator Knowland Yes; I voted to report
the fore'-xn aid authorization bill from the
Foreign Relations Committee on Friday, and
I believe that the bill that has come out has
been substantially a Rood bill. It did cut
about $225 million off the orttjinal request
which I think Is modest and I think is sup-
portable The matter, of course, still gres
to the House and then to conference and then
the approprlatl"n bills will have to follow,

Mr Shepltt Senator KNOWT.^ND, before we
finish I Wfuld like to return to some of the
questions raised by Communist buss Khru-
shchev last week. One of his major points
was that the Soviet Union, the first Com-
munist experiment on the earth. In the pe-
riod of some 40 years, has been catching up
with the world's greatest productive nation,
the Unlt-d States. He made the point that
thfy have been catching up In production of
milk and bntter which he said they would
reach our level, per capita, next year; meat
In 1960 Soviet statistics are dubious at
b?st, but we do know that they have created
atomic weapons and hydrogen weapons and
that they have Jet airplanes that can fly
across the ocean and reach our own coun-
try I would like to know whether you have
given aiiy thought to the general proposition
of how we staaa in tae competition with the
8<jviet Uni' n and whether we are doing
enough to keep our own country ahead of
them In the Important regards.

SENATE

WeDNESD.W, JlNE 12, li)")?

The Senate met at 9:30 o'clock a. m.

The Chaplain. Rev. Predcricic Brown
Harris. D. D.. offered the following
prayer:

Our Father, God. In whose eternal
peace our fretful, restless spirits are
quieted — the fierce tempests sweepin;j
acroas our divided world have left us
weary with watching and guarding the
ramparts of freedom. These testing
times have found out our every weakness.
In the midst of bewilderment and per-
plexity we turn to the infinite calm of

Thy changeless love that we may find
Inner sustenance, wells of living water to
restore our souls, courage in battling for
the truth, and serenity under strain.
Steel our hearts for the austere dis-
ciplines of self-control, and grant us the
power and the purpose to match great
needs with great deeds.

We ask it in the Redeemer's name.
Amen.

SsnAtor Kieowuun, I think wc are ahead
of them. I think the free enterprise system
and free governments will keep ahcMl of
them and that is one reason why I have op-
posed giving American financial aid to the
nations behind the Iron Curtain. Khru-
sbcbST says we are in a great struggle be-
tween Marxian socialism and the free world.
Now I think we can win that struggle, but I
don't think we can win it if we Ux the Amer-
k;an people to support Communist economic
and political systems and that Is why I am
opposed to taking the taxpayers' money to
bolster up Communist systems In nations
which are allied under the Warsaw pact
where they are under occupation of Soviet
forces. We know under the Marshall plan
and under the subsequent mutual aid. why
have we put these funds in? In our mutual
Interest. It has been to strengthen the eco-
nomic systems of free nations of the world.
Why? Because that strengthens their polit-
ical systems. That strengthens their defen-
sive capabilities and I have been for it.

Now. if you take the opposite side of that
cola. If we make the people living under
communism happy, If we make communism
a success, we In turn, strengthen the war-
making poter.tlal of Communist nations and
I am opposed to doing ihat with the funds
of the American people.

Mr, SHKF1.CT. Are you satisfied that we are
doing enough on our own in the way of edu-
cating scientists and in the way of pro-
ducing for the common enjoyment of our
own people, and for the rest of the Free
World?

Senator Knowland I think we are doing a
great deal. I thing we can do more because
I never want to see us get Into a secondary
position vts-a-vts the Soviet Union or any of
the Communist states.

Mr. Lawhtncz. Senator, one quick ques-
tion. As a Member of Congress, will you try
to do anything to stop this loan to Poland
which the administration is now negotiat-
ing?

Senator Kmowland We cant stop the one
that has already been given, but on the Ap-
propriatloris Committee I think a limlUtloa
to the appropriation bill would be effective,
and I dont believe as long as they are under
Soviet occupaUon, that American taxpayers
should be asked to support Conununlst po-
litical and economic systems.

Mr BANcaorr I am afraid that la all the
time we have, and Senator Knowlawd. many
thanks for coming here today to Face the
Ration, and our thanks also to today's panel
of newsmen William H Lawrence of the New
York Times. Walter Cronkite of CBS News,
ani James Shepley of Time and Life This
In Orlfflng Bancroft substituting for Stuart
Novin.-! We Invite you to Join us again next
week for another edition of Fare the Na-
tion Our program today originated in
Washington

TlfE JOURNAL

On request of Mr, Johnson of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the Journal
of the prooeedimrs of Tuesday, June 11,
1957, was approved, and Its reading was
dispensed with.

COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING
SENATE SESSION

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the Commit-
tee on Rules and Administration and
the Subcommittee on Government Con-
tracts of the Committee on Government
Operations were authorized to meet dur-
ixig the session of the Senate today.

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the Subcom-
mittee on Public Lands of the Commit-
tee on Interior and Insular Affairs and
the Subcommittee on Antitrust and
Monopoly of the Committee on the Judi-
ciary were authorized to hold a joint
meeting during the session of the Senate
today.

1057

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8887

iii^

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
and by imanlmous consent, the follow-
ing committee and subcommittees were
authorized to meet today during the ses-
sion of the Senate:

The Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce.

The Public Lands Subcommittee of the
Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs, on the Everglades National Park
and on S. 77 — C. L O. Canal.

The Subcommittee on Fiscal Affairs of
the Committee on the District of Co-
lumbia.

The Internal Security Subcommittee
to sit in New York, N. Y.

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
Riid by unanimous consent, the Commit-
tee on Foreign Relations was authorized
to meet during the session of the Senate
today.

LmiTATION OP DEBATE DURING
MORNING HOUR

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, under the rule there will be the
usual morning hour. I ask unanimous
consent that statements made Id connec-
tion with the business of the morning
hour be limited to 3 minutes.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob-
jection, it is so ordered.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS. ETC.

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the
Senate the following letters, which were
referred as indicated :

AMENDXtNT OF TiTLI 10. VhTTTD STATBS CODB.

RnjiTitta TO Length or Sksvicx of Cestain

GSADOATXS

A letter from the Secretary of the Navy,
transmitting a draft of proposed legislation
to amend title 10. United States Code, with
respect to agreements for length of service
of graduates of the United SUtes MlUUry.
Naval, and Air Force Academies, and for
other purposes (with an accompanying
paper) ; to the Committee on Armed Services.

Establishment of Office of Difutt Judci
Advocate Oenekal of the Navt

A letter from the Chief of Legislative
Liaison. Department of the Navy. Washing-
ton, D. C. transmitting a draft of proposed
legislation to establish the Office of the
Deputy Judge Advocate General of the Navy.
and for other purposes (with an accompany-
ing paper); to the Committee on Armed
Services.

RESOLUTION OF CITY COUNCIL OF
CITY OF TWO HARBORS. MINN.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President. I present.
for appropriate reference, a resolution
adopted by the City CouncU of the City
of Two Harbors. Minn., protesting
against any Increase in the diversion of
water from the Great Lakes at the city
of Chicago. I ask unanimous consent
that the resolution be printed In the
Record.

There being no objection, the resolu-
tion was referred to the Committee on
Public Works, and ordered to be printed
in the Ricord, as follows:

Whereas the city of Chicago is "stealing"
water from the Great Lakes In dangerous
quantiues; and

Whereas officials of State and local govern-
ments, port authorities and shipping com-
panies have protested the diversion from
Lake Michigan of water to be used to flush
Chicago's sewage down the Mississippi
River; and

Whereas the Lake Superior level has
dropped considerably the past years which
has been very noticeable at our municipal
water and light plant : Therefore be It

Resolved. That the City Council of the City
of Two Harbors, Minn., go on record op-
posing an Increase In diversion of waters and
that copies of this resolution be sent to
United States Senators Eowasd Thtk and
HtTBzcT HVMPHRET and Congressman John
Blatnik.

Adopted this 3d day of June 1S67.

FtLAKK Knw, President, City Council.

Attest:

Ratmond W. GusTAFSoir, City Clerk.

Approved by the mayor of the city of Two
Harbors this 4th day of June 1957.

David Battaclia, JTayor!

RESOLUTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA
CHAPTER, INTERNATIONAL ASSO-
CIATION OF PERSONNEL IN EM-
PLOYMENT SECURITY

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I
present, for appropriate reference, a
resolution from the South Carolina
Chapter of the International Associa-
tion of Personnel In Employment Se-
curity. I ask unanimous consent that
the resolution be printed in the Rkcord.

There being no objection, the resolu-
tion was referred to the Committee on
Post Office and Civil Service, and or-
dered to be printed in the Record, as
follows:

Whereas the South Carolina Chapter ot the
International Association of Personnel In
Employment Security Is a professional organ-
ization of 383 employees of the South Caro-
lina Employment Security Commission, sala-
ries for which agency are wholly paid from
Federal funds through the Bureau of Em-
ployment Security of the United States De-
partment of Labor; and

Whereas it has come to our attention that
the National Congress has or will have under
Its consideration House Resolution 4959 and
Senate bill 1693, which are designed to extend
the privileges of the Federal Employees'
Group Life Insurance Act of 1954 to State
employees wholly paid from Federal funds;
and

Whereas we are Informed that the provi-
sions of these resolutions allow an employee
to obtain group life and accidental death
and dismemberment Insurance In multiples
of $1,000 equal to the next highest $1,000
above his annual compensation at a rate not
to exceed 35 cents biweekly or $6.60 per an-
num for each $1,000 of his group Insurance,
we feel that this Insurance would be of great
benefit to the some 540 employees of the
South Carolina Employment Security Com-
mission: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That this South Carolina Chap-
ter of the International Association of Per-
sonnel in Employment Security, In annual
convention assembled at Myrtle Beach,
S. C, on this 18th day of May 1957 does
hereby petition the South Carolina Congres-
sional delegation to exert every effort to
effect passage of House Resolution 4959
and/or Senate bill 1693: and be It further

Jlesolved, That a copy of this resolution be
sent to each United States Senator and
Member of Congress from the State of South
Carolina, and that a copy of this resolution
also be Incorporated in the minutes of the
1957 annual convention of this SoutH Caro-

lina Chapter of the Intorxational Association
of Personnel in En^iloyment Security.

Members of executive committee: Clara
Bell K. Shands, president; Ralph C.
Morgan, vice president; D. Colie Craft,
treasurer; Louise W. Hays, secretary:
Kathryn E. Lewis; Charles P. Scovllle;
Richard I. Lane; Esther R. Boswell;
B. Frank Godfrey; Addison Boetaln;
John M. Jeter; Thelma Evans, mem-
bers.

BILLS INTRODUCED

Bills were Introduced, read the first
time, and, by unanimous consent, the
second time, and referred as follows:

By Mr. MANSFIELD (for himself and
Mr. MnaxAT) :
8.2271. A bill relating to the lmx)osition
of a tax on the importation of zinc and lead;
to the Committee on Finance.

(See the remarks of Mr. Mansftzlo when
he Introduced the above bill, which appear
under a separate heading.)
By Mr. BENNETT:
S. 2272. A bill to provide for tax adjust-
ment based on Increase or decretue In Fed-
eral project authorizations; to the Commit-
tee on Finance.

(See the remarks of Mr. BnorrrT when he
introduced the above bill, which appear un-
der a separate heading.)

By Mr. EASTLAND (for hlmaelT, Mr.
Holland, and Mr. Aiken) :
8.2273. A bin to provide an alternative
acreage-adjustment and price-support pro-
gram for the 1958 crop of cotton, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Agri-
culture and Forestry.

(See the remarks of Mr. Eastland when he
introduced the above bill, which appear un-
der a separate heading.)

By Mr. 8MATHERS:
S. 2274. A blU for the relief of Mario Laz-
zarotto; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. BEALL:
S. 2275. A bill to amend section 15 of the
District of Coliunbla Alcoholic Beverage Con-
trol Act; and

8.2276. A bill to amend the District of
Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Act;
to the Committee on the District of Colum-
bia.

By Mr. O'MAHONKr:

8.2277. A biU to amend title 35. United
States Code, to permit the publication of
patent applications, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on the Judiciary.

AMENDMENT OP INTERNAL REVE-
NUE CODE RELATING TO TAX ON
IMPORTATION OF ZINC AND LEAD

Mr. MANSFIELD, Mr. President, ear-
lier this month the administration pre-
sented to Congress, after 2 years In the
making, what It considers to be Its long-
range minerals program to give some
new life to many segments of our do-
mestic mining Industry. As we all know,
the domestic mining industry of this
Nation Is faced with many economic
problems. The continued deterioration
of the stability of one of our basic In-
dustries will ultimately weaken this
country's defense effort.

I was extremely disappointed with the
program presented. There was nothing
new. and in the instance of the lead find
zinc mining, the program presented
would mean a slow death to these min-
ers and the communities which serve
them.

The lead and zinc miners are in need
of belp. llierefore, on behalf of my

h

i mm

Xii

M',!!

. r

•'i

ii

It •

"I

J

8888

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June IS

eoUffligue, th« distlBguish«d senior Sen-
ator from Montana [Mr. MttkratI and
myself, I Introduce, for appropriate ref-
erence, a bill, which, if enacted, would
impose a tax on the importation of zinc
and lead.

The administration suggested a com-
plicated combination of higher tariffs
and excise taxes on imports, putting a
floor of 17 cents a pound under lead,
and one of 14 'i cents under zinc. This
would not help our lead and zinc min-
ers. In the instance of lead mining, the
average production cost in this country
is near 17 cents; and it is just under 15
cents for zinc

On May 29. the very able Represent-
ative from Montana's western district.
T»« MXTCALT, introduced in the House
proposed legislation which would pro-
vide the necessary relief for this seg-
ment of our mining industry. The bill

1 am introducing today is a companion
to that bill.

In brief, the bill I have Introduced
provides that whenever the domestic
price, averaged over 1 calendar month,
fell below 18 cents for lead and 15 cents
for zinc, an import tax of 6 cents a pound
would automatically replace the exist-
ing tariff upon imported lead and zinc.
The President would suspend the spe-
cial tax after the domestic market price
averaged at least the minimum price for

2 consecutive months.

Enactment of this bill will set a price
at which domestic miners can produce
and sell in this country.

During times of emergency everyone
ia concerned about the welfare of our
domestic mining industry; but as soon
as foreign markets are secure, our do-
mestic industry is forgotten. It is about
time this Industry got some recogni-
tion in time of peace.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
cent that the bill be printed in the Rec-
ord at the conclusion of my remarks.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill will
be received and appropriately referred;
and. without objection, the bill will be
printed in the Record.

The bill (S. 2271) relating to the im-
position of a tax on the importation of
zinc and lead, introduced by Mr. Mans-
rau) (for himself and Mr. Murray > . was
received, read twice by its title, referred
to the Committee on Penance, and or-
dered to be printed in the Record, as
follows :

Be it enacted, etc.. That (a) chapter 38 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating
to Import taxes) Is amended by adding at
the end thereof a new subchapter as follows:

"STTBCHAPnS H — ZINC AND LEAD

"Part I. Zinc.
"Part n. Lead.

"Part I— zinc
"Sec. 4611. Imposition of tax.
"Sec. 4612. Periods of appUcatlon.
"Sec. 4613. Miscellaneous provisions.
"Sec. 4611. Imposition of tax.

"In lieu of any other tax or duty imposed
by law. there U hereby Imposed on articles
Imported Into the United States which are
dutiable under paragraph 77. 393, or 394 of
the Tariff Act of 1930, a tax of 6 cento per
pound on the zinc contained therein, to b©
paid by the Importer. All taxes and duties
Imposed under such paragraphs ars hureby
suspended. For purposes of the tax Imposed.

by this section, tbe term United Statas' m-

elwtos Puerto Rloo.

**8bc. 4«12. Periods of application.

"(a) In general: The tax Imposed by sec-
tion 4811 shall be applied or suspended suc-
cessively from time to time under the follow-
ing speclflc circumstances and conditions:

" ( 1 ) Such tax shiLll apply only to articles
imported after the oonclualon of a calendar
month in which the average domestic market
price of slab zinc (prime Western, free on
board. East St. Louis. 111.) for such month is
t>elow IS cents per pound.

"(2> When for any two consecutive cal-
endar months the average domestic market
price of slab zinc i prime Western, free on
board. East St. Louis. 111.) for each of such
raonths has been 15 cents per pound or more,
and at the e.id of such 2-mont.h period Is
15 cenu per px>und or raon, the Tariff Com-
mission 10 days after the conclusion of such
period, shall so advise the President, and
the President shall, by proclamation, not
later than 15 davs after he has been so ad-
vised by the Tariff Comjnlsslon. suspend
such tax only until the domestic market
price of slab zmc averages below 15 cents per
pound for 1 calendar month, whereupon
such tax shall be automatically reimpoeed.
subject to suspension and rclmposltlon suc-
cessively under the provisions of this section.

'■(b) Definitions:

"il) Average domestic market price: For
purposes of subsectlou (a), the average do-
mestic market price of slab zinc for any
calendar month shall be the average market
price per pound for such slab zinc (prime
Western, free on board. East St. Louis, HI.),
and In determining such average market
price of slab zinc for any calendar month,
the Secretary or his delegate sh.'Ul be re-
quired to ba£e his flndmgs upon the average
price of slab zinc (prime Western, free on
board, East St Louis. HI ) for such calendar
month, reported by the Engineering and
Mining Journal's 'Metal and Mineral Mar-
kets'.

"(2» Month- ^)T purposes of this part, the
term month" means a calendar month.

"(c) I>termlnatlons final: Determinations
by the Secretary or liis delegate under this
section shall, for purposes of this part, be
final and conclusive.

"Skc. 4613. Miscellaneous provisions.

"(a) Entry under bond: All articles de-
scribed la paragraph 77. 393. or 394 of the
Tariff Act of 1930. Imported after the effective
date of this act. shall be duly entered by the
importer by payment of the tax Imposed
hereunder. If applicable, or under bond In
double the amount of the estimated tax, ex-
cept that if such tax Is not appUcable. such
Articles must be entered under bond in such
amount.

"(b) Articles withdrawn from warehouse:
Articles withdrawn from bond regardless of
when Imported shall be subject lo the tax
imposed by section 4611, unless such articles
are withdrawn from bond for export or to be
sold for consumption during a calendar
month In which such tax Is suspended under
the provisions of section 4012.

"Part II— Lead
"Sec. 4621. Imposition of tax.
"Sec. 4622. Periods of application.
"Sec. 4623. Miscellaneous provisions.
"SBC.46ai. Imposition of tax.

"In lieu of any other tax or duty imposed
by law, there Is hereby imposed on article*
imported Into the United States which are
dutiable under paragraphs 72. 391, or 392 of
the Tariff Act of 1930. a tax of 8 cents per
pound on the lead contained therein, to b*
paid by the Importer. All taxes and duties
imposed under such paragraphs are hereby
suspended. For purposes of the tax Im-
posed by this section, the term 'United States'
includes Puerto Rico.

"SK.Maft. Parlods of applkatioa.

"(a) The tax imposed by sscUon 4891 shall
bs applied or suspended successively from
tune to time under the following spectflo
circumstances and conditions:

" 1 1 ) Such tax shall apply only to articles
Imported after the conclusion of a calendar
month In which the average domestic mar-
ket price of common lead ( In standard shapes
and sixes delivered at New York. N. Y.). for
such month Is below 18 cenu per pound.

"(2) When for any 2 consecutive calendar
■oonths the average domestic market price
of common lead (in standard sliapes and
sires delivered at New York, N Y.) , for each
of such months has been 18 cents per pound
or more, and at the end of such a-month
period Is 18 cents per pound or more, the
Tariff Commission. 10 days after the con-
clusion of such period, shall so advlre the
President, and the President shall, by
proclamation, not later than 15 days after
he has been so advised by the Tariff Com-
mission, suspend such tax only until the
domestic market price of common lead aver-
ages below 18 cents per pound for 1 calendar
month, whereupon such tax shall be auto-
matically relmposed. subject to si spenslon
and reinipositlon successively under the pro-
visions of this section.

"(b) DeflniUon:

"(l) Average domestic market p-lce: W>r
purpoees of subsection (a), the average do-
mestic market price of common lead for any
calendar month shall be the average market
price per pound for such common lead Jin
standard shapes and sizes dellvere<l at New
York. NY), and in determlnlnj? suci average
market price of common lead lor any calen-
dar month, the Secretary or his delegate
shaU be required to base bis flndi:igs upon
the average price of common lead ( .n stand-
ard shapes and sizes delivered at New York,
N. Y ) . for such calendar month, reported
by the Engineering and Mining Journal's
Metal and Mineral Markets.

"(2) Month: For purposes of this part,
the term 'month' means a calendar month.

"(c) Deter nUnations Anal: Deterxalnationa
by the Secretary or his delegate under this
aecUon shall, for purpoees of this part, be
final and conclusive.

''Sbc.4823. Miscellaneous provisions.

"(a) Entry under bond: AH articles de-
scribed In paragraph 72, 391. or 393 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, Imported after the aCTecUve
date of this act. shall be duly entered by
the Importer by payment of the tax Imposed
hereunder. If applicable, or under bond In
double the amount of the estimated tax. ex-
cept that If such tax Is not applicable, such
articles must be entered under bond In such
amount.

"(b) Articles withdrawn from vnrehouse:
Articles withdrawn from bond regiudless of
when Imported shall be subject V) the tax
Imposed by section 4621. unless such articles
are withdrawn from bond for export or to be
sold for consumption during a calendar
month In which such tax is suspended under
the provisions of section 4822."

(b) The table of subchapters for such
chapter is amended by adding at the end
thereof.

-Subchapter H— Zinc and lead."

(c) This act shall apply only with respect
to articles entered or withdrawn from bond
after the effective date of thU act. The Sec-
retary of the Treasury Is authorlxsd to maks
all necessary regulations to enforce the pro-
visions of this act.

TAX ADJUSTMENT BASED ON
FEDERAL PROJECT AUTHORIZA-
TIONS

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President. I In-
troduce, for appropriate reference, a bill
to provide for tax adjustment based on

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8889

increase or decrease In Federal project
authorizatior^. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the bill be printed in the Rec-
ord, and lie on the desk for 1 week, so
that any Senators who wish to do so
may join me in cosponsoring It. I will
welcome any helpful comments.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill will
be received and appropriately referred;
and. without objection, the bill will be
printed in the Rkooid, and lie on the
dr.sk. as requested by the Senator from
Utah.

The bill (S. 2272) to provide for tax
adjustment based on Increase or decrease
in Federal project authorizations. Intro-
duced by Mr. Bewnitt, was received, read
twice by its title, referred to the Com-
mittee on Finance, and ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc.. That this act may be
died as the "Tax Adjustment Act of 1957."

trnx 1-

rAx ASJiTSTiCEirr oboess

Src. 101. (a) Whenever any committee of
the Congress (other than the Appropriations
C^mmltteee) requests a report from a Gov-
ernment agency on a bill or Joint resolution
propos'.rg leglsl.itlon which. If enacted, or
a treaty which. If ratified, will authorize or
require the expenditure of Federal funds,
the Director of the Bureau of the Budget
fhaM estimate the costs of such legislation
or treaty for the fiscal year under vroy. the
ensuing fiscal year, and susbequent fiscal
ycirs, and shall transmit such estimates In
each case to the oommittee or conunlttees
concerned. In the event any committee re-
ports any such bill or joint resolution, the
Director of the Bureau of the Budget shaU
make a like estimate of the costs of such
legislation or treaty as reported, and such
estimate shall be Included In the commit-
tee report.

(b) At the conclxislon of each session ctf
the Ckingress. the Director of the Bureau of
the Budget shall make such a cost eetimats
(including necessary revision of any esti-
mates made under subsection (a)) for each
public law enacted and each treaty ratified
during such session. Ths Director shall
cumulate all such estimates and shall de-
duct from the total thereof the amount (In
annual coat) of all authorizations which
have lapsed or terminated during the cur-
rent calendar year.

Sec. 102. On the basis of the net amount
of the project cost estimates for any cal-
endar year under section 101 the Director
of the Bureau of the Budget shall prepars
a tax adjustment order so framed as to pro-
vide such Increases In Income-tax rates et-
fective over such period of time as may in
his Judgment be necessary to meet the esti-
mated Increase in project authorizations or
requirements. U the total of lapsed or ter-
minated authorizations or requirements ex-
ceeds new authorizations or requirements,
the tax adjustment order shaU provide fcr
corresponding decreases in such tax rates.
Sec. 103. A tex adjustment order shall bs
submitted to the President by the Director
of the Bureau of the Budget, for transmittal
to the Congress on or before January 10 of
the year foUowlng the year during which the
laws or treaties on which it Is based were
enacted or ratlflsd. and shall become effective
In the manner provided In section 104. All
orders shall be numbered serially without
regard to the year In which transmitted-
The delivery of any order shall be made to
both Houses of the Congress on the same
day and shall be made to each House while
it Is In session. The Director of the Bureau
of the Budget shall also submit in connec-
tion with each tax adjustment order a state-
ment setting forth his findings and con<du-
sions upon which such order Is based.

Bsc. 104. (a) A tax adjustment order trans-
mitted to the Congress pursuant to section
103 shall become effective at 12:01 o'clock
antemeridian, eastern standard time, on the
expiration of the first period of 80 calendar
days of continuous session of the Congress
following the date on which the order Is
transmitted to the Congress; but only IX,
between the date of transmittal and the ex-
piration of such 60-day period there has not
been passed by either of the two Houses a
resolution stating In substance that the'
House does not favor the order.

(b) For the purposes of subsection (a) —

(1) the continuity of session of the Con-
gress shell be considered as broken only by
an adjournment of the Congress sine die;
but

(2) In the computation of the 60-day
pfrlcd there shall be excluded the days on
which either House Is not In session because
of an adjournment of more than 3 days to
a day certain.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of
subsection (a), a tax adjustment order may
taXe effect at a later date than the date on
which It would otherwise take effect under
the provisions of subsection (a) , If such later
date Is specified in the order.

Sxc. 105. The Director of the Bureau of the
Budget la authorized to employ such per-
sonnel as he determines necessary to assist
In carrying out the duties and ftmctlons
Imposed upon him by this act.

Sec. 108. The Director of the Bureau of the
Budget is authorized to prescribe such rules
and regulations as he determines necessary
to carry out the provisions of this act and
to perform the duties and f imctlons Imposed
up>on him by this act.

Sxc. 107. The Secretary of the Treasury
shall, at the request of the Director of the
Btireau of the Budget, furnish to the Director
such information as the Director determines
necessary to enable him to perform his duties
and functions under this act. The Director
zaay. £rom time to time, request from any
other department or agency in the executive
branch of the Government any infonnatlon
which such department or agency may have
in its possession, or which Is available to it,
and which the Director determines neces-
sary to enable him to perform his duties
and functions under this act.

TRLS n — irmrrsr oh oonokxssional amx-

MAKUfO FOWXB

8sc. aoi. The following sections of this
title are enacted by the Congress:

(a) As an exercise of the rulemaking pow-
er of the Senate and the House of Repre-
sentatives, respectively, and as such tbey
shall be considered as part of the rules of
each House, respectively, but applicable only
with respect to ths proosdiu'e to be followed
in stich House In the case of resolutions (as
defined in section 303) ; and such rules shall
supersede other rules only to the extent
that they are Inconsistent therewith; and

(b) With full recognition of the constitu-
tional right oi either House to change such
rules (so far as relating to the procedure tn
such Houss) at any time, In the same manner
and to the same extent as In the case of any
other rule of such House.

Sxc. 303. As used In this title, the term
"resolution" means only a resolution of
either of the two Houses of Congress, the
matter after the resol'vlng clause of which Is
as follows: "That the does not favor

Tax Adjustment Order No. , trans-

mitted to the Congress by the President
on , 18 .", the first blank space there-

in being filled with the name of the resolving
Bouse and the other blank spaces therein
being appropriately filled.

Sac. 303. All resolutions with respect to a
tax adjustment order Intrtxluoed In the Sen-
ate shall be referred by the President of the
Senate to the Committee on Finance, and aU
resolutions with respect to a tax-adjustment
order introduced In the House at Bepresent-

atives shall be referred by the Speaker at tha
House to the Committee on Ways and Means.

Sac. 204. (a) If the committee to whicb
has been referred a resolution with respect
to a tax-adjustment order has not reported
It before the expiration of 10 calendar days
after its introduction. It shall then (but not
b^ore) be in order to move either to dis-
charge the committee from further consid-
eration of such resolution, or to discharge
the committee from further consideration of
any other resolution with respect to such tax-
adjustment order which has been referred
to the committee.

(b) Such motion may be made only by a
perscm favoring the resolution, shall be high-
ly privileged (except that it may not be mads
after the committee has reported a resolu-
tion with respect to the same tax-adjustment
order), and debate thereon shall be limited
to not to exceed 1 hour, to be equally divid-
ed between those favoring and those oppos-
ing the resolution. No amendment to such
motion shall be In order, and It shall not be
In order to move to reconsider the vote by
which such motion is agreed to cm: disagreed
to.

(e) If the motion to discharge is agreed to
or disagreed to, such motion may not be re-
newed, nor may another motion to discharge
the committee be made with respect to any
other resolution with respect to the same
tax-adjustment order.

Sac. 205. (a) When the committee has re-
ported, or has been discharged from further
consideration of, a resolution vrlth respect to
a tax-adjustment order. It shall at any time
thereafter be in order (even though a previ-
ous motion to the same effect has been dis-
agreed to) to move to proceed to the consid-
eration of such resolution. Such motion
ShaU be highly privUeged and shaU not be
debatable. No amendment to such motion
shall be In order, and It shall not be In order
to move to reconsider the vote by which sucii
motion Is agreed to or dissgreed to.

(b) Debate on the resolution shall be
limited to not to exceed 10 hours, which
shall be equally divided between thoee fa-
voring and those opposing the resolution.
A motion further to limit debate shall not be
debatable. No aoMndment to, or motion to
recommit, the resolution shall be in order,
and It shall not be in order to move to re-
consider the vote by which the resolution
is agreed to or disagreed to.

Sac. a06. (a) All rootions to postpone,
made with rei^teet to the discharge from
committee or the consideration of a reeolu-
tlon with respect to a tax adjtistment order,
and all motions to proceed to the considera-
tion of other business, shall be decided
without debate.

(b) All appeals from the decisions of the
Chair relating to the application of the rules
of the Senate or the House of Representa-
tives, as the case may be, to the procedure
relating to a resolution with respect to a tax
adjustment order shall be decided without
debate.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President. I ask
unanimous consent to have printed ta
the Rkcord a statement, prepared by me,
relating to the bilL

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed In the
RxcoRO, as follows:

STATXaCDrT BT Sbtatob BDTNsrr

This year we have been working on our
annual appropriation task in a new and
different atmosphere. Then is unmistak-
able evidence that the oonttniMlly rising cost
of Government has aroused the American
people, and we are reqxmdlng to their de-
mands by our attempts to rednoe appropria-
tions.

Because the President is required to stfb-
mit to us. in his »""«*»' budget message, an
•stlmata of the funds needed to operate tbm

-i

m

n

!"*;■■

Mi

I

s

I! '

-

hi

S890

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

Oovenxment for the next flwal year — he haa
borne the brunt of public criticism for the
atae of hla propoaal. But In the last annlyals.
It ia we, the Ck>ngre8a, rather than the Presi-
dent whose actions are \inder fire. At least,
we must share the responsibility. This la
true becaiise we, In the exercise of our con-
stitutional power, passed the laws which cre-
sted the programs and projects whose cost
makes up au Important part of the high
budget.

Because we feel secure in the power of the
QoTemment to raise funds, through taxes or
by borrowing, we tend to separate the con-
sideration of the benefits of a program from
a resolute measuring of Its cost. The first
phase, the authorization, is the pleasant one.
Here we are glTlng people what they want.
Here we are carrying out party platform
pledges, or our own campaign promises.
Often such programs carry very low costs to
start with, but these have a tendency to
Increase when they become firmly fixed in
the pattern of Federal services. If they serve
all the people, their costs will reflect the In-
crease in the general population. If they
serve our senior citizens, their costs will In-
crease as the life span lengthens. If they
require the long-time Investment of funds,
their original estimates tend to expand In
the presence of annual civilian wage in-
creases and inflation. But we do not have
to think of these things when we authorize
them. At that point we may be said to be
In the happy state of the wife who has open
charge accounts all over town. She concen-
trates her thinking on what she wants to
buy — not on the day the bills come due.

But. to carry that simile a little further.
we seem to have come to the point where
the bills have piled up too high — the Ameri-
can people are objecting. So we are doing
the best we can to postpone some, to force
economies In others, but we still are not
getting at the root of our problem.

Today I am Introducing a bill, which I
offer for appropriate reference. It is In-
tended to force us to consider two phases of
this problem which we can now Ignore — and
do. usually.

The first section of the bill Is intended to
make sure that when the appropriate com-
mittees of the two Houses, and the Houses
themselves, consider and approve a bill or a
treaty, they will have before them an au-
thoritative estimate of the cost of the pro-
gram the bill or treaty would create. Then
they would be able to weigh Its benefits
against Its impact on future appropriations,
and t>e In a position to develop a more
responsible Judgment.

The machinery for this Is simple, and
basically already set up. Today nearly all
bills are submitted to the affected agencies
for comment, which agencies In turn submit
the bill and their proposed comment to the
Bureau of the Budget for review. My bill.
If enacted, would Impose on the Bureau of
the Budget, as part of Its review of the bill,
the responsibility of providing an estimate
of the costs that the bill would entail, so
that this would be available at every stage
of the legislative process.

The second objective of the bill is to make
sure that enough tax revenue will be avail-
able to meet these costs when they are com-
tiiltted. Taxes are too high now, and no
«.ne wants more than I to see their climb
halted and reversed. But there Is another
related value that I am equally anxious to
protect — a balanced budget. That balimce
haa been painfully achieved, and for the
good of the country we must not slip back
Into deficit spending in a period of high
prosperity. But under our present system,
the balance Is always uncertain, and we In
the Congress have no way of knowing In ad-
vance how any law, or laws, we pass will
affect it.

I realize that the proposal my bill con-
tains haa Uttle chance for consideratloa

•con. But I offer It in the hope that It will
serve to stimulate Interest in this problem
and its solution, both in the Congress and
In the country. If this wave of concern
over the budgetary and fiscal problems of
the Government is more than a flash in the
pan, some such program may eventually b«
adopted.

The second proposal really rests on, and
grows out of, the first. If Congress, with
its knowledge of the estimated cost of new
programs, enacts them into law, the Bureau
of the Budget would be required at the end
of every annual session of each Congress to
accumulate and compile a total of all such
new costs created by new legislation and
treaties, and translate that total into a
figure which would represent a percentage
of each Income tax rate, personal and cor-
porate.

Let us look at an example of how this
might operate. Let us assume a collection
of t40 billion produced by existing rates on
personal and corporate income. Then let
us assume that Congress were to pass new
laws creating additional costs for the next
fiscal year, of |1 billion (net after the Bu-
reau had deducted the expected savings
from any existing programs that would not
carry over). Since 1 billion is 2f^a percent
of 40 billion, this percentage of increase
would be applied to every tax rate. A 2>i
percent increase in the base rate for per-
sonal Income taxes would make the applica-
ble rate for the next year 20 5 percent. The
corporate rate of 62 percent would become
63 3 percent. Conversely if there were a
net decrease In the cost of Government op-
erations and programs, a reduction in the
tax rates would also be possible.

In order to put teeth in the program, the
bill provides that when the cost and its
effect on the rates have been calculated,
they will be reported to the President, who
will in turn transmit the flgures to the Con-
gress; and that unless either House of Con-
gress, by affirmative action within 60 days
after the receipt of the President's message,
epeclflcally rejects the tax adjustment, it
shall become immediately effective, making
the new rates apply to taxes on Income of
the year in which the new costs were com-
mitted.

This Is not a surrender of the taxing power
of Congress. It can still adjust the basic
rates when conditions warrant or require
it. But It does put new legislation directly
on a pay-as-you-go basis, and It does give
added protection to the balance of the
budget. Its chief value is that It forces
Congress and the country as a whole, to
face the cost of any propoaal when con-
sidering its benefits.

ALTERNATIVE ACREAGE ADJUST-
MENT AND PRICE SUPPORT PRO-
GRAM FOR 1958 COTTON CROP

Mr. EASTLAND. Mr. President, on
behalf of myself, the Senator from Flor-
ida [Mr. Holland), and the Senator from
Vermont [Mr. Aiken 1, I introduce, for
appropriate reference, a bill relating to
cotton.

The bill has the snpport of the Ameri-
can Farm Bureau Federation. The bill
provides that when farmers vote in the
fall on acreage allotmenta for the fol-
lowing year, they be given an option, first,
to support the present program of flexi-
ble price supports, with an acreage In
1958 of 17.800.000 acres; or, second, to
vote for price supports of 75 percent of
parity and a 20-percent increase in acre-
age, or for a national acreage allotment
of 21,100,000 acres.

The economists consider that the bill
will increase the net farm Income, and

also will not cost the Govertjnent as
much money.

As acreage has been reduced, the unit
cost of production has Increased. The
bill simply lets the farmer decide whether
he wants 75 percent of parity end a 20-
percent increase In his acreage, the acre-
age allotment to be figured for the
farmer, with each farmer takiiu: his 1957
allotment and adding 20 percent, in order
to get the allotment which would be flg-
\ired under the bill.

Farmers may choose whlcheviT system
they want: the majority vote will control.

Middling inch cotton, under tlie second
option, of 75 percent of parity, would be
roughly, according to the flgunis of the
Department of Agriculture for 1958, 32
cents a pound. Middling inch and
1 16th cotton, which is grown in the
West, the Central Belt, and the South-
east, would figure roughly 34 cents a
pound. MiddUng Inch and l/3id cotton
would figure roughly 33 V* cents a pound.

The purpose of the bill is to increase
the net income of the cotton farmer. It
has the support of the Farm Bur<?au Fed-
eration.

I hope the bill will be enacted, so the
farmers can take their choice as to
whether they desire to expand the mar-
kets and make more money, or to go on
with a gradually declining cotton allot-
ment.

If the bill Is not passed, then In 1959
the national allotment will shrink from
17,800,000 acres to 12,800,000 acr.js. The
bill will prevent a drastic further reduc-
tion in acreage. By acquiring new mar-
kets, as has been done under the cotton
export program, it will be possibl*' to have
a 20-percent expansion of acreage and to
Increase the net income of thi; cotton
grower.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill will
be received and appropriately leferred.

The bill (S. 2273) to provide an alter-
nate acreage-adjustment and price-sup-
port program for the 1958 crop of cotton,
and for other purposes, introduced by
Mr. Eastland (for himself. Mr Holland,
and Mr. Aiken i . was received, read twice
by its title, and referred to the Commit-
tee on Agricultuie and Forestry.

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT OF 1957—
AMENDMENTS

Mr. LONG submitted amendments, in-
tended to be proposed by him to the
biU (S. 2130) to amend further :he Mu-
tual Security Act of 1954, as amended,
and for other purposes, which were or-
dered to lie on the table and to be
printed.

ADDRESSES, EDITORIAI^, AR'nCLES.
ETC.. PRINTED IN THE RECORD

On request, and by unanimous consent,
addresses, editorials, articles, etc., were
ordered to be printed In the RicoRo, as
follows :

By Mr. RHVZRCOMB:
Address delivered by him before the
Southern Conference of Young Republicans
Federation, in Charleston, W. Va., on AprU
13, 1957.

By Mr. BUTLER:
Address by him delivered at rounders*
Day dinner. New York, and an article en-

8892

CONGRESSIONAL RErORD — SFIVATE

Jiinty 1 '>

1057

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8891

titled "President for a Year," written by Kyle
Smith, published in the July issue of Amer-
ican Mercury Magazine; both on the subject
^ of John Hanson, of Maryland.
By Mr. WILKY:
Statement by him and exhibits relating to
the outstanding work of the People-to-
People Foundation.

NOTICE OF HEARINGS ON SENATE
JOINT RESOLUTION 73 AND S. 1174

Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, I give
notice that on June 18, at 10 a. m., the
Committee on Foreign Relations will
hear nonadmlnlstration witnesses on
Senate Joint Resolution 73, a joint reso-
lution to increase the ceiling on the
authorized United States contribution to
the International Labor Organization.

The room where this hearing will be
held will be announced later.

On June 19, at 10 a. m., the committee
will hear executive branch witnesses on
S. 1174, a bill to increase the borrowing
authority of the St Lawrence Seaway
Development Corporation and for other
purposes. On June 20, at 10 a. m., non-
administration witnesses will be heard
on this bill. Both of the hearings on
S. 1174 will be held in room 457 of the
Senate Office Building.

THE FOREIGN RELATIONS OP THE
UNITED STATES— THE "OPEN CUR-
TAIN"

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. Secretary Dulles has staied that he
welcomes the Idea of the "open curtain"
and that It is similar to prf^xxals this
country has made in the pan

It Is fortimate that the Secretary Is In
such complete agreement. It should be
I>ossible to advance the proposal with
redoubled vigor.

It is my Intention to explore this ques-
tion with the Secretary to determine
methods by which Congress can rein-
force the hand of our negotiators. Our
representatives should hav« the united
backing of our people when they urge the
"open curtain" upon the Communist
leaders.

I afik unanimous consent to hav«
printed In the Rccoao at this point as a
part of my remarks the transcript of Mr.
Dulles' news conference on June 11.
1957.

There befaig no objection, the tran-
script was ordered to be printed In the
Rxcoao, as follows:

BxcKRAaT DcixnT Nrwi OoiraDrci or
Jtm 11. 1957
(The following Is the State Department's
release of Secretary of State John Foeter
Dulles' news conference today, which Is au-
thorised for direct quotation:)

Secretary Dulles. We are very happy to
have In our group today 11 correspondents
from Brazil to take part in and witness one
of our dlstlnctlT* American institutions— a
press conference.
Now, If you have queitiona.
Question. Mr. Secretary, Mr. Stassen came
home at the end of last week for consulta-
tions Just, I think, about 3 weeks after he
had been here, and stayed longer than we
had thought he would stay. Oould you tell
us what theee talks are about?

Answer. The problem of working out these
<lisannament proposals la a very dtfflcult,
oompUeated problem, and It baa many deli-

cate aspects In relation to our allies, many
of whom are directly or indirectly concerned
In these matters. And while in substance
the position of the United States was de-
cided upon by the President before Mr. Stas-
een went back the last time, there are prc-
cedural complications which have derelopel
In relation to NATO which made It seem de-
sirable for Governor Stassen to return and
have some further talks on that asptect of
the matter. I am seeing him this afternoon.
Question. Mr. Secretary, are the differ-
ences with our allies substantive differences,
or are they annoyed by the way that the ne-
gotiations are being conducted with the
Russians?

Answer. Well, I would not want to say cr
use the expression that they are "annoyed."
There are some very genuine problems, al-
most inescapable problems as to procedure,
as to whom you talk with first, and who
thinks his views are having the greatest
weight. That is always one of the great
problems of working out a matter of this sort.
where you have allies who are very properly
concerned. And I would say that the dtfflcul-
ties that have arisen are nothing that were
unusual, but I do think that they were of a
character which required a closer review of
our procedures in these matters, relation-
ships to NATO, and the like. "Sou stt.^UL
have complications due to the fact tl»t the
Federal Republic of Germany is not a mem-
ber of the United Nations, and that these
discussions are being carried out under the
auspices of the United Nations; yet Germany
Is very deeply Involved. The working out of
these procedures is a matter of some difficul-
ty, of some delicacy, which I think Justified
having a further talk here with Mr. Staaaen.
Question. Do these questions, Mr. Secre-
tary, center around the so-called European
Inspection sons idea? Is that what the dif-
ference Is about?

Answer. Well, you are talking now about
the substance rather than of the procedural
aspects of the matter. We do not yet know
definitely what the views of our allies are
about the so-called European Eone. At the
moment, the question Is the procedures for
dealing with that matter and getting an au-
thoritative expression of views. There have
been some discussions with NATO, and there
will be continuing discussions with NATO as
one forum through which the attitude of our
continental allies can be worked out. and
the question of the European xone is one
matter. As I say. we do not yet have any
definitive expression of vlewi frt>m our con-
tinental allies as to what they think about a
European Eone.

Question. Well, will Mr. Stassen be able to
present an American position at the table In
London to the Soviets before this matter la
settled with all our allies?

Answer. I dont think that there should
be an official presentation of a United States
position until aspects of It which relate to
oiu- allies have been clarified with them. I
think I made clear here on a number of oc-
casions that the question of whether or not.
In the first phase of the inspection and con-
trol which goes with limitation of arma-
ment, that whether in that first phase there
should be a European zone Is, In our opin-
ion, primarily a matter for the Europeans
themselves to express a view about. I think
that we would feel that It was quite possible
to get started adequately without a European
zone. The question Is whether they want to
have a European zone in the first phase or
whether they do not; and that is primarily a
matter for them. I do not think any olOelal
United States position should Include a Euro-
pean zone unless we know that the conti-
nental aUles. In particular, which would be
affected, want it in. Neither should we pre-
sent a position which excludes a European
Eone If they want a European zone to be In.
And It is the procedures for Ironing out thos*
matters which are being worked on at th*
present tlxna.

Question. Mr. Secretary, lent one of the
problems further complicating the situa-
tion what might be called an unresolved
conflict within the American administra-
tion as to how to proceed basically? I
mean by that, a body of thought within the
administration with respect to wanting to
go further with the European zone, with
respect to cessation of tests of weapons, and
that sort of thing, and another body of
thought against that sort of thing.

Answer. No. I think that the differences
within the United States administration have
been authoritatively resolved by action which
the President took.
Question. Which action Is that, sir?
Answer. The action which he took before
Governor Stassen went back the last time,
which I annotmced from the White House
following a meeting with the President.

Question. Mr. Secretary, then is it correct
from what you say that the United States
will be unable to propKBe any European zone
or any proposal affecting troops, cutting
troops, or armaments in Europe unless there
is a unanimous agreement of all the NATO
countries whose territory would be involved?
Answer. I dont know whether the word
"unable" is the correct word. Certainly we
would not be disposed to present as an
American program a program which In-
volved Continental Europe and dealt with
either Inspection there or the positioning
of forces there unless that was concmred
In by all of the countries that were involved.
Question. Mr. Secretary, to put It an-
other way around, are we going to make a
solid proposal on aerial inspection of the
Arctic?

Answer. That, of course, also Involves the
conciurence of Canada and possibly of Den-
mark in relation to Greenland, possibly of
Norway, depending on Just where the line
is drawn. But subject to the concurrence
of those countries we are prepared to make
a solid proposal covering the Arctic area.
Question. You anticipate, Mr. Secretary,
that the Canadian elections yesterday might
have some effect upon the concurrence
which you said a few weeks ago that the
Canadian Government had given?

Answer. Well, I assume that the new gov-
ernment, assuming that a new government Is
constituted, would want to take a fresh look
at the matter, yes, and that might involve
some delay.

Question. Mr. Secretary, do you share per-
sonally the view of some people In the ad-
ministration that an Arctic zone alone offers
more protection against svirprise attack to
the United States than It would to the Soviet
Union, and that part of any agreement, bal-
anced agreement, between the United States
and the U. S. S. R. would necessitate some
agreement In Europe where the Russians
presumably are most fearful of attack?

Answer. I don't know what the Soviet view
of that matter Is. I would say this: That
any inspection of any pcu-t cf the Soviet
Union offers more protection to the United
States, because we do fear and think we have
reason to fear that tinder certain circum-
stances that the Soviet Union might attack.
I dont think that the Soviet Union has any
legitimate ground to fear any attack from
anywhere in the United States or any of our
bases. If you try to evaluate these different
areas In terms of the likelihood that one or
another would attack, then I ttiink you are
using a very difficult equation. I think that
to find a substantial area where this initial
step can be taken which will test out the
procedures for aerial inspection and coordi-
nated ground inspection, that that is the
Important thing. I dont think anybody ex-
pects that we would stop with that. The im-
portant thing Is to find some place to get
started. Now. there are always going to be
some reasons, I suppose, against finding any
areas. But there seem to be more legitimate
complications with respect to a European

W-'-

•^^^

M

8892

CONGRESSIONAL RICORD — SENATE

June 12

rone, that would Involve many more coun-
tries, and might Involve such political mat-
ters as the reunification of Germany. So. it
may be felt that In the Interests of (jetting
started quickly we should explore the pos-
sibilities of an area which did not Include
Continental Europe. I have no basis to form
an opinion one way or another as to whether
the Soviet Union Is Insistent upon a Euro-
pean zone.

Question. Mr. Secretary, would you believe
these problems can be worked out and Mr.
Stassen can present a plan at the London
Conference?

Answer. Well, I cant foresee how quickly
they will act. I know that these matters are
very difficult and they involve very serious
decisions. We ourselves have taken a Rood
many months to debate the pros and cnn.'i
within our own Government. I do not think
we can fairly expect our allies to make a
decision In Just a few days merely to suit our
convenience or the convenience of the Soviet
Union.

Question. Mr Secretary, a part of the ques-
tion as to when Mr. Sta.ssen can j?o back to
London. Do I correctly gather from th;s
answer that he intends to remain in Wash-
ington until the positions of the allies are
settled?

Ans^•er. Oh. no: because the question of
his staving here Is unsettled at the present
time. I haven't seen Governor Stassen yet.
We are seeing each other at 4 o clock. He
was yesterday at his sons commencement. I
believe, and this morning I am engaged, as
you see. and we are seeing each ether this
afternoon at 4 o'clock. Until we have had a
talk then. I would not want to say. could
not say what the plans might be for his
return

Question. Will other people be In on this
conference, from defense and atomic energy
as before?

Answer. No. At this stage. It involves
m.stters of our diplomatic relations with our
allies, which does not primarily concern any
department except the Department of State
Perhaps Under Secretary Herter will be there,
but It will be a State Department conference!
Question. Mr. Secretary, l.'snt It completely
likely that Mr. Stas.sen will present a pro-
posal which. In effect, omits the European
zone Idea until it Is decided upon by our
allies In terms of whether or not we should
even propose It?

Answer. Well, that prejudges the attitude
of our allies, and. as I say, we do not yet
have any solid Indication from our allies
as to whether they want or do not want a
European zone In the first phase, and the
conditions which they misrht want to attach
to having such a zone In the first phase.
There is this whole problem of the political
Implications of any disarmament matter and
the solution of political problems. The gen-
eral attitude of the Europeans, the conti-
nental Europeans, Is that It may be desirable
to explore at least the possibility of a polit-
ical settlement of the continental problem,
particularly the problem of German reuni-
fication, before we move in the disarmament
field In relation to an area which would In-
clude Germany. But that matter Is being
studied by them Intensively at the present
time, and I would not want by anything to
Imply either a positive or a negative response
on their part to that question.

Questi'-n. Well, that also Implies that you
expect them to act fairly qulcklv. because
Mr -

1957

just In order to make speed with the Soviet
Union.

Now I think that the Soviet Union under-
stands the situation, and that the kind of
procedures that we will work out will not
Involve any rupture In any way of the nego-
tiations or of progress. I think there will
be things that can be talked about with
the Soviet Uiuoti perhaps on an Informal
basis, which will not Involve any of these
major problems, but which will .still be mat-
ters which have to be talked about at some
stage. This problem Is Infinitely compli-
cated. It has many facets, and there are
plenty of facets about which we can talk
with the Soviet Union which don't Involve
or prejudice or prejudice In any way this par-
ticular m.itter of a European zone. So I
think that useful pre^^ress can probably be
made In talks with the Soviet Union with-
out In any way coercing or seeming to coerce,
or onironting our allies with a fait ac-
compli.

Question. Mr Secretary, speaking of allies.
Senator Knowland has suggested that It
might be possible to neutralise Norway In
exchange for Soviet withdrawal from Hun-
gary How do you feel about such a pro-
posal?

Answer. Well. I fully .share Senator Know-
land s feeling that every proper effort should
be made to get the Soviet troops out of
Hungary. And I believe that If we can find
a way to test the sincerity of what Mr.
Khrushchev said In that respect we should
try to ftnd It. But I feel this about our
mutual security, collective security arrange-
ments:

These arrangements, according to my con-
cept, are arrangements such as are made In
any civilized community to gain security.
These are not milltarv aggrei?arion»; they
are not alliances, in the ordinary sense of
that word — they are an effort to do within
the free world the kind of thing that should
preferablv have been done through the
United Nations. The United Nations Char-
ter, as you recall, contemplated a system
of collective security under its Security
Council, with forces, facilities, airplanes and
BO forth at the disposal of the Security Coun-
cil. Now that concept was never realized
because of the Soviet veto. Therefore, we
are trying to realize it within the Free World,
and the mutual-security arrangements which
have been created as between. I think. 45
narlons represent an efTort to do that. And
I do not think It is appropriate to suggest
that any free-world country which wants to
participate in cnUectlve security should
withdraw from it. It would be like sug-
gesting that some of us here In Washington
should agree that our own homes, houses,
should no longer have police protection.
Well, that would not be a sui;gestlon that
would be welcomed. And I doubt whether
It is appropriate to suRgest that a nation
which wants to share in collective security
should give that up.

Question. Mr. Secretary. Prime Minister
Kishl from Japan will be here next week. I
wonder If you could tell us, sir. what prob-
lems you feel might exist between the two
countries which his visit will help solve: and
whether you feel that this visit Is as Impor-
tant as he says it la when It opens* new
era of relations between the two countries?
Answer. I consider that this visit Is very
Important and comes at a formative period
in the relations t)etween our two countries.

x^i'tl^^^^''^lV^^^T^'^ ^° P'*^*''' * proposal Japan since the war has been in the process

' Ar,=„.:-' «",, ,1 ^ .. . yo" "light say. of finding herself again as a

potential great power, and I

Answer. Well, let me make perfectly clear
this: this Is not a bilateral negotiation. It
is not Just between the United States and
the Soviet Union. And we are not going to
throw Into the discard the views of our
allies merely In the interest of making
progress on a bilateral basis with the Soviet
Union. We attach first Importance to our
relation." with our allies, and we shall not
sacriace that relationship with our allies

again as a
use that term
"grea*-" not In the term of ability to Impose
your will upon others but in the ability to
play a constructive role In world affairs and
In the creation of collective security. And
I feel that there is a growing feeling In Japan
that a new stage Is approaching In the rela-
tions of Japan to the rest of the world and I
hope and believe that we will have a chance
to talk that over constructively with Mr.

Kishl when he Is here I do regard It as a
very Important meeting coming at an im-
portant time.

Question. Mr. Secretary, getting Into the
Inter-Amerlcan field, there Is going to be an
economic conference In Buenos Aires in Au-
gust. Could you tell us who will head the
United States delegation, whether it will bo
Mr Humphrey or Mr Anderson, and whether
any new policy will be enunciated there?
Answer. I doubt very much that it will
be Secretary Humphrey. Whether or not it
will be Secretary Anderson or possibly Mr.
Burgess, that I don't know — that's a matter
for them to work out. And I would also
not want to discuss the policies because, as
you know, those conferences are primarily
held under the au.splces of the treasury de-
partments, the finance departments, of the
different countries, not under the auspices
of the State Department.

Question. On a related subject. Mr. Secre-
tary, the representatives of the presidents
of the 21 .American Republics issued a re-
port last month, which was made public
on May 2.5. prr,pt>f!!ng certain hteps to
strenthen the economic phase of the Or-
ganization of the American States. I wonder
If you have seen the report and can tell us
how quickly the United States plans to im-
plement Its part In the program?

Answer Yes I have seen the report. I
think It Is a constructive re{X)rt. There are
different parts of it which will have to come
Into force at different times, and there is no
one date for everything that can be done
there. But I see no reason why the United
States should not carry forward its part in
that at a rapid rate TTiere are no mat'ers
which cannot be dealt with. I think, within
the compass of presently agreed policies I
think wh.1t is proposed is important It is
constructive, not when measured by the
yardstick of dollars, which I think is a very
fallible measuring rod. for these matters, but
In terms of getting new concepts underway,
and I think we can respond rather quickly
to the recommendations of the committee.
Question. Mr Secretary, the Soviet Union
has proposed a rather large-scale resumption
of cultural and other forms of exchange be-
tween Itself and the United States. Could
you tell us whether you favor such a resump-
tion, and along what lines?

Answer. Well. I favor the resumption, but
not necessarily along the precise lines that
the Soviet proposes. You may recall that
at the meeting of the Foreign Ministers which
came after the summit conference, that is.
the meeting held In October and November
1955, some 18 months ago, the United States,
with the British and the French, put for-
ward a very comprehensive package of pro-
posed exchanges— a 17-polnt proposal. That
Included, for ex.\mple. a proposal for recipro-
cal presentations on current affairs by radio.
with someone from the United Sutes who
would have an opportunity to speak to the
people of the S<jvlet Union. I think we pro-
posed that there should be an allotted time
of a period of half an hour every month, and
that they. In turn, would have a half hour
to make a presentation to the United
States of their views and policies. I was
very glad. Indeed, U) see the strong endorse-
ment of that concept by Senator Johnson
the other day. He made almost exactly the
same proposal, or at least adopted, you might
say. the same proposal that the United States
had made at that time. But his reinforce-
ment of that at this Juncture is a very useful
thing and Is again a demonstration of tlie bi-
partisan character of our foreign policy. We
are consuntly pressing the Soviets, for ex-
ample, for these reciprocal facilities to speak
to the Soviet people. So far, they have been
adamant in their refusal. I remember Molo-
tov said that he would not be willing to
have exchanges of that sort because it would
present the Soviet people with what he called
social scum.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8893

Question. Mr. Secretary, aince Khru-
shchev's television appearance and since this
issue has come alive again, has the United
i^tates made any specific proposal to the So-
viet Union for reciprocal radio or television
lime, or do you propose to do so?

Answer. Well, we have been pressing them
consistently since the original formulation
of that proposal 18 months ago. I can't say
with posltlveness as to whether or not we
have pressed it again upon them within the
l.i^t day or two. But I know that that la
one of the items which U on the list, which
Is t>eing watched here for us In the State De-
partment by Ambassador Lacy. I talked to
h.m on the phone last night and he said that
l: Is constantly In his mind. I don't think
a concrete proposal has been made within
the last day or two, but he has been pressing
ind we have been pressing for that kind of
exchange ofT and on, with consistency, for
ttie last 18 months.

Question. Well, Mr. Secretary, does that
mt an that as of now the proposal, the spe-
c.ilc proposal for a one-half hour exchange
p:trh month, or in any period of time you
would specify, is an open proposal on the
part of the United States to the Soviet Union?
Answer. It is. And that has been made
pcrlec'..ly clear repeatedly to the Soviet
Union.

Question. Mr. Secretary, has any progress
been made In negotiations with Egypt to get
H ( :>i.ser adherence to the United Nations" e.ix
J .'ii.t iplps for operating the Suez Canal?

Answrr TTiere are no new developments
sl'.rik' ih.it line other than the bilateral talks
whK h have beeen conducted by some nations
».th reference to easing, from a fiscal sUnd-
;>otnt. the conditions of transit. That is per-
haps one aspect of brin,j;lng the Suez Canal
into line with the six principles In that It
does away wi;h monetary restrictions which
might be an impediment. The French are in
the process I think of concluding discussions
< f that sort: possibly other governments have
been having them. But, aside from that. I
think no progress has been made.

Question. Mr. Secretary, on another point.
President Elsenhower, in discussing trade
^nth Red China at his news conference last
week, said that he belongs to the school of
thought that believes that In the long run
trade cannot be stopped between countries
and that you will either have authorized
trade or clandestine trade. Further, he said
he did not see as much advantage as some
I-eople In maintaining tougher trade controls
t n shipments to Red China than on ship-
ments to the Soviet bloc in Europe. Could
you tell us how you stand on this, sir?

Answer. Well, let me first say that you left
out the last part of his sentence.
Question. That he does not favor abolition.
Answer. He said he did not favor the total
abolition of the differential.
Question. Thafs right, sir.
Answer. And that is an extremely impor-
tant point because that is the position we
took at the Paris talks and with respect to
which we had the support of a substantial
majority of the nations that were repre-
sented there. An elTort has been made to
suggest that the United States stood alone In
that matter. Actually, at this conference, a
substantial majority of the nations shared
the United States position and not the posi-
tion of the United Kingdom, and that Is the
position which the President expressed at his
last press conference when he said he did
not favor a total abolition of the differential.
The problem as I see It Is this, that China
has only a limited amount of foreign ex-
change with which to buy goods abroad and
the question Is how high. In terms of strate-
gic value, are the goods you are going to let
China buy? It Is, I think, highly doubtful
that the total volume of China's foreign trade
^^'lll be Increased by a total abolition of the
differential. It will. I think, mean that In-
stead oX buying commodltlee of leas atrateglo

value, they will concentrate their buying
upon goods of higher strategic value because
their great effort today la to build up their
war potential and their heavy Industry that
supports it. I feel that the views of the
United States, which carries the primary re-
sponsibility for peace In the area, should
have weight with respect to that matter.

Question. Mr. Secretary, what Is the exact
position today of the United States Govern-
ment regarding the situation in Algeria?
There have been some rumors In Paris that
the United States Government would be
more active in trying to promote a negotiated
settlement of the conflict. Can you com-
ment on that?

Answer. The United States has no plan for
intervening or Interfering In that matUr In
any way. I received the suggestion, which
I may have referred to here, some little time
ago, from the Arab ambassadors, that be-
cause the United States gives military assist-
ance to France we should attach to It cer-
tain conditions In relation to Algeria. And
I asked whether they really felt that assist-
ance from the United States of a military
character or military support character
should have attached to it political condi-
tions, and on reflection I think that they
would not want that kind of a poUcy applied
to them.

Question. Mr. Secretary, the other day at
his news conference. Mr. Elsenhower seemed
to Invite the Inference that he disapproved
of a broadcasting system Inviting Mr.
Khnishchev to appear on an American pro-
gram, the Inference being that somehow It
was lopsided or that it embarrassed the ad-
ministration. Then he went on to say that,
whereas he himself would probably not ap-
pear In answer, that others of the adminis-
tration might. I'd like to ask you a few
questions against that background.

First, Is an appearance of this kind by Mr.
Khrushchev or some other foreign figure,
whether he be Communist or not, considered
by the administration to be detrimental
propaganda that you would like not to see;
and. second, would you yourself object to
appearing as one of the American Govern-
ment figures In the exchange with Soviet
Russia. If that Is worked out?

Answer. Well, I don't want to be com-
menting upon what the President said In
this respect, because he speaks for himself
and his views on these matters are naturally
controlling upon the Department of State.
And we welcome that.

Now, on the question of appearances, 1
think this: I have considerable doubt as to
the value of these one-shot operations so
far as the Soviet Union Is concerned. I
think what we need to get and should get Is
a regular opportunity on a reciprocal basis
to speak to each other's peoples. That was
the view that we took at the Geneva Con-
ference. That Is the view we have held ever
since. It Is the view that was expressed
very eloquently by Senator Johnson, the
day before yesterday, I think It was.

Now, If you can get this on to a regular
basis, I would think that leading American
figures could be found who would appear on
these programs. And I would not see any
Inherent objections to my doing so. Actu-
ally, of course, this press conference Is being
recorded on radio and television, and If the
Soviets wanted to play this back In the
Soviet Union, I'd be delighted. If they would
rather have one that was specially geared
Into a discussion of Soviet-American rela-
tions, I'd be delighted to have that kind of
a press conference. But, as I say, I think
that what we should strive for Is to have a
regular system. If we can get it, and not Just
a kind of a one-shot operation which I think
would not have the desired Impact of really
bringing to the Soviet people an adequate
understanding of our policies.

Question. Mr. Secretary, returning to the
China trade question, do you see any possi-

bility of a common, unified apivoach being
worked out by the 15 nations maWng up the
China Control Committee; In other words,
is there still room for a negotiation with
Britain and Is there a likelihood that a com-
mon approach might be worked out short of
total abolition of the China differential?

Answer. Well, there Is one aspect to the
matter which Is still open for negotiation
and which is Important, and that Is the size
of the quotas of Items which will now be
on the China No. 2 list, I think It Is called.
You see, on the COCOM Ust, which applies
to the Soviet Union and which the British
would now apply equally to the Chinese,
we have three categories. One Is goods which
are totally forbidden. The second Is articles
which are allowed to go within specified
limits. And the third Is the so-called watch
list, where the shipments are reported but
where no limitations exist unless and until
the volume of shipments seems to call for
further action.

Now, In the case of the No. 2 list, which
Is the quota list, the actual quotas for
China have not yet been agreed upon and
they are still subject to negotiation. And
there Is a possibility of a measure of agree-
ment in that respect which would be helpful.

Question. Mr. Secretary. In answer to the
earlier question on trade with Red China, you
pointed out that a majority of the countries
In this 15-nation group did support our
view, that there should be a differential.
My question was based on President Eisen-
hower's remark that he did not personally
see as much of an advantage In maintain-
ing a differential at all, even though he did
not favor complete abolition of it. My ques-
tion was. Do you share that view, and If so
why did we propose a differential to begin
with?

Answer. Because, as President Elsenhower
said, he did not favor — nor do I favor, nor
does, I think, anyone In the American Gov-
ernment favor — a total abolishment of the
differential. And we proposed a reduced dif-
ferential but not a total abolishing of the
differential, which is exactly the position
President Elsenhower took.

Question. Mr. Secretary, do you have any
fears or any evidence that the American
people were taken In or bamboozled by Mr.
Khrushchev in his appearance on TV?

Ans'wer. Well, I think myself that the
American people are sufficiently versed In
the vocabulary of communism so that they
were not fooled In any way by that state-
ment. I dldnt see the statement myself
or hear It, because I was fortunately on my
Island where we don't go In for things of
that sort. But from what I hear of it, it
is pretty much in line 'with what the So-
viets have been saying in a great many ways
In the last 2 or 3 months. There has been
a plethora of propaganda notes sent out
by the Soviet leaders. They have been writ-
ing notes that look almost as if they had
hired a letterwrltlng bureau to do the work
for them. And they have been pouring out
notes in an unprecedented rate. I got a
list the other day of 15 or more long dia-
tribes which had been sent to one or an-
other of the free-world governments, all
pretty much along the same lines. Those
lines had all been printed or reported In
substance In our press, and of course we
have been hearing that kind of thing off and
on now for a good many years. I don't
think that the American public is fooled
by what Is the essence of repetition of that
kind of stuff.

Question. Mr. Secretary, at your May 14
news conference, you told us that there were
some Supreme Court decisions to back up
3rour policy of prohibiting newsmen from
going to Bed China. And you gave lu a ntun-
ber of citations. Some of us have looked up
those citations and we found they don^
really support your view at all as far as the
Supreme Court decision U concerned. Ilier*

3rl

i

■»■■;

i'rf: ;•

it

8894

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Jiine 12

mam on* th*t M«m«l to. And It was tb*
Mickey Jalke eu* In tbe New York court.
Can you clarUy thl* for us? (Laugbter.)

Answer. Well. I will tell you I h&ve a new
legal a^lvlser now. Tou know, one of the
aoiloins of the legal profession is that it Is a
great mistake to be yoiu: own lawyer. Per-
ha{)0 that is a self-serving axiom for the
legal profession. At any rate. I apply It now.
We have now a new legal adviser, Mr.
Becker, who Is beginning to work here with
VIS, taking Mr. Phleger's place. He is be-
ginning to get into this, and if you want to
discuss the Impact or meaning of decisions
by the Supreme Court and tbe highest coxirts
of our States, I suggest you take it up with
blm. And if you can. have your own lawyers
prepare their version of It. It may cost you
some money. 1 warn you.

Question. Thank you. sir.

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, the free-
dom loving peoples all over the world
have cauRht new glimmers of hope for
true global peace In recent developments
here in the United States and at the
United Nations disarmament conference
In London.

In today's edition of the Washington
Post there appears an article quoting
Secretary of State Dulles supporting the
"open curtain" proposal of the distin-
gniished majority leader, the Senator
from Texas [Mr. Johnson ]. in a speech
last Saturday.

The text of that speech, which is cer-
tainly an example of the forward-looking
and realistic leadership offered by our
majority leader, has already been in-
cluded in the Record. Secretary Dulles
should be congratulated for endorsing
the views expressed by the majority
leader, and I ask unanimous consent thai
the text of the article carrying his com-
ments be printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

Duuxs, Johnson Acru on Soviit TV
Exchange

The United States wants, and may soon
ask for a regular radio-television exchange
with the Soviet Union, Secretary of State
John Foster Dulles made clear yesterday.

He expressed pleasure at what he termed
the 'strong endorsement" of such an Idea —
f!rst advanced by the United States some 20
months ago — by Senate Majority Leader
Lyndon B. Johnson, Democrat, of Texas.
In a Saturday speech In New York. John-
son called for an open curtain policy. In the
wake of Soviet Communist Party boss Nlklt.'i
Khrushchev's American television appear-
ance.

Other officials at State Indicated yester-
day that it may be a couple of weeks at least
before any new. Arm proposal can be put to
Moscow. They cited such problems as how
to get regular tLme on American radio and
TV. how to pay for it, and how to determine
who would appear on the Soviet air to repre-
sent the United States.

Johnson, it is known, had sent Dulles a
copy of his speech as he did to other admin-
istration officials. He is determined to press
the matter. Dulles cited the Johnson
speech as a "demonstration of the bipartisan
character of our foreign policy"

Dulles told his press conference that the
first American offer for a reciprocal half-an-
hour-a-monih on the air stUl stands. The
oiler was made at the last Big Pour Ministers
meeting in Geneva in October 1955.

But. said Dulles, the then Soviet Foreign
Mliuster, V. M. Molotov. rejected the Idea on
the grounds it would present the Soviet peo-
ple wbat he called social scum.

The Becrstary mada It cls«r ha tsJces %.
poor view of a "one-shot" reply to Khru-
shchev. What "we need to get and should
get." tie said, "is a regular opportunity on a
reciprocal basis to speak to each other's peo-
ples. That was the view we took at th*
Oeneva Conference. That is the view we
have held ever since. It is the view that was
expressed very eloquently by Senator Jobm-

60N."

VIEW or KHKITSHCHXV'S ANSWXaS

Dtilles said he would not personally object
to going on Soviet teIe%-lslon and that he
would be delighted to have his press con-
ference shown there or even a press confer-
ence "specifically geared Into a discussion of
Soviet-American relations."

Johnson had called foi discussion of Amer-
ican disarmament proposals on such pro-
grams.

Asked if he felt the American people were
taken in or bamboozled by Mr. Khrushchev
in his appearance on TV, D\illes said he didn't
think so. He said Khrushchev's replies
had followed recent Soviet propaganda.

Dulles said Uie United States had been
pressing the Soviets for a radio-TV exchange
but he added that no concrete proposal has
yet been made in the wake of the Khruschev
appearance.

A3 to other types of exchanges sought by
Kruschchev in the technical and cultural
fields. Dulles said he favored resumption of
exchanges, suspended at the time of the
Hungarian revolt, but "not necessarUy along
the precise lines ' proposed by Moscow.

DEFENSE PLANNING— ALICE IN
WONDERLAND

Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, as
the Senate draws closer to a vote on the
Defense Appropnations bill, it is becom-
ing increasingly clear that we are enter-
ing the realm of Alice in Wonderland.

On the e\enin? of May 14, the Presi-
dent of the United States, in a nationally
advertised telecast to the American peo-
ple, said:

I earnestly believe that this defense budget
represents, in today's world, the proper di-
viding Hue between national danger on the
one hand and excessive expenditures on the
other. If it is materially cut, I believe the
country would be taking a fearful gamble.

Twenty-eight days ago, therefore, the
President, in effect, urged the American
people to persuade the Senate to restore
reductions in the military budget made
by the House of Representatives, includ-
ing some $638 million cut by the House
from the Air Force alone.

But 11 days ago, on May 31, Secretary
oT the Air Force E>ouglas in his second
letter of protest to the Secretary of De-
fen.se against Defense Department Di-
rective 7200 4, protesting the effects of
this directive, said:

If we are required to adhere to the present
expenditure objectives for fiscal year
1958 • • • we would need to eliminate some
«4 bUllon cf programed weapon systems In
the fiscal year 1958 and prior programs —

And—

the estimated reduction In flscal year 1958
and prior programs would be approximately
•3 4 billion lu aircraft and missiles and $800
million In major procurement other than
ai£craft.

What, therefore, does President Eisen-
hower want: Does he want an addition
to the Air Force of $638 million — or does
he want a reduction in the Air Force ol
(4.200,000.000?

Does Hoe Presklent support hia own
tdecMted recommendation to raise Air
Force fonds over six hundred million
dollars — or does he support the directive
of his own Secretary of Defense to re-
duce Air Force funds over $4 billion?

The Senate has the right to know
before It votes.

Equally Important, the people have the
right to luiow — what does the President
want?

Mr. Presklent. as a result of this ex-
traordinary directive, recently there have
been three able and informative edito-
rials on this subject In the Washington
Evening Star.

The first, written on June 2, was en-
titled "Efficiency or Folly?"

The second, on June 6, is called
Wrong-Way Emphasis.

The third, of June 7, bears the title
"Defense Snafu."

I respectfully request my colleagues
to note the last para^iraph of this edi-
torial of June 7 which reads as follows:

Mr. Elsenhower has said that his S38 biU
Ikjn defense budget would supply only the
minimum defense needs of the country. If
we are not going to get this minimum with
•38 billion, assuming restoration of the House
cuts, he ought to step forward and ask for
more money.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that these three editorials be
printed at this point in the Reccwd.

There being no objection, the editorials
were ordered to be printed in the Record.
as follows:

[Prom the Washint^ton Sunday Star of Jun*
a. 19571

B'riCllNCT Ot FOLLT?

As we understand it, Defen.se Secretary
Wilson's Air Force procurement directive has
been Issued in an effort to promote greater
efficiency in contracting and financing proce-
dures. Like a lot of other well-intentioned
things, however. It apparently would do more
harm than gcxxl. Indeed, according to its
critics, it would have a seriously adverse ef-
fect on American security by hnpeding the
Nation's missile program and projected
buildup of Intercontinental Jet bombers.

This Is the firm view, at any rate, of Sena-
tor Stmincton of Missouri, and his grave
mls!3:lvUigs are shared at least In part by Air
Force Secretary Douglas who has formally
protested against the directive. And the same
sort of concern, of course, is felt by men like
Generals Twining and LeMay whose direct
resfKinslbillty It Is to keep our country as
strong as possible in the skies. In their
opinion, as indicated by reports from the
Pentagon, Mr. Wilson has laid down a rule
that cannot be followed without causing a
potentially dangerous slowdown In the whole
procurement effort.

Thus, under the Wilson directive, the Air
Force would have to have on hand all the
funds necessary to pay for an entire project
or weapons system bafore it could contract
for or spend any money on components of
that project or system. This would seem to
mean, for example, that unless the cash were
available for tiie buUding of a complete
bomber, advance orders could not be placed
for the bomber's engines or other parts which
require from 18 to 21 mouths to construct.
As the critics see It. the effect of such a re-
striction would be roughly the same as slash-
lug an additional $2 5 billion from the Air
Force's already slashed budget.

And what would this mean? In Mr.
&TMIMGTONB Judgment, it would moan a
heavy cut In the buildup of B-62'b and make
almost Impoasibl* th« procurement oi the

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8895

new B-58'8. the Nation's first Bupersonlc Jet
bombers. Certainly, If this Is the truth of
the matter, then Mr. Wilson's directive ought
to be rescinded forthwith as something that
would constitute not efficiency, but the most
bumbling kind of folly.

[From the Washington Evening Star of
June 6, 1957]

Wbono-Wat Emphasis

It Is something of a shock to read that the
Defense Department apparently issued its
controversial directives restricting Air Force
Installment buying without any exact calcu-
lation of their effect on the procurement pro-
pram. And yet that is. In substance, what
As.sistant Secretary Wilfred McNeil, depart-
ment controller, told the Senate Military Ap-
propriations Subcommittee.

Testifying t>efore the committee. Mr. Mc-
Neil said he had been told the directives
might affect from $i billion to $3.5 billion
worth of contracts for modern planes and
mi.oirlles. but he added that "no definitive
analysis" has yet been made. He acknowl-
idK'ed ftorther that "we really are in bad
Khape ■ If the restrictions should Interfere
w;'h procurement as drastically as charged.

Mr McNeil defends the orders as aimed at
kopplng spending on a "sound business" basis.
This Is a worthwhile objective by Itself and
t^ere is no doubt that procurement practices
should be kept under scrutiny and control.
Tlie prevailing consideration, however, should
be the estimated military needs for national
security It is most disturbing if so-called
fi.-iral readjustments are being made without
prinr determination of their Impact on buUd-
ing up the essential alrpower.

(From the Washington Evening Star of
June 7. 1957)
DzrzNE* Snaftt

The situation in the Defense Department,
If one may borrow a famUiar phrase, seems
to be In a dreadful mess.

As we get the story, defense expenditures
In the fiscal year beginning July 1. assum-
Int; that the present rate is maintained.
Will be $42 billion. But only SSS bUlion has
been budgeted for that year, and there Isnt
any more. So the Budget Bureau U insUt-
Ing that the Defense Department hold its
spending within the $38 billion limitation,
and Defense Secretary Wilson has issued
directives designed to accomplish this.

Deputy Defense Secretary Quarles and Air
Frirce Secretary Douglas are opposed to the
Wilson directives. If the directive banning
Installment buying stands, says Mr. Doug-
las, the Air Force would need to eliminate
some tA billion of weapons systems. He says
this would be a major disruption of the
Air Force program, and that certainly is no
exaggeration. Nor U this all. Other pro-
grama would have to be eliminated, or
stretch-outs instituted, throughout the
Armed Forces.

For the rest of the story, one must turn
back to Congfress. The House has decreed
a •2 5 billion cut in the $38 billion budget,
and the President has said It is imperative
that •1.2 billion of this be restored if the
Nation Is to have an adequate defense struc-
ture. As we understand it, however, the
President, when he said this, was not taking
account of the cutbacks that may become
necessary through the miscalculations in
the Defense Department. If the $4 billion
cutback to which Mr. Douglas referred has
to he made on top of the cut ordered by the
House, the Defense Establishment is going
to be In pretty sad shape.

This really Is a question of dollars verstis
defense. If more money is needed, the
President ought to say so — in addition to
nppeallng for restoration of the cuts which
have been made on Capitol Hill. It may t>e
embarrassing for him to admit that defense

requirements have been underestimated —
due. apparently, to a reduction In so-called
lead time for the production of weapons —
but this dlfBculty should not be resolved
by letting the national security take the rap.
Mr. Elsenhower has said that his $38 bU-
llon defense budget would supply only the
minimum defense needs of the country. If
we are not going to get this minimum with
$38 billion, assuming restoration of the
House cuts, he ought to step forward and
ask for more money.

OKLAHOMA COMMEMORATIVE
STAMP

Mr. MONRONEY. Mr. President, on
June 14, for the third time in history, a
new United States commemorative post-
age stamp will be issued frwn Oklahoma.
The occasion is the opening of the semi-
centennial exposition celebrating Okla-
homa's 50th anniversary as a State. The
arrows-to-atoms stamp is a 3-cent, blue
oblotig with a horizontal arrow, superim-
posed on a solid outline map of the State,
and piercing the orbital emblem which
has become symbolic of atomic energy.
The stamps will be sold both at the Okla-
homa City Post OfSce and at Boomtown
post office, a replica of Oklahoma City's
first post office at the exposition grounds.

The two earlier stamps from Oklahoma
were the Will Rogers 3-cent purple stamp
in 1948, with a photograph of our great
humorist and his well-known words, "I
never met a man I didn't like," issued at
Claremore, Okla., and the brown and
white 3-cent Indian centennial stamp of
1948, issued to commemorate the 100th
-anniversary of the settlement of the Five
Civilized Tribes in Oklahoma.

Issuance of the semicentennial stamp
brings to mind the colorful growth of our
postal service, started long before there
was a State of Oklahoma when most
of what is now Oklahoma was just a slice
of the Louisiana Purchase, with odd
comers of it labeled Arkansas Territory,
Cimarron Territory, and Greer Coimty,
Tex. History moves on through the pe-
riod when the present State was a patch-
work of Indian nations, into an era when
the Postal Guide listed both Indian Ter-
ritory and Oklahoma Territory along
with the States, up imtil the day of Okla-
homa's admission to statehood, Novem-
ber 16, 1907, when at least one envelope,
which has been preserved, was post-
marked both "Ind. T" and "Okla." at the
changeover hour.

With the help of the Library of Con-
gress, Oklahoma Historical Society pub-
lications, old records at the Post Office
Department, and my staff. I have gath-
ered together and embodied in a state-
ment some highlights of early Oklahoma
post offices. Much of the basic research
in this field was done by the late Grant
Foreman, and by George H. Shirk, a
practicing attorney in Oklahoma City.

I ask unanimous consent to have my
statement printed in the Record fol-
lowing my remarks.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows :

OKtAHOuA Post Omcxs
(Statement by Senator Monsonkt)

Unfortunately most of the records of what
appears to have been the first poet office
in what Is now ^dahoma were destroyed

In 1828 when a group of settlers who pre-
ferred Arkansas burned Miller Courthouse
In protest at the transfer of the area north
of the Red River to the Choctaw Nation
by the Crovemment. Miller Coiuthouse had
been established as a post office on Sep-
tember 5, 1824, with J. H. Fowler as post-
master, soon after Miller County had been
formed from what later became southeast-
ern Oklahoma and northeastern Texas.

About the same time, the Government
had pushed west from Port Smith. Ark., to
establish a post in what Is now northeastern
Oklahoma on Grand River about 3 miles
from Its mouth. It was called Cantonment
Gibson and made a post office on February
23. 1827. Although the name was changed
to Fort Gibson in September 1842. and there
was an interval of 7 days in July 1839 when
It was not operating. Port 'Gibson probably
has a good claim as the earliest post office
which stiU is operating at the present time.

Port Gibson was abandoned as a military
post later, surveyed for a townslte by the
Cherokee Nation, reoccupled by troops dur-
ing the ClvU War, abandoned, reoccupled,
and finally abandoned by the Army in 1890.

First postmaster was Gen. John Nicks,
commander of the Arkansas mlUtla, who
was serving as suttler (apparently supplier)
at Cantonment Gibson in 1827. He also
was honored a year later In the naming
of Nlcksvllle, established as a post office
April 28. 1828, in what is now Oklahoma.
That office was then a part of Lovely County.
Ark., but was discontinued In 1829 after
the area was ceded to the Cherokee Indians.

Fort Towson. Choctaw Nation, wm the
fourth post office established In our present
State In September 1832, with George C.
Gooding as postmaster. For many years It
was known as Doaksville, and briefly it was
called Camp Phoenix, but since 1903 It has
been Port Towson again at a site 1 mUe
away.

It was named In honor of Gen. Nathan
Towson, paymaster general of the Army, and
located near the mouth of the Kiamlchl
River about 7 miles from the Grand River.
The post was used variously as a center of
Government Influence among the Choctaws
and Chlckasaws, as the residence of the
Indian agent, and later by Confederate forces
In the ClvU War. It was there that Gen.
Btan Watie surrendered in June 1866.

A number of letters in Post Office Depart-
ment files list Choctaw Agency as the State's
flirst post office, but it appears to be fifth, in
later research. It was established June 26,
1833, In Arkansas Territory, with P. W. Arm-
strong as the first postmaster. The name
was changed to ScuUyville, changed back to
Choctaw Agency, and discontinued In 1871
shortly before a post office named Oak Lodge
was established at the same location. Oak
Lodge stlU was listed at the time of state-
hood.

Eagletown, now In McCurtaln County, ap-
parently is the direct descendant of Eagle-
town, established July 1, 1834. and believed
to be the first permanent town estabUshed
by the Choctaws on their removal to the
West. It was discontinued for 11 years be-
tween July 2. 1866. and June 4. 1877. Inci-
dentally, many historians believe that the
name Oklahoma, is derived from the Choc-
taw words meaning CMcia (people) and
homma (red). The Choctaws then were not
referred to as Indians, but as "the Choctaw
Nation of Red People."

Fort Coffee, Choctaw Nation, abandoned
for Fort Smith 3 years later, was established
as a post office April 20, 1836, and Kldron.
m Cherokee Nation, opened September 17,
1835. Its name was changed to Marble Salt
Works for awhile, then to Kedron.

Fortunately, the post-oOlce records reveal
something of what these early post offices
were like in connection with Park Hill, esUb-
llshed May 18, 1838, with Samuel Newttm as
postmaster, and later changed to TaUequah.

'. J

•r--

'1:1

■5; >

4 ^^-^

if i-.S;.:

m

i't'i **?•'■

sji:

'i.f

M

1]

88%

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

Some time between August 1853 asd May 6.
1850. tbe ipelllns on the recoixts In the office
of the Postmaster General was changed by
pen to read Tahlequah. That tllustratea a
cQfflcuIty common to many post offices In
Indian Territory. Clerks In Washington were
unfamiliar with Indian spellings. A little
later, dtlaens In what U now Nowata. Okla..
thought they were naming their town Nowee-
tah, an Indian word meaning welcome, but
a postal clerk In Washington made It Nowau.
and so It remained.

Park H112. by 1840. was served by a con-
tractor who left Fayettevllle. Ark.. Tuesday
at S a. m.. stopped at Eutaw. Sylva. Park
Hill, and Cherokee Agency (established In
January 1840) . and finished the 75-mtle drive
to Fort Gibson (Cant. Gibson) by 7 p. m.
on Wednesday. The Park HlU postmaster's
salary was 144 a year, and postal rates were.
In 1838. as follows:

For every letter composed of a single sheet
of paper conveyed not exceeding 30 miles, 6
cents; over 30 miles and not over 80, 10 cents;
over 8 miles and not over 150. 12 <] cents;
over 150 and not over 400. 18^4 cents; over
400. as cents; and every double letter or two
pieces of paper, double said rates; every triple
letter, or three pieces of paper, triple said
rates; every packet of 4 or mere pieces of
paper, or one or more other articles, and
weighing 1 ounce avoirdupois, quadruple
said rates, and In that proportion for ail
greater rates.

These early rates are especially interesting.
since by Uarch 3. 1885. 22 years beiore state-
hood. fir8t-cla£3 mall rates had dropped t<j 2
cents each ounce or fraction, anywhere in
the States, with local mail the same, and
penny postcards a reality. Ten years after
statehood. In November 1917, our present
3-cent rate per ounce or fraction thereof ua
first-class mail went into effect.

Although the earliest postofflces of our
State were in what was Indian Territory at
Btateboed, by November 16. 1907. there were
about 7C0 each in Indian Territory and Okla-
homa Territory, wh:ch saw its first postoQce
on September i8, 1869. at Fort Sill. Comanche
County, wUh J<^hn Evans as postmaster.
That total of about 1,400 Is almost twice
as many as are now listed in the State, since
tjravel ha« become faster.

Neither of our largest cities was amonR
the first post offices. Oklahoma City was
established as Oklahoma Station December
30. 1887, on a railroad route from Arkansas
City. Kans.. to Purcell, I. T.. with the 6outb-
ern Kansas Railway Co. as contractors.
Tulsa, Creek County, was earlier, established
March 25. 1879, with Joaiah C. Ferryman as
postmaster.

One other development In Oklahoma poet
history should be added. First rural deliv-
ery service In what is now the State was
establlsheci August 15. 1900, at Hennessey,
In Kingfisher County, with Albert W. Darrow
as the first carrier.

Through all these years, before and after
statehood, we have had a great tradition for
service, often over and beyond the call of
duty, from both our city and rural carrier
who still comprise one of the finest groups
of public servants In the Nation.

WISCONSIN'S CONSTRUCTIVE EF-
FORT TO AID SMALL INDUSTRY

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President. I wish to
bring to the attention of the Senate an
outstanding example oX real, construc-
tive grassroots effort to aid small busi-
ness.

All too often, we find people, organiza-
tions, and even State goTemments look-
ins to Uncle Sam to lead the way In. and
perhaps to pay lor, programs in any And
all fields.

To<l&9 I uu happy to focus the spot-
light on a meritorious program which
haa been developed by cooperaUon be-
tween State officials and pabUc-spirlted
cltixens In Wisconsin.

Recently. Vernon Thomson. Oorernor
of the Badser State, appointed an 11-
man advisory board of retired business
leaders and executives a^ a special ad-
viaoiy group to small Industry.

The functions of this board are to pro-
vide new. young— and all too often struK-
Rling — businesses with topnotch assist-
ance In resoMns their many problem-s.

As we know, most of these small busi-
nesses, in the early stages of develop-
ment, simply cannot afford to pay hiRh-
piiced consultants. The members of the
advisory board have agreed to charge
for their servio; according to a firm s
ability to pay.

I believe our Clovernor. Vernon Thom-
son, is to be cotimended for talcing this
action in organuung this fine group. Mr.
Robert Koob. director of the State divi-
sion of industrial development, is to be
conqratuiated for recommending the
formation of the advisory board. More-
over, each and every member of the
advisory board is to be commended for
participating in thLs excellent program.

A recent article in the Milwaukee Jour-
nal gives more detail about this fine en-
deavor. I a5k unanimous consent to
have the article printed at this point
in the Record.

There beine no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

Bi-rvHj»-M<ff BoM»D NA\rrD To Am Sm.^ll
Indtstry-Thom-son B.<rrABi.isHES Gaot'P
To Provide GuroANci roa Fibms in Earlt
Ye.aks

Madison, Wis —A small industrv «d-
vlsonr board composed of 11 retired indus-
trial leaders was established Friday by Gov-
ernor Thomson.

The board was formed to assist the State
mvlsion of Industruil development in pro-
viding guid.ince on problems confronting
youn^. small industries in Wisconsin.

Robert Koob, director of the division, had
smtKested the formation of the advisory
board. He said that many smaU firms were
financial ly unable to hire management con-
sulunts at $100 to $150 a day. The retired
industrialists have agreed to charge accord-
ing to a firm's ability to pay.

AID IN DITFICULT TCAIS

Governor Thomson said that because moet
business failures occurred in early years of
operaUon and were traceable to lack of ex-
perience in management, the advisory board
should help Wisconsin's Industrial develop-
ment by helping these Industries dtirtng their
difficult years.

•These retired business leaders are per-
forming a noteworthy public service In offer-
ing the experience of their many successful
years of business management to our small
Indusuies now struggUiig with the varied
problems of growth and expansion," he said.

MEMBCas USTZO

The Governor stressed that the consultlns:
service would be available only to small busi-
nesses luiable to aSord regular consultant
services.

The first meetlnif of the advisory board
will be held in Madison soon. Koob said.

Members of the board appointed by Thom-
son irtclude:

W. D. Kyle. Sr.. Milwaukee, former presl-
dent of the Line Material Co ; A. M. Van IXju-
scr. Wausau. retired secretary-treasurer oX

the Msirathon Corp^; Dan K. Brown, N«*nah.
former president axui chairman of the board
of the Neenah Paper Co.; James N. Black.
Jiuiesvllle, former sales and advertising vice
president of the Parker Pen Co.

P. M Petersen. Kenoaha. retired vice presi-
dent of sales of S C Johnson & Son. tnc ; Lee
W. Melcher. Gconomowoc, former general
manufactttrtng esecuuve: HaroM L. a«tase.
Wausau. former utUlUea eaecutive; Elmer O.
Volgt, Racine, retired dtalrman of the board
of the Western Prluiiiig ts LJthi45raphing Co.;
Allen Abrams. Waus.-vu. f-jrnicr vice president
of the Marathon Curp ; A F. Stoffel. Racine,
former credit executive (-f S C Juhnson, and
Oscar O. Eggebrecht. Wausau. retired divi-
sion executive of the Maralhi)u Corp.

CIVIL USES OF ATOMIC ENERGY—
AGREEMENT FOR COOPERATION
WITH GOVERNMENT OP IRAQ

Mr. PASTORE. Mr President, I ask
unanimou.s consent to have printed in
the Record an agreement for coopera-
tion with the Government of Iraq, to-
gether with accompanying correspond-
ence. This agreement was signed on
June 7 and was received at the Joint
ComnUUee on Atomic Energy on June 7.
It is a standard research aTreement
which provides for the lease of up to 6
klloRram.s of contained U-235 in ura-
nium, enriched up to a maximum of 20
percent U-235.

There being no objection, the agree-
ment was ordered to be prmted in the
Record, as follows:

United States
Atomic Enerct Commission,
Wa^hingtun, D C , June 7, 1957.
Hon Carl T Durham.

Chatrman. Joint Cnmmittre on Atomic
Enrrgy. Congress of the United
Statci.

D«Am Ma. Dttiham: Purrusnt to section
123c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. there
Is submitted with this letter:

1. An executed a^eement for cooperation
between the Government of the United
States of America and the Government of
Iraq concerninR civil uses o* atomic energy;

2 A letter dated May 27. 1957, from the
Commission to the President recommending
approval vt the agreement; and

3. A letter dated May 28. 1957. from the
President to the Commission containing his
determination that it will promote and will
not constitute an unreasonable risk to the
common defense and security, approving the
agreement, and authorizing Its execution.

This agreement, as executed, makes coop-
eration possible between the U.-^ited States
and Iraq on the design, construction, and
operation of research reactors, including re-
lated health and safety problems; the use
of such reactors in medical therapy; and
the use of radioactive Isotopes in biology,
medicine, agriculture, and industry. Iraq.
if it desired tu do so. would be able to en-
gage United States companies to construct
research reactors, and private Industries In
the United States wUl be permitted, within
the limits of the agreement, to render other
assistance to Iraq. No restricted data would
be communicated under this agreement.
The Atomic Enerpy Commission, however,
would lease to Iraq up to 6 kilograms of
contained U-235 in uranium enriched up to
a maximum of 20 percent U-235, plus such
additional quantity as. In the opinion of the
Commission. Is necessary to permit the effi-
cient and continuous operation of the re-
actor or reactors while replaced fuel ele-
ments are radioactlvely cooling In Iraq or
while fuel elements are In transit. This
expressed limitation wUl restrict Iraq in

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8897

determlnlag t^e cboioe of reftctor to b« eon-
•tructed to a research reactor.

Tou will note that ttM agreement Includes
In article V provlslona for tbe eate or trans-
fer of reaaarch quantltlaa of Batertala of in-
tareat In ooonection with deftned resaarcb
projecu. TtM amount of special nuclaar ma.
terlal which would bt made availaUa to Ira^
under this agreement would not be Important
from the mlUtary point of view.

Article vni of the proposed agreement
records the ottHgatlons undertaken by Iraq
to safeguartl the special nuclear material
to be leased by the CXunmtsslon and article
IX contains the guaranties prescribed by
section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act.

This agreement expresses the hope and ei-
pecutlon of the two Governments that this
nrst stage of cooperation will lead to further
development of the peaceful ums of atomic
enersy In Iraq.

The agreement will enter into force when
the two Governments have exchanged notifi-
cations that their respective statutory and
constitutional requirements hava been ful-
fllled (art. XI).
Sincerely,

H. S. VANcr.

Chairman.

VrrnTD STATta
Aromc Enesgt Commission,
Washington. D. C. May 27. 19S7.
The PaismEKT.

The White House.

DiAB Ma. PaisroENT: The Atomic Energy
Commission recommends that you approve
the enclosed proposed agreement entitled
"Agreement for Cooperation Between the
Government of the United States of America
and the Government of Iraq Concerning
Civil Uses of Atomic Energy,'" and authorize
Its execution.

The agreement has been negotiated by the
Atomic Energy Commission and the Depart-
ment of State pursuant to the Atomic En-
ergy Act of 1954, and Is, In the opinion of
the Commission, su Important and desirable
step In advancing the development of the
peacef lU uses of atomic energy In Iraq In ac-
cordance with the policy which you have es-
tablished. The agreement would permit co-
operation between the two Governments with
respect to the design, construction, and op-
eration of research reactors. Including relat-
ed health and safety problems, the use of
such reactors in medical therapy, and the use
of radioactive Isotopes In biology, medicine,
apriculture. and Industry. The agreement
contains all of the guaranties prescrllied by
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. No restricted
data would be conomunicated under this
agreement, but the Commission Is authorized
to lease to the Government of Iraq up to 6
klloj^ams of contained U-235 In uranium
enriched op to a maximum of 20 percent
U-235 for use as reactor fueL You will note
that article V of the agreement would per-
mit the Commission to transfer limited
quantities of special nuclear materials. In-
cluding U-23&, U^233. and plutonlum for de-
fined research projects related to the peace-
ful uses of atomic energy.

The Government of Iraq, If it desires to do
•o. may engage United States companies to
construct research reactors, and private In-
dustry In the United States wUl be able,
under the agreement, to render other assist-
ance to the Government of Iraq. This agree-
ment expresses the hope and expectation of
the two GovernmeiUs tbat this first stage of
cooperation will lead to fiu-ther discussions
and agreements relating to other peaceful
Uses of atomic energy In Iraq.

Following your approval and subject to the
authorization requested, the agreement will
be formally executed by the appropriate au-
thorities of the Government of Iraq and the
United Sutea and then placed before the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy In com-
Cin 560

pUanee with eeeUoo USc of the AtOBtic
•rgy Act of 1064.
ReapecUulljr.

H. S. Vancs,

Chairman,
I certify this U a true and oorrect oopy.
R. N. BbAwaoM. Jr.,
AeUtig CMaf. AHa-Afrioan Branch,
Diviaion o/ /rUematioaai Agairt,

The Whtr Houas,
Washington, May Zi. 19$7.

The Honorable Lkwis L. Snuuas,

Chairman, Atomic Energy Commiuion,
Washington, D. C.
TttAM Ma. ST«AT78a: TTnder date of May 27.
1957. you informed me that the Atomic
Energy Commission had recommended that
I approve the proposed Agreement for Coop-
eration Between the Government of the
United States of America and the Govern-
ment of Iraq Concerning the Civil Uses of
Atomic Energy, and authorize Its exeeutlsn.
The agreement recites that the Government
of Iraq desires to pursue a research and de-
velopment program looking toward the real-
ization of the peaceful and humanlttuian
uses of atomic energy and desires to obtain
assistance from the Government of the
United States and United States Industry
with respect to this program.

The recommended agreement has been re-
viewed. It calls for cooperation between the
two Governments with respect to the design,
construction, and operation of research re-
actors. Including related health and safety
problems; the use of such reactors In medi-
cal therapy; and the use of radioactive Iso-
topes In biology, medicine, agriculture, and
Industry. The agreement contains all of the
guaranties prescribed by the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954. No restricted data would be
communicated under the agreement, but the
Commission Is authorized to lease to the
Government of Iraq up to 6 kilograms of
contained U-235 in uranium enriched up to
a maximum of 20 percent U-235 for use as
reactor fuel. In addition, article V of the
agreement would permit the Commission to
transfer limited quantities of special nuclear
materials, including U-235, U-233, and plu-
tonlum. for defined research projects related
to the peaceful uses of atomic energy.

Pursuant to the provision of section 123
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and upon
the reconmiendatlon of the Atomic Energy
Commission, I hereby (1) determine that
the performance of the proposed agreement
will promote and will not constitute an un-
reasonable risk to the common defense and
security of the United States; (2) approve
the propx>sed Agreement for Cooperation Be-
tween the Government of the United States
and the Government of Iraq enclosed with
your letter of May 27, 1957; and (3) author-
ize the execution of the proposed agreement
for the Goveriunent of the United States
by appropriate authorities of the United
States Atomic Energy Commission and the
Department of State.

It is my hope that this agreement repre-
sents but the first stage of cooperation In the
field of atomic energy between the United
States and the Government of Iraq, and that
It will lead to further discussions and agree-
ments relating to other peaceful uses of
atomic energy in Iraq.
Sincerely,

DwiCHT O. Eisenhower.

I certify that this is a true and correct
copy.

R. N. Blawson. Jr.,
Acting Chief, Asian-African Branch,
Division of International Affairs.

ACKEZMENT FOK COOPEKATTOIT BETWEEN THE
OOVKRNMEIfT O* THE UNIIEU STATES OF
AMESICA and THE GOVEKITWEIfT OF IKAQ,

CowcEENiNG CnriL Uses or Atomic Enekct

Whereas the peaceful uses of atomic energy
bold great promise for all mankind; and

Wlwreas the Oovernment of tbe United
fitataa of America axKl the Oovemment oC
Iraq dealre to cooperate with each othfer in
the development of audi paaoeful v»n at
atomic energy; and

Whereae tbe deelfn and development of
Mveral types of reaaarcb reaoton are well ad.
vanoed; and

Wbereaa reeearcb reactors are uaeful in tbe
production of reeearob quantltiea of radio-
leotopee. in medical therapy and In numeroua
other research acUvltlee and at tbe m^m^
time are a meana of affording valuable train-
ing and experience in nuclear aclence and
engineering useful in tbe development of
other peaceful uaes of atomic energy includ-
ing civilian nuclear power; and

Whereas the Government of Iraq deslree
to pursue a research and development pro-
gram looking toward the realization of tbe
peaceful and humanitarian uses of atomlo
energy and desires to obtain asslstanoe from
. the Oovernxnent of the United States of
America and United States Industry with re-
spect to this program; and

Whereae the Government of the United
States of America, acting through the United
States Atomic Energy Commission, desires to
assist the Government of Iraq in such a
program;

The parties agree as follows:

AXTICLX I

I^r the purposes of this agreement:

(a) "Commission" means the United States
Atomic Energy Commission or Its duly au-
thorized representatives.

(b) "Equipment and devices" means any
Instrument or apparatus and Includes re-
search reactors, as defined herein, and their
component parts.

(c) "Research reactor" means a reactor
which Is designed for the production of
neutrons and other radiations for general re-
search and development purposes, medical
therapy, or training in nuclear science and
engineering. The term does not cover power
reactors, power demonstration reactors, or
reactors designed primarily for the produc-
tion of special nuclear materials.

(d) The terms "restricted daU." "atomic
weapon." and "special nuclear material" are
ttsed In this agreement as defined in the
United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

AXTTCLS n

Restricted data shall not be communicated
under this agreement, and no materials or
equipment and devices shall be transferred
and no services shall be furnished xmder this
agreement to the Government of Iraq or
authorized persons under its Jurisdiction if
the transfer of any such materials or equip-
ment and devices or the furnishing of any
such services Involves the communication of
restricted data.

AancLE m

1. Subject to the provisions of article n,
the parties hereto will exchange information
in the following fields:

(a) Design, construction, and operation
of research reactors and their use as research,
development, and engineering tools and In
medical therapy.

(b) Health and safety problems related to
the operation and use of research reactors.

(c) Tbe use of radioactive iaotopea in
physical and biological research, medical
therapy, agriculture, and Industry.

2. The application or use of any informa-
tion or data of any kind whataoever. Includ-
ing design drawings and specifications, ex-
changed under this agreement shall be the
responsibility of the party which receives
and uses such Information or data, and it is
understood that the other cooperating party
does not warrant the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability of such information or data for
any particular vise or application.

ARTICLE IV

1. Tbe Commission will lease to the Gov-
ernment of Iraq lu-anlum enriched in tbe

K--. .

%m

1

il;

\ i; ■

r,r»

i

1^

Hi

V I

h

8898

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

Isotope U-335, subject to the terms and ccn-
ditlona provided herein, as may be required
as initial and replacement fuel In the opera-
tion of research reactors which the Govern-
ment of Iraq, in consultation with the Com-
mission, decides to construct and as required
in the agreed experiments related thereto.
Also, the Commission will lease to the Gov-
ernment of Iraq uranium enriched In the
Isotope U-235. subject to the terms and con-
ditions provided herein, as may be required
as initial and replacement fuel In the opera-
tion of such research reactors as the Govern-
ment ot Iraq may. In consultation with the
Commission, decide to authorize private in-
dividuals or private organizations under its
Jurisdiction to construct and operate, pro-
vided the Government of Iraq shall at all
times maintain sufllclent control of the ma-
terial and the operation of the reactor to
enable the Government of Iraq to comply
With the provisions of this agreement and
the applicable provisions of the lease iir-
rangement.

2. The quantity of uranium enriched In
the Isotope U-235 transferred by the Com-
mission under this article and In the cus-
tody of the Government of Iraq shall not at
any time be In excess of 8 kilograms of con-
tained U-235 In uranium enriched up to a
maximum of 20 percent U-235. plus such
additional quality as, in the opinion of the
Commission. Is necessary to permit the effl-
clent and contlnous operation of the reactor
or reactors while replaced fuel elements nro
radloactlvely cooling In Iraq or while fuel
elements are In transit. It being the Intent
of the Commission to make possible the max-
imum usefulness of the 9 kilograms of sold
material.

3. When any fuel elements containing U-
235 lefsed by the Commission require re-
placement, they shall be returned to the
Commission and. except as may be agreed,
the form and content of the Irradiated fuel
elements shall not be altered after their re-
moval from the reactor and prior to delivery
to the Commission.

4. The lease of uranium enriched in the
Isotope U-233 under this article shall be at
such charges and on such terms and condi-
tions with respect to shipment and delivery
as may be mutually agreed and under the
conditions stated In articles VIII and IX.

ASTTCLX T

Materials of Interest in connection with de-
fined research projects related to the pea.:e-
ful uses of atomic energy undertaken by the
Government of Iraq. Including source mate-
rials, special nuclear materials, byproduct
material, other radioisotopes, and stable iso-
topes, win be sold or otherwise transferred
to the Government of Iraq by the Commis-
sion for research purposes In such quanti-
ties and under such terms and conditions
as may be agreed when such materials ire
not available commercially. In no case. h<'w-
ever. shall the quantity of special nuclear
materials under the Jurisdiction of the G<iv-
ernment of Iraq, by reason of transfer under
this article, be. at any one time, in excess of
100 grams of contained U-235, 10 grams of
Plutonium, and 10 grams of U-233.

ARTICLB Vt

Subject to the availability of supply «nd
as may be mutually agreed, the Comrr.ls-
sion will sell OT lea.ie. through such metms
as it deems appropriate, to the Government
of Iraq or authorized pers4)n8 under its juiLi-
dlction surh reactoi materials, other tl an
special nuclear materials, as are not obtain-
able on the commercial market and which .-ire
r«'qulred in the construction and operxfion
of research reactors in Iraq The sale or
leHiie of these materials shall be on such teima
as may be agreed.

ABTICT.E VTI

It Is contemplated that, as provided In this
article, private Individuals and private ori; m-
Izatlons In either the United States or Iraq

may deal directly with private Individuals
and private organizations In the other coun-
try. Accordingly, with respect to the sub-
jects of agreed exchange of Information as
provided In article III. the Government of
the United States will permit persons under
Its Jurisdiction to transfer and export mate-
rials. Including equipment and devices, to
and perform services for the Government of
Iraq and such persons under Its Jurisdiction
as are authorized by the Government of Iraq
to receive and possess such materials and
utilize such services, subject to;

(a) The provisions of article II.

(b) Applicable laws, regulations, and li-
cense requirements of the Government of
the United States and the Government of
Iraq.

ARTTCLK Vin

1. The Government of Iraq agrees to
maintain such safeguards as are necessary
to assure that the special nuclear materials
received from the Commission shall be used
solely for the purp«ises agreed In accordance
with this agreement and to assure the safe-
keeping of this material.

2. The Government of Iraq agrees to
maintain such safeguards as are necessary
to assure that all other reactor materials.
Including equipment and devices, purchased
in the United States under this agreement
by the Government of Iraq or authorized
persons under Its Jurisdiction shall be used
solely for the design, construction, and op-
eration of research reactors which the Gov-
ernment of Iraq decides to construct and
operate and for research In connection there-
with, except as may otherwise be agreed.

3 In regard to research reactors con-
structed pursuant to this agreement, the
Government of Iraq agrees to maintain rec-
ords relating to power levels of operation
and burn-up of reactor fuels and to make
annual reports to the Commission on these
subjects. If the Commission request, the
Government of Iraq will permit Commission
representatives to observe from time to time
th9 condition and use of any leased ma-
terial and to observe the performance of the
reactor in which the material Is used.

4. Some atomic energy materials which
the Government of Iraq may request the
Commission to provide in accordance with
this arrangement are harmful to persons
and property unless handled and used care-
fully After delivery of such materials to
the Government of Iraq, the Government of
I.'aq shall bear all responsibility. Insofar as
the Government of the United States Is con-
cerned, for the safe handling and use of
such materials. With respect to any spe-
cial nuclear materials or fuel elements which
the Commission may, pursuant to this
agreement, lease to the Government of Iraq
or to any private tndlvldu.il or private or-
ganization under its Jurisdiction, the Gov-
ernment of Iraq shall indemnify and save
harmless the Government of the United
States against any and all liability (Includ-
ing third party liability) from any cause
whatwever arising otit of the production or
fabrication, the ownership, the lease, and
the possession and use of stich special
nuclear materials or fuel elements after de-
livery by the Commission to the Govern-
ment of Iraq or to any authorized private
ii-.divldual or private organization under its
Jurisdiction.

AKTTCM IX

The Government of Iraq guarantees that —
(a) Safeguards provided in article VIII
shall be maintained.

(b» No material, including equipment and
devices, transferred to the Government of
Iraq or authorised p>er»ons under Its Juris-
diction, pursuant to this ageement. by lease,
sale, or otherwise will t>e used for atomic
weapons or for research on or development
r f atomic weapons or for any other military
purposes, and that no such material. In-
cluding equipment and devtcee, wUi be

transferred to unauthorized persons or be-
yond the Jurisdiction of the Govertiment of
Iraq except as the Commission may agree to
such transfer to another nation and then
only If in the opinion of the Commission
such transfer falls within the scope of an
agreement for cooperation between the
United States and the other nation.

Aa-nn.« x

It Is the hope and expectation of the
parties that this Initial agreement for coop-
eration will lead to consideration of further
cooperation extending to the design, con-
struction, and operation of power-producing
reactors. Accordingly, the parties will con-
sult with each other from time to time con-
cerning the feasibility of an additional
agreement for cooperation with respect to
the production of power from atomic energy
in Iraq.

Asncrx XI

1. This agreement shall enter Into force
on the day on which each Government shall
receive from the other Government written
notification that it has compiled with all
statutory and constitutional requirements
for the entry Into force of such agreement
and shall remain In force for a period of S
years.

2. At the expiration of this agreement or
of any extension thereof the Government of
Iraq shall deliver to the United States all
fuel elements containing reactor fuels leased
by the Commission and any other fuel mate-
rials leased by the Commission. Such fuel
elements and such fuel materials shall be
delivered to the Commission at a site In the
United States designated by the Commission
at the expense of the Government of Iraq
and such delivery shall be made under ap-
propriate safeguards against radiation bas-
ards while In transit.

In witness whereof, the parties hereto have
caused this agreement to be executed pur-
suant to duly constituted authority.

Done at Washington, In duplicate, this 7th
day of June 1957

For the Government of the United State*
of America :

Wrt-tMlf Ilf ROHNTIKX.

Asrlstant Secretary of State for Near
Ea^itern, South, Asian, and African

Affairt.

W P. LlBBT,

CommUsioner, United Statet Atomic
Energy Commmsion.
Tot the Government of Iraq :

M Shaba NO,iB.
Ambasxador of Iraq.
1 certify that this U a true and correct
copy.

R N Slawsoic, Jr .
Acting Chief. Axtan-Afncan Branch,
Division of International Affairs.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
Carlson In the chair >. Is there further
morning business? If not, morning busi-
ness Is concluded.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I move that the Senate proceed to
the con.sideration of executive business.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to the consideration of
executive business.

of

EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF
COMMITTEES

The following favorable reports
nominations were submitted:

By Mr GREEN, from the Committee on
Foreign Relations:

Loftus B. Becker, of New York, to be legal
adviser of the Department of Bute;

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECCED — SENATE

8S99

James M. Langley, of New Hampshire, to
be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipo-
tentiary to Pakistan; and

Vinton Chapin. of New Hampshire, and
sundry other persona, for promotion in the
Foreign Service.

By Mr. MAONUSON, from the Committee
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce:

Ben H. Galll. of Texas, to be a member of
the Federal Maritime Board for a term of
4 years; and

Bernard R. Berson. and sundry other per-
sons, for permanent appointment In the
Coast and Geodetic SurTey.

The PRESIIMNa OFFICER (Mr.
Carlson in the chair). If there be no
further reports of committees, the nomi-
nation on the Executive Calendar will
be stated.

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION

The Chief Clerk read the nomination
of Andrew Downey Orrick. of California,
to be a member of the Securities and Ex-
change Commission.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I should like to invite the attention
of the Senate to the fact that the nomi-
nation presently under consideration
was reported to the Senate and placed
on the calendar only yesterday. I wish
to comment briefly on the nomination. I
should like to have the attention of the
drstinguished minority leader and the as-
sistant mmority leader, the Senator from
Illinois I Mr. Dirksiji], because Confess
Is coming under fire occasionally with
respect to Its record.

Mr. Andrew D. Orrick is being reap-
pointed as a member of the Securities
and Exchange Commission. His term
expired on June 5.

As I have said. Mr. Orrick's nomination
was reported to the Senate and placed
on the calendar yesterday, and I under-
stand there have been many urgent re-
quests made to the Committee on Bank-
ing and Currency and to the Senate Itself
to act quickly upon it.

I should like to Inform the Senate that
Mr. Orrick's nomination was submitted
to the Senate on May 27, although the
White House knew Ihat his term was to
expire on June 5.

I have read many criticisms coming
from Mr. Adams, of the White House,
about the lag in our Congressional activ-
ity. I should like to Inform Mr. Adams,
who is now on a New England vacation,
I understand, that the Senate considers
it Important to hold full and thorough
hearings on nominations, and that it
would be much appreciated If he could
send the President's nominations for-
ward early enough to give the Senate
.sufficient time to perform its constitu-
tional duties.

There was no deep, dark secret about
the fact that this term was to expire on
June 5. We do not feel that if a nomi-
nation Is sent to the Senate at sundown
the day before the expiration of the
term, the White House can expect us to
perform our constitutional functions
thoroughly of advising and consenting
to the nomination, without the nominee
going off the payrolL In this instance
the committee has been unusually dili-
gent and has acted with great dispatch.

I hope the Senate will concur In the
nomination this morning. If that Is
done, we may possiUy save Mr. Orrick
a day's pay.

I express the hope that In the future
when it is known that terms are expiring,
and it Is desired to avoid delay, the
executive department will perform its
function on time.

The PRESmiNa OFFICER. The
question is: Will the Senate advise and
consent to the nomination of Andrew
Downey Orrick to be a member of the
Securities and Exchange Commission?

The nomination was confirdtied.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent ttat the
President be immediately notified of the
confirmation of the nomination.

The PRESmiNa OFFICER. Without
objection, the President will be so
noUfled.

LEGISLATIVE SESSION
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I move that the Senate proceed to
the consideration of legislative btisiness.
The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate resumed the consideration of
legislative business.

CALL OF THE ROLL

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ab-
sence of a quorum has been suggested,
and the clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll, and
the following Senators answered to their
names:

AUcen

Allott

Anderson

Barren

Beall

Bennett

nble

Brlcker

Butler

Carlson

Carroll

Case. N. J.

Chavez

Church

Cooper

Cottbn

Dirksen

Z>worshak

Bast land

Blender

Krvln

Flanders

Frear

Goldwater

Oore

Green
Rayden

Hennlngs

Hlckedooper

Hlh

Holland

Hruska

Humphrey

Ives

Jackson

Javlts

Jenner

Johnson, Tex.

Johnston, 8. C.

Kennedy

Kerr

Knowland

Kuche'

Lausche

Long

Magnuson

Mansfield

Martin. Iowa

Marttn, Pa.

McNamara

Monroney

Morse

Morton

Mimdt

Murray

Neuberger

O'Mahoney

Pastore

Payne

Potter

PurteU

Revercomb

RusseU

Schoeppel

Scott

Bmathera

Smith. Maine

Stennis

Symington

Talmadge

Tburmand

Ttiye

Watklns

Wiley

WUllams

Mr. MANSFIELD. I announce that
fee Senator from Virginia [Mr. Byrd],
the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr.
Clark], the Senator from Illinois [Mr.
Douglas], the Senator from Arkansas
[Mr. FuLBRiGHT], the Senator from Ten-
nessee [Mr. KxTAWKR ] , the Senator from
West Virginia [Mr. Neilt], the Senator
from Virginia [Mr. Robertson], the Sen-
ator from Alabama [Mr. Spaskman], and
the Senator from Texas [Mr. Yar-
borough] are absent on oCBcial business.

The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Mc-
Clellan] Is absent by leave of the Senate
on official business.

Mr. DIREISEN. I annoimce that the
Senator from New Hampshire [Mr.
Ban>GEsJ, and the Senator from North

Dakota {Mr. Laxcu] are absent because
of illness.

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr.
Bush], the Senator irom Tn^ianfl [^r;
Capkhast]. the Senator from South Da-
kota [Mr. Case], the Senator from Ne-
braska [Mr. Curtis], the Senator from
Nevada [Mr. Malone], the Senator from
Massachusetts [Mr. Saltonstall]. the
Senator from New Jersey [Mr. Smith],
and the Senator from North Dakota
[Mr. Young] are absent on ofQcial
business.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. A quo-
rum is present.

INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPRO-
PRIAHONS, 1958

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask that the Chair lay before the
Senate the unfinished business.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, the Chair lays before the
Senate the unfinished business, which is
H. R. 6070.

The Senate resiuned the consideration
of the bill (H. R. 6070) making appro-
priations for sundry independent execu-
tive bureaus, boards, conunissions, cor-
porations, agencies, and offices, for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1958. and for
other purposes.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, the
independent offices appropriation bill
for 1958 makes appropriations for inde-
pendent offices, boards, commissions,
and corporate agencies and many of fee
ofeer activities of CJovemment imder
this category. Seventeen of these son-
des are engaged in regulatory, research,
and service operations, and approxi-
mately eight are engaged in corporate
operations of the Government.

T%e bill, as passed by fee House of
Representatives, was In the amount of
$5,385,201,700.

As fee bin has been reported to fee
Senate by the Committee on Appropria-
tions, fee appropriation items are de-
creased in a total amount of $6,976,900.
In short, fee bill as reported to fee Sen-
ate by the Senate Committee on Appro-
priations calls for appropriations of
$5,378,224,800.

The appropriations for 1957 for feese
agencies amounted to $5,990,841,826.

The amount ofthe regular and supple-
mental estimates, 1958, was $5,924,-
165,000.

The amount ht fee bill as reported to
the Senate Is under fee estimates for
1958 by $545,940,200.

The amount of the bill as reported to
fee Senate is imder fee appropriations
for 1957 by $612,617,026. In other words,
there is a considerable saving over bofe
fee 1958 estimates and the 1957 ap-
propriations.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, at
this point will the Senator from Wash-
ington yield?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does
the Senator from Washington yield to
the Senator from Delaware?
Mr. MAGNUSON. I yield.
Mr. WILLIAMS. Am I correct In un-
derstanding that $525 million of fee
amount of savings results from a change
In policy on fee part of fee Congress

i;

iv

7 ft'

.■i.m

-1 ^1

;! 411

tl

:f:

m

8900

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

ill

In paylngr for retirement. In that
each agency now pays Ita own 6 4 per-
cent of the employee payroll into the
civil service retirement fund, whereas
prior to this time that money was ap-
propriated by the independent ofBces
appropriation bill.

Mr. MAGNTJSON. That Is correct.

Mr. WTLXJAMS. So the $525 mUlion
of claimed savings are. in reality, not
savings at all, but will be paid under
other appropriations. Is that correct"*

Mr. MAGNUSON. That is partially
correct in the case of the agencies other
than the ones included in this bil.

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is correct

Mr. MAGNUSON. Although the bill
does include the funds for the 17 Gov-
ernment agencies and the 8 corporate
agencies.

Mr. WILLIAMS. But they are in-
cluded in other appropriations, rather
than those in this bill, are they not?

Mr. MAGNUSON. That is correct.

Mr. WILLIAMS. So the $525 million
of claimed savings are, in reality, not
reductions in appropriations, but relate
to items transferred elsewhere.

Mr. MAGNUSON. They are partial
savinffs for the agencies not Included in
the 17 and the 8 corporate agencies.
This matter involves a transfer of the
funds for the agencies not within this
group.

Mr. WILLIAMS. How much of the
$525 million applies to them?

Mr. MAGNUSON. I do not have
those figures.

Mr. WILLIAMS. How much applies
to these aeencies?

Mr. MAGNUSON. I have not added
up the total of the amount of money
needed for mandatory retirements in
the case of each one of them.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Nevertheless, a sub-
stantial amount to which I am referring
is. in reality, included in other appro-
priation bills — in the State Department,
Commerce, and Post Office appropria-
tion bills, for instance — is it not?

Mr. MAGNUSON. I do not know the
I)ercenta2e.

Mr. WILLIAMS. My point is that
when it is said that the appropriations
carried by this bill are $612,617,026 less
than the appropriations for 1957, that
figure is not an accurate one, because
$525 million of that amount are not ac-
tual savings.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Of course the fig-
ure is accurate. It speaks for itself. I
have merely stated the amount the
pending bill i.s under the 1957 appropri-
ations and the 1958 estimates. The Sen-
ator from Delaware asked me a question,
and I answered "yes." In connection
with the bill, there is a transfer of man-
datory retirement funds for the agen-
cies not included in the bill; but the bill
does include the funds for the manda-
tory retirements in the case of the 17
regulatory research and service agencies
and the eiaht corporate agenc'es.

Mr. WILLIAMS. That Is correct.
Nevertheless, the $525 million was al-
ways paid, previously from appropria-
tions made by the Independent offices
appropriation bill. So although the
pendmg bill calls for appropriations for
$612,617,028 less than the appropriations
for 1957. most of that amount does not

really constitute a saving. It will show
up in other appropriation bills later.

Mr. MAGNUSON. I disagree with the
Senator from Delaware, but there Is no
use laboring the point.

I merely have stated the difference be-
tween the 1957 appropriations, the 1958
estimates, and the appropriations car-
ried in the bill as reported to the Senate;
and I believe that my addition and sub-
tractions are correct.

As contrasted to last year's appropria-
tion bill, the pending bill involves numer-
ous shifts in the case of various Govern-
ment agencies. For instance, the Post
Office EVpartment bill wjis said to Involve
great savings for that Department.
However, the fact Is that there was a
shift in the pajTnent of sulwidies to the
Civil Aeronautics Board, and there were
some increases in mail pay. Neverthe-
le&<:. the figures speak for themselves.

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is correct; but
mv point is

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, If
the Senator from Delaware will permit
me to finish my addition and subtraction.
I shall be glad to discuss these savings.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Perhaps that would
be better.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Yes.

Mr. President, as I was saving, the bill
as reported to the Senate calls for appro-
priations in the total amount of $5,378,-
224.800: and that amount is $545,940 200
less than the estimates for 1958, and it Is
$612,617,026 less than the appropriations
for 1957. In short, the bill as reported
to the Senate calls for a decrease of
$6,976,900 as compared to the House ver-
sion of the bill.

The net decrease from the House ver-
sion of the bill results from increases
totaling $11,215,100. and decreases total-
line: $18,192,000.

The bill provides, as I have pointed out.
appropriations in the total amount of
more than $5 billion for the 17 agencies
of the Government engaged in regula-
tory, research, or service operations, as
well as $17 million for administrative ex-
pense limitations in the case of the 8
corporate operations.

The increa.ses recommended by the
Senate committee, over the House ver-
sion of the bill, amount to $11,215,100;
and the reductions under the House ver-
sion of the bill amount to $18,192,000.
In short, there is a net decrease of
$6,976,900.

The detailed figures are as follows:

One hundred and seventeen thousand
dollars is recommended for restora-
tion of the full budget estimate for an-
nuities for Panama Canal construction
employees and Lighthouse Service wid-
ows. This item Is necessary because
the Congre.ss pas.sed a bill increasing the
annuities for the Lighthouse Service wid-
ows, and also for the Panama Canal con-
struction employees. I believe the House
of Representative did not provide the full
amount of the budget estimate and we
have restored the amount in this bUl.

Another increase is in the amount of
$5,750,000 for partial restoration of the
cut voted by the House of Representa-
tives in the operating expenses cf the
Public Building Service. One million
dollars of that Is for Increased leasing
expenses, and the remainder Is for Im-

proved cleaning of public buildings. It
Is for the regular Government buildings
maintenance. In Its testimony, the Gen-
eral Services Administration pointed out
to the committee that the maintenance
and cleaning of public buildings is some-
what behind schedule. Some sort of
cleanliness standard is used, and the
buildings are at present at 77 percent of
the minimum standard. The amount
recommended would permit much needed
work to be done in the case of the public
buildings.

Another item Is $20,000 for the plan-
ning of a border station at Dunselth. N.
Dak., for the accommodation and u.««
of the Bureau of Customs and the Immi-
gration and Naturalization Service.

Eight thousand and five hundred dol-
lars is for the purpose of microfilm-
ing the part of the Confederate service
records known as the Consolidated Index
of the States. That program will be
carried on by the National Archives; and
It Involves putting together a great many
Confederate soldiers' service records,
which now are located In various agen-
cies scattered over the city of Washing-
ton. This appropriation will begin the
program, and probably next year further
indexing will be done.
i<icmoni.Mn40 or coNrcDKiuTs bxbtics Kzcoue

Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Washington yield?

Mr. MAGNUSON. I yield.

Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President. I wish
especially to thank and commend the
members of the Independent Offices Sub-
committee for their recommendation in
connection with the microfilming of Con-
federate service records.

The $8,500 amount so recommended
will enable the completion of a microfilm
copy of the Consolidated Index of the
States, and marks the beginning of the
availability of copies of these priceless
documents at cost to local patriotic
groups throughout the country. It Is a
measure of preservation of the priceless
and Irreplaceable original records, and
I do not believe that any money could be
better spent for historical purposes than
this small item.

This program should continue over the
years until microfilm copies of all these
records are made so that they may be
properly preserved and also made avail-
able at small cast to patriotic organiza-
tions throughout the Nation.

Mr. MAGNUSON. To continue my
statement, $1,710,000 Is proposed by the
Senate committee to be added to the
bill for the purpose of equipping the
new hospital in the District of Colum-
bia. A great deal has been said about
that matter on the floor of the Senate
during the past few days. The hospital
has been completed at great expense.
It Is about ready to be opened; It will
be opened In October or November. The
cost of equipment has Increased so much
that the authorization for the whole pro-
gram Is not sufficient, and $1,710,000 Is
needed. That was the testimony of all
those Involved — the administrators, the
doctors, and the Washington Hospital
Corporate Board. The appropriation of
the $1,710,000 is contingent upon the ex-
tension of the authorization, which is
now before Congress, and which was ap-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8901

proved by the District of Columbia Com-
mittee of the Senate, I believe last
Thursday.

There is an item of $120,000, a new
item, for work on housing studies, which
was authorized by the Housing Act of
last year. In that particular case, the
housing bill authorized studies to be
made by the Housing and Home Finance
Agency. The bill having been passed
late in the last session, or Just before
Congress adjourned, that item was not
put in the budget. All members of the
Housing Subcommittee of the Commit-
tee on Banking and Currency and oth-
ers interested urged — because the House
did not consider the item at all — that
we authorize the beginning of the study,
and the committee has recommended
the amount of $120,000 for that purpose.
The committee recommends an in-
crease of $500,000 for the Interstate
Commerce Commission, which is a par-
tial restoration of the cut which the
Hou-se made. The necessity for the in-
crease is due to added work at the Com-
mLssion because of legislation enacted
by the Congress. TTie legislation re-
quires a great deal of additional inspec-
tion work. Furthermore an extra
burden has been put on the ICC because
of the tremendous growth of motor
transportation carriers and because of
added safety work in cormectlon with
compliance with the Motor Carriers Act.
The committee also recommends an
Increase of $1 million in the appropria-
tion for the National Advisory Commit-
tee for Aeronautics, which repusents a
partial restoration of the cut ^ade by
the House. In that particular case the
House committee voted $71 miUion. On
the floor of the House a cut of $1 million
was made in the item. The Senate com-
mittee restored the amount cut, making
the amount $71 million, which was the
Item in the bill as the House committee
reported the bill.

The committee has recommended an
Increase of ^1.989,600 In the appropria-
tion for the medical administration and
miscellaneous operating expenses of the
Veterans' Administration, which Is a
partial restoration of the cut made by
the House, plus an additional $1 million
for medical research Ir the fields of heart
disease, mental illness, cancer, neuro-
logical diseases, and arthritis.

The committee report mentions the
fact that last year the Senate passed
a bill providing a $10 million fund for
re.search, as a result of an amendment
offered by me and other Senators. We
have found that the money spent for
that research, in cooperation with Na-
tional Institutes of Health, has repaid
the Government many times over. The
program Is to be continued. The rea-
son for the additional $1 million Is that.
for some peculiar reason, the Bureau of
the Budget, early this spring, failed to in-
clude $1 million of that $10 million fund.
The committee has restored that fund to
the Veterans' Administration.

Those are the increases the commit-
tee has recommended over the House
amounts.

The decreases in the bill under those
provided by the House are as follows:

The committee recommends a reduc-
tion of $14,250,000 in the amount pro-

vided by the House for the Veterans' Ad-
ministration. That particular appro-
priation totals $2,826,250,000, or nearly
$3 billion. The appropriation requests
submitted to the budget in that case are
submitted on estimates for the whole
fiscal year.

The Veterans' Administration has been
pretty accurate /n its estimates. It haa
not been wrong In Its estimates. In many
cases, by more than 1 or 1 \'2 percent, or,
I think at the most, 3 percent, in a given
year. The Veterans' Administration
could not know exactly whether its esti-
mates would prove to be correct, con-
sidering the huge amount of $3 billion
which is appropriated for it, until early
the next year. So the committee
thought it wise to keep the Veterans' Ad-
ministration as closely as possible with-
in its limitations, without eliminating
any payments, allowing a leeway of from
one-half to 1 percent.

Of course. It would be necessary, if the
Veterans' Administration found it was
running short of funds, for it to come
to Congress next year for supplemental
funds, or, if it expended less than the
estimated amounts, the money woiild be
retained for later payements.

We feel that the program in this par-
ticular case is more than adequately
taken care of.

The committee recommends a reduc-
tion of $3,940,000. in the appropriation
for readjustment benefits. In that case,
the estimates of the Veterans' Adminis-
tration vary somewhat, because the very
name of the item, readjustment benefits,
means that literally. The Veterans'
Administration estimates the amoimt
necessary for that item as best it knows
how, but sometimes it is off in its esti-
mate by a small percentage. The item
is necessary because of the mandatory
provisions of law. The- Veterans' Ad-
ministration cannot estimate exactly its
needs for each year, and when the Ad-
ministration is short of funds, it requests
supplemental amounts.

Tht committee recommended a reduc-
tion of $2,000 from the amount provided
by the House for the National Capital
Housing Authority, putting the appro-
priation back to the 1957 level.

Some Increases were provided in lan-
guage amendments to cover limitations
on travel expenses and limitations on
administrative expenses, as well as ad-
ditional automobiles for Selective Serv-
ice and Veterans' Administration.

Among other language amendments
is one Involving the restoration of a pro-
viso exempting from conflict-of -Interests
statutes the members of the Interna-
tional Organization Employees Loyalty
Board under the Civil Service Commis-
sion.

The committee Inserted a new proviso
prohibiting during the year the use of
funds for a proposed new Federal Office
Building No. 7. There is pending con-
demnation proceedings to acquire the
whola block in the vicinity of Jackson
Place, 17th Street, Pennsylvania Ave-
nue, and H Street. It involves the con-
demnation of many buildings with
which many Senators are familiar. I
refer to the block on the west side of
Lafayette Square, in which Is located the
headquarters for the National Grange,

the Decatur House. Bnxddngs Institu-
tion, the old Court of Claims Building,
and the Blair House. I refer to the
block containing those buildings.

It was found that the General Serv-
ices Administration was not quite ready
with its plans for the use of that square,'
which would disrupt such organizations
as the headquarters for the National
Grange. The committee thought we
could wait at least a year, or until there
was something more definite regarding
that particular plan.

The committee restored a proviso au-
thorizing the unused balance to be ap-
plied to contracts for public buildings.
That would come under the Lease-
Purchase Act. The General Services
Administrator felt he needed that leeway
or fiexibllity.

The committee restored language to
permit the continuation of available
funds of $145,700,000, plus $6,500,000 an-
ticipated recoveries, or a total of $152.2
million, for operations of the General
Services Administration under the stock-
piling program. The budget estimate
figure was $130 million. The House pro-
vided $19 million. That item was lost
on the floor. The committee felt the
stockpiling program should proceed.

The testimony will show — I do not
think this is classified information — ^that
we are well along with the completion of
certain items in the stockpile. This is a
program the General Services Admin-
istration conducts at the behest of the
Office of Defense Mobilization. They
have, as I have said, $152 million in
carryovers and recoveries, with which
to continue the program. We felt that
was sufficient, and the officials of the
General Services Administration were in
agreement with us. So we inserted
language to permit them to continue the
program.

We inserted a provision giving the
General Services Administrator author-
ity for a 5 -percent transfer between
operating expenses, but with an aggre-
gate limitation of $5 mlllioh. This
agency is, of course, comparatively new
as Government agencies go. It has been
given more and more work to do. It does
much work on behalf of other agencies.
We felt there should be some fiexibility
within the discretion of the Administra-
tor to transfer operating expense funds.

We inserted a proviso for 10 field po-
sitions at GS-16. There was strong
testimony as to the need for aid in better
administration. This will not result in
the hiring of additional personnel.

We inserted a provision authorizing
the continuance of the real-property in-
ventory, and the printing of such inven-
tory as a Senate document. This was a
directive which the Senate Committee
on Appropriations Itself made to the
General Services Administration In last
year's appropriation bill and in previous
years.

As to the National Science Foundation,
the House had earmarked a limitation
on the funds for the program for hlgh-
school science and mathematics teachers
imder the program. We took that out
of the bill, and again gave some flexi-
bility to the National Science Founda-
tion, to permit it to carry on Its program,
which the members of the committee felt

>ii.

i:P

e'*.

.A r%^^f

[I

I'll

jHil

8902

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

jvpas most Important It Is a program
in the Arid of science and mathematics,
and affects teachers engaged m work
liavlng to do with the buic tenets of
physics, mathematics, and science In the
high schools. The appropriation will
enable the Poxmdatlon to embark upon
the program nationwide.

We deleted the earmarking for regis-
tration, classification, and induction ac-
liritles of local boards under the Selec-
tive Service System. The committee
strongly recommends that the Adminis-
trator take a good look Into the possi-
bility of consolidating throughout the
United States many of the selective-
service boards. There still are in exist-
ence some 4,000 such boards. Many of
them meet only two or three times a
year. It is thought that in many cases
the county boards could be consolidated,
and some money could be saved.

I have pointed out the earmarking of
medical research under the Veterans' Ad-
ministration. The amount recommended
includes also $344,000 for mandatory
payments to the civil service retirement
fund, so it is a $1 milliion Increase for
research. This $344,000 is a mandatory
payment which the Veterans' Adminis-
tration must make in that particular
branch of its administration.

I have covered the decreases In the
committee amendments. Unless there
are questions to be asked. I ask unani-
mous consent that the committee amend-
ments be agreed to en bloc, that the bill.
as thus amended, be considered for the
purpose of amendment as the original
text, and that no points of order be
waived.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Ls there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
It is so ordered.

The amendments agreed to en bloc are
as follows:

Under the heading '"ntle I — Independent
Offices — Civil Service Commission." on pace
3. line 23, after the word "perlormed". to In-
eert a colon and "Provided further. That
nothing In section* 281 or 233 of title 18.
United SUtes Code, or In section 190 of the
RevUed Statutes (5 D. S. C. 99) shall be
deemed to apply to any person because of
appointment for part-time or Intermittent
service as a member of the International
Organizations Employees Loyalty Board In
the Civil Service Commission as established
by Executive Order 10422, dated January 9.
1353. as amended."

On page 4. line 9, after "(64 Stat. 465) •. to
■trlie out ■•»2.300.000'" and Imert ■•t2.417.000."

Under the heading "Federal Civil Defense
Administration", on page 5, line 5. after the
word "exceed", to strike out "$598,000" and
insert ••$800,000."

Under the heading •"Federal Power Com-
mission'. on pa^e 7. line 10. after the word
'"exceed", to strlJte out "•$325,000"' and Insert
•■W35.000.""

Under the heading "Federal Trade Com-
mission", on page 7, at the beginning of line
19, to strike out "$237,000" and insert
••$251,250."

Under the heading "General Accounting
Office"', on page 8. line 5. after the word "ex-
ceed ", to strike out •$1,500,000" and insert
'"$1,600,000 "■

Under the heading "General Services Ad-
ministration", on page 8, line 20. after the
word "exceed", to strike out '•$205,300" and
Insert '•$238,650'". and In the same line, after
the word "travel", to strike out "$127,464,000"
•nd Insert "$133,214,000."

On page 9. line 10. after the word ""exceed".
to strike out ""$250, COO" and insert $270,000."

On page 10. line «. after "(40 U. S. C. 341)".
to Insert a colon and "Provided. That no part
of sucli funds ahaU be used during the cur-
rent fiscal year for preparation of drawings
and specifications, acqulslilon of sites, de-
sign, planning, construction, or In any other
manner for or In connection with proposed
Federal office building Numbered 7 on square
187 In the District of Coltmibla (project
Numbered 3-DC-05, General Services Admin-
istration prospectus subniitted July 13,
1956)."'

On page 10, line 18. after the figures
"$1,331,100", to Insert a colon and "Provided,
That the Administrator of General Services
may enter Into contracts during the fiscal
year 1958 for which the aggregate of annual
payments for amortization of principal and
interest thereon shall not exceed the unused
portion of the $12,000,000 llmltiiilon appli-
cable prior to July 1, 1957. under the Inde-
pendent Offices Appropriation Act. 1957 (70
Stat. 343)."'

On page 11. line 2. after '•(40 U. S C 34n".
to strike out '"$2,125,000" and Insert '"$3,
145.000."'

On page 11. after line 3. to Insert:

"Hospital facilities In the District of Co-
lumbia: For an addltlun.il amount for ex-
penses necessary In carrying out the provi-
sions of the act of August 7. 19 56 (60 Stat.
896). as amended, authorizing the e.stabllsh-
ment of a hospital center In the District of
Columbl.a, including grants to prlv.\te agen-
cies for hospital facUltlea In said Dl.strlct.
$1,710,000. to remain available until expend-
ed: Provided. That the limitation on the total
amount for completion of the hospital center
is Increased from $21,700,000 to $23,410,000:
Provided further. That this paragraph shall
become effective only upon approval of the
Increased authorization proposed In S. 2194
and or H R 7835, 85th Congress.""

On page 11, line 20. after the word "ex-
ceed"', to strike out ""$120,000" and Insert
"$192,500 ••

On page 12. line 11, after the word '"ex-
ceed"", to strike out "•$110,000'" and Insert
■■$!23,900."'

On pag" 12, lire 20. after the word "ex-
ceed", to <:trlke out ••$44.750^ and In.-iert '"$52,-
WiO". and In line 31. after the word ""travel"',
to strike out "$7,254,500"" and Insert "'$7,263.-
000."

On page 13, line 1, after the word ""exceed".
to strike out "•$25.000' ind insert "$27,500."

On page 13, line 3, after the word ""mate-
rials"', to strike out ""For necessary expenses
In" and Insert "Funds available fo-"; In line
6. after the numerals "1946", to strike out
"Including" and Insert "during the current
fiscal year shall be available for"; in line 9.
after the word •materials", to Insert 'estab-
lishment and operation of a buying station
at Santa Fe. N. M?x., to handle purchases of
mica under the General Services Adminis-
tration purchase programs for domestic mica.
estab!l.<^hed pursHant to the Defense Produc-
tion Act of 19,S0. as anr>ended,", and In line
23, after ""(7 U. S. C. 1704 (b))", to strike
out the comma and "to remain available
untU expended.'

On page 15. line 14, after the word '•ex-
ceed ", to strike out "$10,230,000" and Insert
"•$10,830,000", and In line 15, after the word
"exceed", to strike out "$137,700" and Insert
•"$168,900 "'

At the top of page 17, to Insert:

"Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropria-
tion made available to the General Services
Administration for the current fiscal year
by this act may be transferred to any other
such appropriation, but no such appropria-
tion shall be thereby Increased more than 6
percent: Provided. That such transfers shall
apply only to operating expenses, and shall
not exceed in the aggregate the amount of
•5.000,000."

On page 17. after line 7. to Insert:

"The Administrator is authorised, without
regard to the Classification Act of 1949. as
amended, to place 10 positions at the field

level. In addition to those otherwise author-
ized. In grade GS-16 In the general schedule
established by said act."

Under the heading "Housing and Home
Finance Agency — OflBce of the Administra-
tor", on page 17. line 19. after the word
"travel", to Insert "The salary of a general
counsel, but not in addition to staff other-
wise authorized, which shall hereafter be at
the salary rate of grade GS-18;" and on page
18. line 17. after the word "exceed", to strike
out "$1. 500.000"" and Insert "$2 000.000."

On paje 18. after line 18, to Insert:

"ADMLNISTKATn-l rXPENSES. HOtTSINO BTPOira

"For administrative expenses In carrying
out the program authorized by Fectlon 603
of the Housing Act of 1956 (70 Stat. 1113),
$130 000, to remain available until June 30,
1D58."

Under the heading '"Interstate Commerce
Commission", on page 19. line 23. after the
word "exceed", to strike out "$200"' and in-
sert '$500'". In line 22. after the amendment
Just above stated, to In.sert "uniforms or
allowances therefor, as authorized by law;
purchase of not to exceed 80 passenger
motor vehicles of which 63 shall be for
replacement only"'; on page 20, at the be-
ginning of line 1, to strike out "$1,085,000"
and Insert "$1,185,000"'. and In the same line,
after the word "travel", to strike out "$16,-
600.000" and Insert ""$17,000,000""; In line 3.
after the word "which", to Insert '"(a)"; in
the same line, after the word "than", to
strike out "$1.350 000" and insert '$1,303,-
500^; In line 4, after the word "than', to
strike out ""$960,000" and insert "$956,600"';
in line 6. after the word "activities", to strike
out the colon and "Prortdcd, Thr.t no part of
the foregoing funds" and Insert ""(b) $225.-
000". and In line 10. after the word "Pro-
vided", to strike out -further"

Under the heading "National Advisory
Committee for Aeronautics"", on page 30. line
17. after the word "contracts'", to insert 'for
the making of special Investigation and re-
ports and"; in line 19, after the word "ex-
ceed", to strike out '"$330,444" and Insert
"$425,000"; Bt the beginning of line 21, to
Insert "purchase of 10 passenger motor ve-
hicles for replacement only", and on page
31, line 3. after "(5 D. S. C. Ma)", to strike
out ""$70,000,000" and Insert '"$71,000,000.""

Under the he.iding " National Capital Hous-
ing Authority", on page 21, line 11, after
the word ""Act", to strike out "$10,000" and
Insert "$38,000"

Under the heading "Nfttlonal Science
Foundation", on page 23, line 3, after the
word 'exceed"", to strike out "$150,000" and
Insert "'$300,000 "; In Une 4, after the word
"exceed", to strike out $300°' and Insert
$400 ", and in line 7, after the word '"ex-
pended ", to strike out the colon and "Pro-
tided. That of the foregoing amount not less
than $9,500,000 shall be available for tuition.
grants, and allowances In connection with a
program of supplementary training for high
school science and mathematics teachers."

Under the heading ""Securities and Ex-
change Commission'", on pf.ge 22. line 23.
after the word ""exceed'", to strike out "$197.-
600"" and Insert "$241,000 "

Under the heading "Selective Service Sys-
tem." on paK;e 23. line 9, after the word "ex-
penses"", to insert "purchase of 44 passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only. Includ-
ing 1 St not to exceed $4,000;", and In line
14. after the word "Provided", to strike out
"That of the foregoing amount $19,410,000
shall be available for registration, classifica-
tion, and Induction activities of local boards;
Proridcd further "

Under the heading '"Veterans' Administra-
tion," on page 34, line 12. after the word
"law", to in.sert "piurhase of 6 passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only, includ-
ing 1 at not to exceed $5,000;". and in line 16.
after the word "which", to strike out ""•18.-
500.000' and Insert "$17,500,000."

On page 25, line 7, after the word "exceed",
to strike out "$992,200"" and Insert "fl.lOO.-

Ql%i\M

rnMrii?F<:<;mMAT nFrnpn <;fmattr

.hirtp. 17

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8903

000"; In Hue 14, after the word "equipment",
to strike out "$20,773,800" and Insert "$32,-
763 400", and in line 15. after the word
•"Which", to strike out "$10 million" and
Insert ""$11,344,000.-

On page 26. line 4. after the word "ma-
terials"", to Insert '"ptirchase of 100 pas-
senger motor vehicles for replacement only."

On page 28, Une 1, after "(38 U. 8. C. 631
and 661 ". to strike out "$3,840,600,000 " and
insert ""$2,826,250,000."

On page 28. line 11, after the numerals
"1956". to strike out "$787,987,000" and In-
sert "$784,047,000."

Under the heading "Independent Office^^
General Provisions." on page 33, after line
23, to insert:

'Sec. 109. The detailed Information from
the annual Inventory report on real prop-
erty currently being compiled by the General
Services Administration shall continue to be
furnished to the Committees on Appropria-
tions and Government Operations of the
Senate and House and summary statements
and tabulations therefrom hereafter Issued
annually as Senate documents."

Under the heading "Title II — Corpora-
tions— Federal Home Loan Bank Board," on
page 34, line 19, after the word ""of", to strike
out '"$1,200,000" and Insert "$1,300,000."

On page 36. line 13. after the word "ex-
ceed ", to Btrlk-e out "$650,000" and insert
••|7iX).0O0."

Under the heading "Housing and Home
Finance Agency," on page 37, line 14, after
the word "exceed", to strike out "$1,337,000"
and Insert "$1,437,000."

On page 38, at the beginning of line 18, to
strike out "$970,000" and insert "$1,940,000".
and on page 39. line 6, after the word
'"States"", to strike out the colon and "Pro-
vided. That all expenses, not otherwise spe-
cincally limited In connection with the pro-
grams provided for under this head shall not
exceed $500,000, but this limitation shall not
apply to expenses (other than for personal
services) in connection with disposition of
Icderally owned projects."

On page 41, line 10, after the word "exceed".
to strike out ""$12,305,000" and Insert "$13.-
170,000.-

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President. I wish
to offer one amendment to the bill. I
offer it with the concurrence of the
chairman and members of the commit-
tee. It relates to an Item which comes
under the General Services Administra-
tion, and proposes, on page 13, line 2, to
strike out "$1,330,000" and insert
••$1,700,000."

The effect of the amendment would
be to Increase by $370,000 the Item 'or
operating expenses, under Transporta-
tion and Public Utilities Service, for the
General Services Administration. The
figure now in the bill was the result of
a clear Inadvertence on the part of the
committee. The committee agreed that
the item should be Increased.

These funds are used by the GSA to
appear on behalf of various agencies of
Government before the rate-making
bodies with respect to transportation
and utility management. I think their
record has been exceedingly good. They
anticipate that with these funds they
will probably save in the neighborhood
of $9 million or more. I believe Mr.
Floete and his associates have done an
exceedingly fine piece of work in this
field. We wish to restore the $370,000 to
the total amount for the General Serv-
ices Administration.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President. It
was an inadvertence, because in this
particular cast, as the Senator from Illi-
nois will remember, a year ago the Com-

mittee on Appropriations was very criti-
cal of the General Services Administra-
tion for not appearing on behalf of the
Government in cases involving rate in-
creases.

Inasmuch as the Government Is the
biggest buyer of transportation in the
world, we felt that the public interest
should be protected, and this appropria-
tion is for that purpose. The General
Services Administration have set them-
selves to that task.

As the Senator from Illinois has point-
ed out, I think they have saved the Gov-
ernment much money in the long pull,
"nils appropriation is to enable the Gen-
eral Services Administration to continue
a very important feature of their opera-
tions. I shall be glad to accept the
amendment.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Mor-
ton in the chair). The question is on
agreeing to the amendment offered by
the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Dirkskn].

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, In
connection with the item for the Securi-
ties and Exchange Commission, I wish
to offer a very brief memorandum for the
Record. The Senate increased the travel
limitation applying to the Securities
and Exchange Commission. They were
allowed additional personnel, but the ef-
fectiveness of the personnel will be meas-
ured In large degree by the amount of
field work they can do in pursuing the
various complaints and problems which
come before the Commission.

The Commission has done a notable
piece of work, especially so imder the
chairmanship of Mr. J. Sinclair Arm-
strong, who has now advanced to the
post of Assistant Secretary of the Navy,
He has made this Commission a very
effective agency in the field.

There has been a tremendous growth
of their business. They need the travel
money recommended. While we did not
allow all they said was required, I be-
lieve we gave them about one-half of
their request for travel expenses.

In that connection, Mr. President. I
ask unanimous consent to have printed
in the Record, only for the purpose of
having It available when the bill goes to
conference, so that we can make the
case with the conferees, the statement I
send to the desk.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

STATIMINT in StJPPOKT OF SENATE COMB«TTEB

ON Appropriations Recommendation por
SEcuRrriEs and Exchange Travel Limita-
tion

The effectiveness of the Securities and Ex-
change Commission's accelerated enforce-
ment program depends upon two key fac-
tors: (1) Maintaining a staff adequate to
discharge the exacting duties of the pro-
gram; and (2) availabUity of travel funds to
give this personnel the mobUity necessary to
cover the large geographical areas In which
the investigative work must be accomplished.
The Senate Appropriations Committee has
confirmed the House bill, which provides
funds for 92 additional employees for the
fiscal year 1958. The Senate's recommended
travel limitation for the Securities and Ex-
chamge Commission of $241,000 Is absolutely
essential If the Commission is to continue
to conduct its fraud investigations and brok-
er-dealer inspections. These cannot be done
by the staff sitting In their offices. Investi-

gators and Inspectors have to go to wltnessea
If they are to collect evidence, and visit
broker-dealer's offices if they are to inspect.

It Is my tmderstandlng that the Com-
mission requested a travel limitation of $384.-
600, CM- an $87,000 increase over that pro-
vided for fiscal 1957. The Senate Appro-
priations Committee has allowed an Increase
of $43,500 or, one-half of the reqtiested In-
crease. No one is more In favor of economy
of operation In Government than I am. The
Congressional policy for the protection of
the investing public against misrepresenta-
tion, fraud, manipulation and other abuses,
which contributed to the economic collapse
in the 1930'8, reqtilres the ConE;ress In the
public Interest to continue to support the
Sectirlties and Exchange Comnnlsslon In thla
moet essential area of law enforcement.

I urgently appeal to my colleagues of the
Senate, to stistaln the committee's recom-
mendation of $241,000 iot travel of the Se-
ctirlties and Exchange Commission.

Mr. MAGNUSON. For the Record. I
may say that in that case the committee
Increased only the travel limitation,
from $197,500 to $241,000. This has be-
come a very Important part of the work
of the Commission.

Mr. DIRKSEN. The Senator is cor-

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President. I
submit another amendment, with which
the Senator from Illinois is familiar, I
believe. I offer an amendment relating
to a matter which arose since the com-
mittee met, which involves the sum of
$35,000 for the Selective Service System.
The amendment speaks for itself.

The PRESIDING OFFICER- The
clerk will state the amendment.

The Legislative Clerk. On page 23,
line 14, after the numeral "$27,000,000,"
it is proposed to insert the following:
"together with $35,000 of the imobll-
gated balance of funds appropriated for
this purpose in the 'Independent OflBces
Appropriation Act, 1957,' for the National
Advisory Committee on the Selection of
Doctors, Dentists, and Allied Specialists,
of which not to exceed $4,000 may be
used for travel."

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent to have printed
in the Record a letter from General
Hershey explaining this proposed
amendment. There has been estab-
lished and is now in process of opera-
tion, a national advisory committee on
the drafting of doctors, which is a very
important matter. Because this item
was not in the budget, and affects a new
branch of the Selective Service System,
it can be very helpful in dealing with
the knotty problem of what to do about
the drafting of medical persormel. The
amendment would provide only a suflB-
cient amount to take care of the small
needs of the advisory committee.

There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

National Headquarters.

Selective Service Ststem.
Washington, D. C, June 11, 1957.
The Honorable Carl Hatden,

Chairman, Committee on Appropria-
tions, United States Senate.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Reference Is made to
H. R. 6070, the Independent offices' appro-
priation bri, in which is included the Selec-
tive Service System appropriation for 1D58.

No provision was made in this bill to pro-
vide funds for the National Advisory Com-
mittee, set up under the so-called doctors

^j^-

i. I

' \ ■

Qi'

] i

It

i| -.rif

*i">

V i:

mi%

t n

*.-•>; ■•

4--VI:

■.ii ♦' .

1957

CONf;RF<v<;inMAT nvmnn cinMiTn

qoae:

8904

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

draft Uw. whlcii la due to expire June 30,
1957.

It now appaars that H. R. 8548, 85th Con-
gr^ss. to amend the nnlversal MUU&ry
Training and Service Act. aa amended, aa
regaxda persons in medical, dental, and
allied apeclallst categortea, will be enacted
into law. Thla bill would, among other
things, reinstate the Advlaory Committee.
Aa stated above no funds for this comnrlt-
tee are In the present appropriation bill
for 1958.

In order to provide funds in fiscal year
1958 for this committee we would like to
be authorized to expend unobligated funda
appropriated for the tise of the con^mlttee
In fiscal year 1957, in the amount of $35,000.

This would be possible If the Senate print
or H. R. 6070 of June 7. 1957, Is amended as
below.

On page 23, line 14 after "$27,000,000.-
Insert the following: "together with $35,000
of the unobligated balance of funds appro-
priated for this purpose In the "Independ-
ent OflSces" ApprcprUtlon Art, 1957' f-ir the
National Advisory Oommlttee on the Selec-
tion of Doctors. Dentists, and Allied Special-
ists, of which not to exceed $4,000 may be
used for travel."

We would request this amendment be In-
serted in the Independent offices' appropria-
tion bill for 1958.

Sincerely yours.

Lrwis B. HsMireT, Director.

The PRESroiNO OFFICER. The

question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment of the Senator from Washington
[Mr. M.^crrDSONl.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Mr. President. I send to the desk an
amendment which I offer on behalf of
myself and the Senator from Virginia
[Mr. Robertson).

The Senator from Virginia who serves
on the Committee on Appropriations,
deals with matters of this kind. Since
I am the chairman of the Committee on
Post OflQce and Civil Service. I also deal
with matters pertaining to insurance.

I should like to invite the attention of
the Senate to the fact that a similar
amendment to the one I am submittmg
was adopted by the Senate In the form
of a bill, and has already been sent to
the House. It was reported unanimously
from the Post Office and Civil Service
Committee. The purpose was to take
care of those Insurance companies which
have zMt already been taken over. Some
have teen taken over, and others have
not

I invite the attention of Senators to the
fact that this amendment will not neces-
sitate any appropriation. The money
will be taken out of the insurance fund,
which has accumulated, up to the present
time, to approximately $100 million. We
think it is absolutely necessary to treat
all the employees alike, and to treat all
the insurance companies alike.

I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the Record at this point as, a
part of my remarks, a statement from
the Civil Service Commission which
.shows the necessity of enactins such
lo'-;islation at this time. It must be done
immediately, because the time within
which the insurance companies can be
taken over will soon expire. That bein?
so. I ask the chairman of the subcommit-
tee to take the amendment to conference.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the request of the Senator
from South Carolina?

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
KficoRD, as follows :

ExrzNsz LnfrrATioir

ADMINISTKATTVE EXPENSES — EMrLOTETS' tin
INSUaANCK rTJND

General statement

The Federal Employees* Group Life Insur-
ance Act (5 U. S C 209frt (as amended by
Public Law 3o6. 84th Cong. (69 Stat. 676),
August 11. 19551. provides that the em-
ployees' life-Insurance fund is available for
any expenses incurred by the Civil Service
Commlision la the administration of the
act within such Umltatl ms as may be speci-
fied annually In npprnprlatlon acts.

There are approxln-.ately 2.150,000 em-
ployee participants In thla country and over-
seas. This Is approximately 98 percent of
the employee* who are eligible. Estimated
insurance coverage for this group Is $10 bil-
lion.

By August 17. 1357. approximately 149.000
members of 25 F^^d -ril and District of C >-
luni'^U emj^'.cyee brneflchil ass >clatlor'.s with
B.ssets of appr'ixlmRtely $18 million and In-
surance coverage of approximately $221 mil-
Hen will also be In.sur^d because of the
August 11. 1955. amendment to the law,
which authorized the assumption by the l.ie-
Insurance fund of li^surance agreements of
emplnyce beneficial associations a:;d per-
mltteci Insura.ice ccveratje for empl ^yees now
In Federal service. C vera^re under the origi-
nal law was limited to retired and separated
employees only.

Thrnijch June 30. 1958. $117,100,000 was
withheld from the salaries of employers cov-
ered under the regular program and de-
posited into the fund. The Government CiHi-
tributj-d t58.5;0.000 to the fund fur this
group. It is estimated th;it in fiscal year
1958. $66 700.000 will be paid Into the fund
by these r-.embers. and $3J .150.000 by the
Government. Emp;oyees In thla group con-
tribute 25 cents per $1.0O<J of insurance each
biweekly pay period, and the Government
c )ntribiues one-half that amount.

Through June 30. 1956, $83,200,000 has
been paid under the policy in life-insurance
benefits to survivors of Insured members and
In dlsmpmberm?nt benefits to injured m^^m-
bers. There are approximately $13 mllllnn
In accrued benefits awaiting the filing of
papers and claims. It Is estimated th.-it $«0
mint' n In life-Insurance and dtsmemberm.ent
benefits will be paid out In fiscal year 1958.

Most of the difference between receipts and
benefit payments under the p'jUcy Is placed
by the Insurer in a contingency fund which
la used primarily to pay benefits accruing to
the survivors of retirees — a group which will
rapidly Increase as more Insured employees
reach retirement age As of November 18.
1955. the end of tha laat completed policy
year for which an accounting has been made,
there was a to»al reserve of $50,779,000. of
which 847.633.600 was held as a special con-
tingency reserve by the Insurer at Interest,
and $3,145,400 was on deposit In the Treasury
of the United States.

Through June 30. 1958. Individuals whose
beneficial life-insurance agreements have
been a.ssumed by the fund paid $248,900 Into
the fund It Is estimated thst In fi?cal year
1958. $1,700 000 win be paid Into the f\md
bv this group. Former members of benefi-
cial asstictations continue to pay premiums
according to the rate schedules In effect at
the time their Hfe-lnsuranco agreements
were assumed by the ^Jnd. but the Go\-ern-
ment mattes no current contributions to the
fund for these Individuals as It does for em-
ployees covered under the regular program.

There Is no contingency reserve fund to b«
held by the Insurer under the policy cover-
ing members of beneficial aasoclatlons.
That policy calls for a refund to the Com-
mission at fhe end of a policy year of any
premiums In excess of the total of claim

expense, and risk charges under the policy.
The refunded premium would be deposited
In the TJ-easury of the United States to th«
credit of the employees' life Insurance fund.
Vo such refund Is due as yet because the
first policy year does not end until Decem-
ber 31, 1956.

Forecast of tupplemental requeat for in-
crease in administrative expen»t limita-
tion for fiscal year 1957

Total required 1957 $194,000

Present llmlUtlon. 1957 m, 500

Increase In limitation. 1957 76.600

The Commission had to discontinue nego-
tiations for assumption of the 9 remaining
beneficial associations comprising 85.C03
members In fiscal year 1958 because the
amount allowed In the adminlstra'.lve ex-
pense limitation was Inaufflclcnt to perm^lt
completion cf this work. Also In fiscal year
1j57. the expense limitation Is InsuClclent to
permit the assumption of the remaining
be.-.cficlal aisocUtlons. The assumption of
the Insurance agreements of members of
Federal and D..»tr!ct of Columbia employe©
beneficial asjoclatluus Includes the cost In-
volved In setting up Individual records a«
well as preparing mtlces of premium* due.
and receiving, dcixjsitlng. and •ocountlng
for Individual premium payments. The ex-
pense limitation requested f ir fl.sc.U year 1958
does n )t Include an amount to provide for
talceover costs. The Increase In fl.scal year
1358 covers only the amount needed to fully
maintain the additional 05.000 members of
the 9 employee bcnehcial af»ocia;ion* not
>tt In the prcgrani.

i«uaL\Tivx JurrmcA-r.ON

Fund requirement!^ for administrative
expenres

The e.^tlmates for admlnL"<tratlve expenses
for n cal years 1937 and 1958, shown on the
comparative summary statement, are based
on actual experience during 1956. and ex-
pected workloads la ILical years 1957 and
1958.

The August 1955 amendment resulted In
25 beneficial association* with a riembershlp
of approximately 149.000 becoming ellgibla
for assumption by the life-insurance fund of
their life-insurance agreements. In fiscal
year 1958 the administrative expense Umlta-
Uon was Inadequate to handle this antici-
pated additional workload. During that
y?ar the fund assumed 16 beneficial associa-
tions with approximately 54.000 members, as-
seu of approximately $5 million, and Insur-
ance coverage of approximately $83 million.
Because the limitation was Inadequate, tt
was necessary to discontinue negotUttona
for the MBumptlon In fiscal year 1868 of the
remaining beneficial ar.aoclatlons with ap-
proximately 95.000 members. Likewise In
fiscal year 1957. funds avaUable do not pro-
vide a sufficient amount to take over the re-
maining beneficial aseoclatlons.

With the exception of tke oontrlbutton to
the retirement fund, the increaae requeeted
la needed to defray the coet of eerrlclng 9
additional beneficial aseocUUons with ap-
proximately 95,000 members. Requlremenu
for fiscal year 1958 are as follows:

Fiscal year 1957 expense llmlU-

Uon $117. 500

Increase for contribution to re-
tirement fund 11, 800

Additional requirements for main-
tenance coats resulting from the
asBumptlon of approximately
95,000 members of 9 benetlclal
aasoclatlons 103, WO

Total estimate for fiscal

year 1958 233,000

The amount shown in the summary table
on page 138 un<ter "Other contractual eerv-
Ices" reflecU the ctsu of services performed
and materials purch.ased by the Civil Serv-
ice Commission for which the Commission

nois Will remember, a year ago the com- by the stair sitting in tneir omces. invesu- mitiee, sex up unaer tne so-cauea aocwra

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECX)RD — SENATE

8905

will be reimbursed by the employees* life-
insurance fund.

A number of functions are required by law
to be carried out by the Commission. Among
the more Important ones are:

1. The purchase of a group policy from a
private Insurance company to provide the
benefits authorized.

2. Determining or redetermining that the
insurer and reinsurers meet the eligibility
conditions for carrying the policies under
which Federal employees are hibured.

3. Arranging for assumption by the life-
insurance fund of life-insurance agreements
of certain Federal and District of Columbia
employee beneficial associations for the mem-
bers; determining that the proper amount
of asset* Is received by the fund from the
associations; and collecting premiums there-
after from eligible Individuals for Insxor-
ance imder the group program.

4 Determining eligibility of employees re-
tiring under the CivU Service retirement
byst^-m and other Federal civilian retire-
ment systems for continuance of their life
Insurance alter retirement without cost to
them.

5 Arranging for Insured Individuals to re-
ceive appropriate certificates, notices, and
information concerning their rights, privi-
leges, and benefits.

6 Auditing the claim, mortality, expense,
and risk charges of the insurance company
and the office established under the program
for payment of benefits.

7 Preecrlblng the operating regulations.
rules procedure, and form for the Commia-
Eln. employing agencies, and Individuals.

8. Developing and maintaining financial
and statistical data for management use. and
for annual reporting to the Congress.

9 Receiving and accounting for employee
withholdings and agency contributions to
the fund, and maintaining necesaary con-
trol accounts and records.

10. Answering Inquiries from Individuals
and agencies on Insurance matters.

Under the program, all insurance paymente
to claimants are settled by an administra-
tjve office of the Insurer upon receipt of cer-
tification of the Insurance status of the per-
son on whose account the claim is being
made In the case of an employee not re-
tired, the certification Is made by the last
employing office, and it is unnecessary for
the Commlaaion to be Involved In any rec-

ordkeeping for such individual. In tha
case of retired employeea. and those Indi-
viduals Insured because of the assumption of
life-insurance agreements of beneficial as-
sociations, the Commission acts as the cen-
tral agency for certification of Insurance
status at the time of death of the insured.
Because the Commission already has all nec-
essary records, obtained from employing
agencies at retirement, or at time of tak-
ing over the beneficial associations' life-in-
surance agreements, there la some individual
recordkeeping In these cases.

The Commission administers the Civil
Service Retirement Act as well as the Fed-
eral Employees' Group Life Insurance Act.
The retirement and Insurance activltlea are
cloaely related and many of the day-to-day
Insurance functions affecting rights, bene-
fits, and privileges of Individuals are per-
formed by the "tm* employees who perform
retirement functions. Employees who per-
form both functions allocate time and cost
to each activity as the work requires.

appropriation: emplotees' lite insurance

FUND administrative EXPENSE LIMITATION—
nSCAL YEAR 1857

General statement
The figures below show the total require-
ments, the present limitation, and the
amount of Increase for which this request
Is being made:

Total reqtitred, fiscal year 1957 $194,000

Present limitation, fiscal year 1957. 117, 500

Increase In limitation, fiscal
year 1957

78.500

The Federal Employees' Group Life In-
surance Act (6 U. 8. C. 209, fl., aa amended
by Public La-v 356. 84th Cong , 69 Stat. 676.
Aug. 11, 1956) provides that the employees'
life Insurance fund Is avaUable for any ex-
penses Incurred by the Civil Service Commis-
sion In the administration of the act within
such limitation as may be specified annually
In appropriation acts.

The amen'lment of August 1955 author-
lEed the Commisalon to arrange for the as-
sumption by the life Insurance fund of In-
surance agreements of all members of
Federal and District of Columbia employee
beneficial aasodations. Including those mem-
bers BtUl in the Federal service. This re-
sulted in 25 beneficial associations with a

monbershlp of 149,000 becoming eligible for
assumption of their Ufe insurance agree-
ments by the life Insurance fund. However,
the administrative expense limitation au-
thorized for fiscal year 1956 was inadequate
to handle this Increased workload. The
fund assumed 16 beneficial associations with
approximately 54,000 members before funds
were expended to the extent of the limita-
tion. The Commission then discontinued
negotiations for the assumption of the re-
maining 9 beneficial associations with a
membership of approximately 05,000.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
The expense limitation of $117,500 for
fiscal year 1957 is barely sufficient to
maintain the regular Insurance program
for active Federal employees and to serv-
ice the accounts of association members
already assumed by the fund. Unless
additional limitation is provided it will
be impossible to take over the remaining
beneficial associations.

A further delay in taking over these
associations may result in their being
placed in a precarious financial position.
As of this date, some of the associations
are liquidating part of their assets in
order to pay claims to survivors of associ-
ation members. Since there is no pro-
vision for their writing further insurance
agreements, thus bringing younger
members into the organization and pro-
viding cash for the payment of claims,
their financial position will become more
serious as time passes.

Therefore, a request for an increase of
$76,500 in the expense limitation is being
submitted in order that funds will be
available to complete arrangements for
assumption of the remaining associa-
tions before the legal deadline of August
17, 1957. As the expense limitation in-
cluded in the Commission's budget re-
quest for fiscal year 1958 does not pro-
vide for the increased workloads in con-
nection with the assumption of the re-
maining beneficial associations, it is es-
sential that the increased limitation be
made available at the earliest possible
date.

Nummary of Commitsion'g rfforla to obtain ndequate rxprnte limitation to assume an/i service insurance of members of beneficial association$
ns required by amendment to Public Law 598, Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance Act of 1954

r>.it>

Juno an. law

A US 11. Wi

YvU. li. lUSC

yiiy 19. IMC

I>cc. 1(.1!<W

'imf 77, 19.'^e

M if 21,10."

J.in.

,1957

Amount of llmltMmn Miihorized in flscal year

luSft ncprnpriatiori. $«i.'lf«i.
.tir-rnilm^nl to F«?«ieral KiTiiilf)Vo<'s' Oroiip Life

Iii^iiranw Act of IftM. Public Law 356, 84th

fong.
Fiscal year iftV'. 5ii|)p.fiuontai n>guest to Con-

erpss fur f113..ViU liion>ii.<ie in liniitation.

.\moiint of limllation 'nrtrase approvfwl by Con-
irrt«^ !Ti fiscal year ItSti suppieini'ntaJ appro-
l>riation. MT.JKifl.

Flscil yt-ar 1U.'T retrular rerjiiost to Conscrfff in-
rlii'l^ Jl*! ?»> -Ai llw* amount of limitation M
hr aiitliorized to sdni.nistcr the iilc-insuntnce
lunil

Amount of (imitation aiithorlied In fiscal year
la.'iT approtrliUion. $117..wii

¥\sn\\ yi'ar l.f.*)7 siiprlomi-nlal request to Con-
gress lor an iii'Ti-ase of ITii.SOO In the limitation.

FivT\l voar li.'.* r<>c"'!U" rp<iup.«t to Conerosj
lnrhi'l»Hl *2XX.(t*\ for the fTpt-nw llmitatk>a
to a'lmtoisux ibe Ufe-ln^xirancc proKram.

Explanation

Restricted amount to h« expended from lire-iasurance fund for administration of the retnilar prosram of Fed-
eral fmt>loyecs' irroup life insurance.

Aulhori7.<>d the Commis-iion to armnse for a<!sumptian by the .tmd of insunnce agreement.'! lield by 149,000
niernhers of 25i non|>rD6t associations of Federal or District of Columbia employees by Aug. 17, 1957.

The Incrr-ased limitation requested was to eiwble the Commission to assume the Itisurance ssrecments of the
2.^ heneflci.sl associations as provided In Public Law 3.S6. This supplemental estimate was required because
the amendment to the Life Insurance Act was passed on Aug. 11, 1955, after the Commission's reimlar 1956
afiproitriat.on was approved June ,'iO, 1955.

This rp<luce<l amount permitted the Commission to take over only Ifi l>enefl[pfal associat.ons with 54,000 mem-
bers, and it bad to disoontinue ite.f^iations with tlie 9 remainih); associations.

This request Included funds which would be adequate to (I) take over the 9 remaining associations with
9.'t,(X)i) members, (2> administer the refrular Federal employees' life-in$uraQoe profoam, and (3j service all
tiie 149,UUU members of beneficial associations.

This limitation provided only enough funds for maintenance of the regular life-insurance program ana serv-
icinc of the 54.000 members of the 16 associations already taken over.

As fun<is were not provided in the regular fiscal year 19.'>7 appropriation limitation, shown above, the Com-
ml'ston apuln requested funds to enable tt to assume the 95,000 members of the 9 remaining l)eneficial asso-
datiorus. This was the Jd request made to IncretBe the expense limitation for porposes of assomlng the
bcDcflclal associations and. as of Mar. 27, l».'i7, it is still pending in Congress.

ThLs amount would provide for raalntainhig the regnlar program and servictns the full 149,000 memiiership
of the 25 beneficial associatioas. It was based on the as.sumptioTi that fimds will also l>c made avaUable
throiieh the fl.scal year iw.'i7 supplemental request to enable tbe Commission to take over the 9 remaining
associations with ^S,IW meintxTS. The Hoase reduced this amount to $123,sno. The amount of limitation
alloweci in the House bill will not quite t>rovide enough funds to maintain the regular Federal employe**'
program and to service the 54,000 memijers of beneficial associations taken over last fiscal year. Obviously,
this limitation woul<l not provide for servifing an additional 95,000 members which sliould be taken
over If the supplemental appropriation for 19.S7 is approved.

The Commission has made 3 attempts to obtain expenditure aathority to carry out its responsibility under
the amended law; however, in order to carry out the intent of this legislation (Public Law 356, 84th Cong.)
It Ls necessary that (1) the 1957 supplemental request be approved in order to take over the insurance agree-
ments of the" remaining 9 beneficial associations, and (2) the full amount of the fiscal year 1958 request be
restored and authoriied by Congress in order to maintain the whole program as retiu.red by law.

I" ■;-'

1 i. ^B« H7>

^^M,.

1 I- ii !

<t

8906

CONGRISSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

ScHFOri-B A. — Life-inxurance ngre^mrnts axgumed by the Cr)mmi.'<i»ion

June 12

Associdtion

P.»<Tet .^wvlc« Bpneflelal A«oolatlon

I)«»th and Duwhillty I)fi>artinent, VKPOr

Munu-lpaJ Eniplovfvs' Oroup Life Insursnoe A^sociatioa

1.09 An«el(w Post brtlce Kmploypwi -

Iiiimtxllatfi Bfiiftlt A-'iso«'!»tion, Haltlrnon» Hixit ()tlic«

Burtwi Protective .tvsociation i Burton EtiKntvuig aiid Printing)

() f'l) llroiip I.lfp Insuranr* X-yax-latlon

K.iilwsy Mill Mutual Benefit A«<>iiation iChloaeo)

InitTSt ite CoTinierce Coinml.s,sion Club-..

Kmplovf*" Wclfnr* .\.vsoo(atlon, V A

I'Dmmeroe anil Ju.'ftiw Beni'ttcial .Avooiatiou

IVpartnicnt of Lab<ir B»'ni>flrial AssiM'i;if.ion

Wjvth'nstdn Navy Yar 1 itroup Lift< Insiiranrv A-isoc-iation

Posit n'fioe Imnifliate B«'nt>rtt A-<s<x;lation vL>unr:ct of Columbui)

A«icultur» Bt'nertci.al A^Mx-iation

Cuiuiu Bureau Ueneflcul Aistxiatiun .

Total

M»mh«r-

In^uruine

Awt.i

ihip

In foroB

Millinni

^4

».' n-,

$n. 'YT)

r !i»i

;• (1

/-'.I Ml

I. nil

2 1

4, <»>

1. '4«l

1 5

nil. !•»

'tit

. .1

1.1. '»u

! .'r»i

.1

?«. iin

.< oil

« I

J2.1. orn

4, "vi'

7 .'

W^.itt)

.'M

4

.\>i>i

» •<»!

f. «

2T.' nn

1/. .«•!

i: 0

1, 2IMMI

,1.1 »l)

b 1

.Vift.li«l

3.'.*yi)

I, 4

K'l.lll)

1. VW)

1 4

T. Ill)

l,'...::<i

::. H

1,V.M. 'Ifl

Mil

i

4. JO

H.iH

Hi M , &.Uo7, 3U0

ScHEDCLK B — [.{/''-in^uninre iKjrft-tneHl* til hf a^iuTHfil 'ly the Commi^ftorx

A.sstX!i.it:'in

K«TT DopATfoant R«n<>flcial Avnolatkui

\V'»f I>«piu'Uli«iU B«n»rtri«J .imirialKin . ...

Tr*iwnry lV|iiirt'i»«>nl Hwiortrl.kl A'nu<-iatt»n

Motm|M>Jlt«n Pollr* Ri-liff A««nrt.'«tHui

I>*p«rUu«>nl o.' Inl^rn>r H»>n»>ftrl«l .\«<<>rlatloa

(°hiCtt«P) P<V<t 0(T1C* Kll>ll|oV'><V' .\W)Cli4tl<Ul

PhilwIflrvMa Saw Y*rl Oroup I.lfn In.turux* A«ocl»llon

Flr*m«n's F. ;in<l F Ri-ll^f A««orution

hnRoix n. NaLC. Kncuio. C»ii;

Total

111 iir tiuv tluii Ixl.ty lU furui •
A.l I

StiUfiu

.^1 <*<

r K►^

»4«V4

21 t-;

ar. T.'j

*\ II

u. «■:

i: '..'.'

W 1

4. Ill

i. l1^

AO

.\ 'l^-i

\ -.rs

K%

H. «"i

( ,

il

«.::»•

( 1

\i r

>iH)

( 1

.«

Mil

.•

nri<.i7

IJH 0

' Not inclu<leU in sample of prwwnt memNr^hip.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER, The
amendment offered by the Senator from
South Carolina will be stated.

The Legislative Clerk. On pa?e 4.
line U. it is proposed to strike out "$ !?*?,-
800"' and insert "$309,500."

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, this
Is a subject which has given the com-
mittee considerable concern, as it has
concerned the di.stingui.shed Senator
from South CaroUna and his commit-
tee.

Some time ago we embarked upon a
program for Civil Service Commission to
take over various Government-insur-
ance programs. Considerable progress
has been made with the project, but
there are still a few left which have
not been taken over I believe there are
nine left. The fund is a larye one. and
we are tryin? to complete the program.

The Senator from Virginia [Mr. Rob-
ertson] has been vitally intere.sted in
this question. The amendment was
submitted to the committee, and the
committee stayed with the House
amount, but I think we can take this
amendment to conference and obtain
some agreement with the House confer-
ees and the House Appropriations Com-
mittee regarding the entire program.
The sooner it is completed the more
money we shall save, and the better off
the employees who contributed their
money will be. I think it is a good
amendment.

I think the Record should show that
there is a very small attendance of Sen-
ators in the Chamber. Many are at
committee meetings. However, the Sen-
ator from Virginia [Mr. Robertson), as
well as many other Senators, are nec-
essarily absent because a great naval re-
view is in progre.'^s at Hampton Roads.
Many Senators were invited, and felt

' K<tini»tr-1.

that It was very desirable that they be
present. That is why the Senator from
Virginia is not present. Except for the
circumstances I have mentioned. I would
suggest the absence of a quorum at this
time. However, the fact is that the Sen-
ate has already passed a bill similar to
this amendment, and sent it to the
House.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment offered by the Senator from South
Carolina (Mr. Johnston I.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. DIRKSEN Mi President, f^rst
I wish to compliment the distinguished
chairman of the subcommittee on his
diligence and the thoroughness with
which he has gone into the bill.

This is a rather complicated measure,
dealing with all the regulatory agencies
of the Government, as well as the Vet-
erans' Administration, the Housing and
Home Finance Agency, and many others.

The chairman of the subcommittee
has devoted a great deal of time and at-
tention to the bill, and I extern' to him by
felicitations for a job well done.

I have only one comment to make with
resoect to the bill, and it rei?tes to the
Veterans' Administration. I feel that I
should make this comment m order to
disabuse the mind of anyone who may
entertain any fears or appi-ehen-sions
about what may happen In the field of
veterans' readjustments, benefits, and
pen.sions.

When the bill was before the House,
the amount for compensation and pen-
sions was reduced by $149 million. An
examination of the House committee re-
port will disclose that the only reason
was that it was felt that there might
have been an error in the estimates.
After all, these appropriations are based

upon estimates, and the amount set
apart each year for this iteiii depends
upon the attrition in that field, and on
how many veterans' cases will be pre-
sented in the course of the fiscal year In
which pensions and compensation must
be paid.

The House committee evidently felt
that there might have been an error, and
that the Veterans' Administration might
have overestimated the number of cases.
As a result, the appropriation was de-
creased by 5 percent. I think the his-
tory of the Veterans' Administration and
its capacity in this field indicate that
there will not be that much difference
between 1957 and 1958.

Compensation and pensions are on a
contractual basis. They are the respon-
sibility of Government, and they must be
paid. I think the record should bo
made abundantly clear to the veterans,
to their dependents, and to the veterans'
organizations, that as times goes by, if
it is discovered that there are not suf-
ficient funds for the fiscal year to meet
the needs in all the cases which will be
presented, it is the sense of the subcom-
mittee and of the Senate that the Vet-
erans' Administration should, of course,
come forward with a deficiency estimate,
so that sufiBcient funds may be made
available.

This appropriation differs slightly
from other appropriations, in that there
is no fiscal year end In connection with
the appropriation, so the money is avail-
able at a net level, in proportion as the
cases are compensated.

It may be — and I am confident that
this is the probability — that after the
first of the year the Veterans' Admin-
istration will find, on the basis of Its
experience for the first 6 or 7 months of
the fiscal year 1958, that the $149 mil-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8907

lion, or a portion thereof, will be neces-
sary in order to meet the Federal Oovem-
ment's responsibility to veterans. 'We
want the Veterans' Administration to
know the attitude of the subcommittee
and of the Senate. We want the Vet-
erans' Administration to be able to refer
to the Record to show that it Is the sense
of the subconunittee that If additional
funds are required, we shall feel duty-
bound to assist the Veterans' Admin-
istration in expediting the enactment of
a deficiency or a supplemental appropri-
ation bill, so that tiie responsibility of
the Government will be fully met in
veterans' cases.

The same thing Is true with respect to
readjustment benefits. As I recall, there
was a cut of $41 million. The aggregate
in the cases of pensions, compensation,
and readjustment benefits, was $190 mil-
lion. Here again, the Federal Govern-
ment is in a contractual relationship, and
has an abiding obligation to veterans to
carry on the readjustment program. If
it is discovered, after this reduction Is
made, that there are not adequate funds
to carry out every phase and aspect of
the program, the Administrator will sub-
mit to the Bureau of the Budget his re-
quest for a deficiency appropriation, and
it «ill be expeditiously handled when it
comes to the House and Senate in the
calendar year 1958. I wish the record to
be perfectly clear on that point. I am
confident that the chairman and other
members of the subcommittee share the
viewpoint which I have expressed.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President. I
heartily concur in the statement of the

Senator from nilnois. It was the feeling
of the subcommittee that the Govern-
ment must meet Its commitments in con-
nection with these Items. It Is possible
that there may be an overestimate or an
underestimate. However, within 6 or 7
months we shall know a little more ac-
curately what the needs will be. We are
committed to give consideration to any
requests which may be made for ad-
ditional appropriations. No harm will
be done to the program.

I think the Senator from Illinois has
made a fine explanation of the situation.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I may add that the
Veterans* Administration submitted a
table which appears in the Record, In
what we refer to in the Appropriations
Committee as the "side slips," showing
the increase in cases from 1951 to the
estimated numl)er of cases in fiscal 1958.
The total numbers, as presented to the
Senate committee are shown on page 266.
I think it would serve a very useful pur-
pose if that table were printed in the
RxcoKD. as well as the table on page 267.
headed "Comparison of Compensation
and Pension Appropriation. Average
Cases and Total Obligations, Fiscal Years
1956. 1957. and 1958."

I ask unanimous consent that those
tables be printed in the Record at this
point in my remarks.

There being no objection, the tables
were ordered to be printed in the Record.
as follows :

Vetxsans' Administration
coicpcnsatiom and pensions appsopuatiom

JuBtlflcatlon of request for rettoration of
$148,500,000.

The eomptosatloo and pension require-
ment* have steadily Increaaed since 1019 from
a total expenditure of 9233,460,835 to 12,707,-
006.657 In flseal year 1056. There rollows a
summary of cases and expenditures from
fiscal year 1051 through fiscal year 1056, and
In addition an ectlmate for fiscal year 1957
and fiscal year 1958, showing percent In-

Fiscslyear

Averag«
eaaes

Total expendi-
tures

Pwoent
increase

1951

8,051255
S.12MaO
3,252.008
3.366..S68
>. 475, 296
3.525,828
' 3. 623. 724
'3.718,405

C 171, 172, 166
2,180,268,787
2, 419, 245, 173
2.481.503.017
2,«81.726.077
2. 797, 006, 657
2, 896, 000, 000
3.003,000.000

196J

1S>&3

0.4

11.0

2 6

1954

1959

a 1

1056

4.8

3 5

1957

1958

a.7

i Estimated.

The fiscal year 1058 appropriation request
of •a.OOO million, which was baaed on an an-
ticipated carryover from fiscal year 1057 of
around 113 million, was reduced by the Houae
Appropriations Committee by fi percent to a
toUl of 63,840.500.000. This reducUon has
the effect of providing 666.500.000 less for fis-
cal year 1058 than will be expended for fiscal
year 1057, even In view of a steadily increas-
ing cost from year to year as reflected above.

The following detailed table broken be-
tween compensation and pension reflects the
estimated changes by periods of service from
fiscal year 1957 to fiscal year 1058. Prom this
chart, it can readily be seen which categories
are increasing or decreasing trendwlse. The
substantial Increasing roll Is World War I
pension cases as refiected in the chart. The
average age of World War I veterans In clvU
life as of June 30, 1056, is 623 years. Due to
this advanced age. It Is expected that the pen-
sion rolls as covered by this appropriation
will steadily Increase.

%

■ ■ ^^

Comparison of compensation and

pension

appropriation, average cases a

nd total oblioattons, fiscal years 1956, 1957, and 195S

Trend

Actual.

BacaJ year 1956

Difference

£sUmat«d, fls<^l year
1957

Difference

Estimated, fl.<iral year
1958

CAses

Amount

K vpraee
awHcs

Total ohllga-
tlons

Cases

Amount

Average
cases

Total obliga-
tions

Cases

Amount

Average
cases

Total obliga-
tions

Tr>f'\| nhlie;itlonn

{+)

(-)

(-)
(-)
(-)
(+)
(+)

(+)

(-)

(■^)
(+)
(+)
(+)

(+)

(+)

$2. 796. 378, 9«9
1. 863. 751. 780

1. 44S. 979. 809

"iVm

$09,621,011
30.866.230

$2. 896, 000, 000
1.884.618.000

■"-226'

$107, 000, 000
23.803.000

Z 467.903"

$3. ora. 000. 000
1 908. 421 000

Cu.'iilH ii.>at,oll. total..........

(+)

(-)

(-)
(-)
(-)

(4-)
(+)

(+)

(-)

!;!

(+1
(+)

(+)

(4-)

2.464,93.3
2,0M. 1H2

2,468.123

Livng rptprans. total

-1, 141

-2. 978, 809

2.080,041

1. 446, 001. 000

-7,3a3

-6.886,000

2,072.738

1,439.11.5.000

Ppinish-ArnfTifan War...
\\..rM W.ir I

.ri

23S. 21 «

l,613.fiHl

170.270

M. tV47

814.506

222,021, fl77

l,041,30fi,4<)l

l«l. 755. 968

44. OSl. 2.'>7

-42

-!1.7fil

-13.086

20,410

3.338

-103,506

-11.031,677

-8.916,401

14,381,032

2. 691. 743

329

221,442

1,600,605

19f),680
66.985

711,000

210.990,000

1. {XX!.. 390, 000

15.5.137,000

46.773,000

-37

-12,313

-14.601

12,641

7.007

-80.000

-11,481,000

-9. 418. 000

8.333.000

5, 76a 000

292

209.129

1,586.004

203,321

73,992

631,000

199, 509, 000

1. 022. 97Z 000

W..rl(1 War 11

KoiTivn conflict

163, 470, 000

IVorttlnip servipe

52, 533. aX)

Deopn»<l veterans, total

383,751

414. 771, 971

4.331

23,84^029

388,082

438,617.000

7,083

30.089.000

395,165

409,306.000

f^'n^i^h Amfrlcan War...
Worl'l Wv I

1. 170

53. .v,;j

270. (IV,
19. 2S0

1, 12S. 7.V!

fA. 372. U2fi

297.0I9.fin6

42. 898. 9fi0

19, 452. 623

-74

-1,908

1,170

2.073

3,130

-10.7.56
A, 854, 974
8.237.394
2,367.040
7. 396, 377

1.096

51, 595

277.226

35.755

22.410

1,118.000

», 227. OOC

806.157.000

45.260,000

afi, 849. 000

-46

-1.924

4 374

2,499

il80

-3.5,000

8.147.000

11,849.000

3.971.000

9. 757. 000

l.O.V)

49. 671

279,600

38,251

26. .590

1.083,000
64. 37i Ono

\S irl 1 W vr U

Korpan prmnirf

318, 006. 000
49, 237. 000

Pea<'etime serrioe

36. 606. OOiJ

Foil- inns, totnl

I.ntiO. S9,5

HS2. 69.T F.7»5

W.706

80. 705. 324

1.155.601

963.399.000

91901

84.046.000

1. 250. 502

1. 047. 44.5. aw

LIvine vWorans. t«t«l

H'A '43

603. 142. 304

66,9H3

65,098,696

6ea536

668,241,000

71,535

69,232.000

762.071

737,473,000

Y'llow-fprnr expwlmenta
Iri'liin wars

(')
(-)

(1)
(-)
(+)
(+)
(+)
(-)

(+)

\-J
(-)

Si

(+)
(+)

(-)

(')
(-)

0)
(-)

<+
(+)

(+)

(-)

(+)

ti
ti

(+)

1

1

168

1

57. 241

«)6, 740

67, 207

1.S72

310

1,650

228.217

-.5,291

73, 201, 201

474, 457, :«5

53, 422, 4.3fi

1, 77.5. 185

61, .571

0

-29

-1

«-4. 141

64,971

6,371

829

-7

350

-40. 217

.5,291

-5,948,201

64, 780. 665

6, 4.10. ,564

849, 815

-1.671

1

139

0

63,103

571.711

62, .578

2,701

303

2,000

188,000

0

87, 2.55, 000

639.238,000

88,878,000

2,625,000

60.000

0

-27

0

-.5, 103

70,602

6,239

940

-16

0

-37,000

0

-6, 4.'«, 000

69,660.000

6, 214, 000

936.000

-3.000

1

112

0

48,000

642.213

67.817

3,641

287

2,000
151,000

Civil War

0

Hfi'ii'h ^mp^lcan W3r..._

>Vorll War I

NVorl.l W:ir IF

K'ir(>:in ponflirt

fiO, 797, 00-j

606, 818. 000

54,087,000

3,561,000

ri«iTiiiiii' service

67.000

Deoravd votorans, tot.il

4.S7. 3.12

279,551.372

27.713

16, 606, 638

465,06,5

296.158,000

23,366

14, 814, 000

488,431

309,972.000

MeTicnn War ...

Iniliiin w;irs

Civil War

9

1,210

.5,827

81,983

3K.. 74.'i

30,992

491

95

3.992

708.768

S, 238. 915

64,277.533

199, Sn 242

21, 54<-., 244

408,902

36,776

-1

-27

-466

^181

22,212

3,494

325

-6

-992

-19,768

-288.915

262,467

12,992,758

2, 435, 7.56

227,098

-1,776

8

1,183

5,361

84.164

838.957

816
90

3,000

680,000

2, 950, 000

64.540,000

212.323,000

33,982,000

636,000

3^000

-1

-24

-477

-647

90,764

3,193

563

-5

0

-14.000

-241.000

-114,000

12, 575, 000

4 220,000

390.000

-2.000

7

1,159

4.884

83,517

859,721

37,679

1,379

86

3.000

67.5,000
2,709.000

Ht):uii.st» Amorican War

Worl.l War I

World War 11

Knrwui' oontllrt

64.436.O0U

334,898,000

35,202.001)

1,026.000

V-'-ufliiuc HTvice

33,000

VSUtlo.

i Amended award due to overpayment.

n 'H

■^ ^"i:

8908

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

f

I II

I

Comparison of comptntalion and pension appropriation, average caset and total obligations, fiscal years 1956, 1957, and 1958—

Continued

-

Traod

Actuftl, flval year 19M

Difference

Estimated. fl.v*l year
1957

Different

Estimated, fl.val year

19M

CaM

Amount

Average

CHiiMS

Total oMlga-
tiona

Caaes

Amount

A veraee
c:k-ies

Total nhllga-
tlotia

Caaet

Amount

Average
cases

Total ohllc*.
tluoi

Other

(-)

(-)
(-)
(-)

$49. 933. .533

3,S71,369

4.281

2R. 294. ■Jig

17, rsa. j«>4

-117

-S

—2. 24.5

+11.950.553

-lOO, 3«9

-2.281

-2.H72..119
1.((.'4. 4J6

>47, 9K3. 000
8,771.000

2.nr)0

tIS. 422. (irt)
i\7'ei. uoo

-1849. noo

-105.(100

0

-2. 2SS. f^
l.o4t.0U0

(47. 13i000

Bmeritency officers dU-
ablllty retirement
(World W)u- Ii

{-)

(-)

(-)
(+)

1,771

14

22.245
114. 6U)

I,M4
«

an.nrm

li!l..iO0

-4«
-2

-i.«no

7.500

1.Q08
4

ijy. IJUO

3,0(W,noo

Adjusted service and de-
pendent pay

6ubs(5tenoe aJlowance for
dl'tehled veteran trainees-

Initial burial allowanws '..

2.000

23. IJ4.nno
30.33-2.000

» Figures shown represent estimated fiscal year totaLi, not averaares.

The PRESIDINa OFFICER. The
bill is open to further amendment.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. DIRKSEN. I yield.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I was discussing
earlier with the Senator from Washing-
ton the claim of a $525 million saving on
the retirement item. I am not criticizing
what the committee has done, because
the committee was following the law. I
voted for that law about a year ago. It
compels the various agencies of the Gov-
ernment to pay into the retirement fund
the Governments proportionate part of
the retirement cost.

I am referring to page 10 of the com-
mittee report. The report shows no ap-
propriation for the civil-service retire-
ment fund, although last year there was
a contribution of $525 million. The re-
port then claims a saving of $525 million
this year.

The point I make is that this is not a
true saving. It is not a saving below
last year's appropriation, but actually is
money that will be appropriated in the
various other agency appropriation bills
as they come to us.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I believe that Ls an
accurate statement. I should like to
elaborate on it. With respect to the
payments to the retirement fund, the
committee encountered considerable dif-
ficulty. There had been no disposition
on the part of Congress to make adequate
appropriations to cover the Federal Gov-
ernment's share of the contribution to
the Federal retirement fund. It had
assumed rather astronomical size. To
include In a single bill the whole amount
of the money the Government owed,
would certainly unbalance any budpet.

Last year we inserted in the bill a
rather substantial amount, but not
enough to bring the Government up to
date or to make it current under Its
obligation with respect to its payment to
the retirement fund.

Since that time this matter has had
the sustained attention of the Bureau of
the Budget. The Bureau hit upon the
device of assigning to the appropriation
for each agency its proportionate share
of what it owed to the retirement fund.
We have done that in every appropria-
tion Dill we have considered this year and
those we will consider this year for fiscal
year 1958. We have added those items
to the respective appropriation bills. In
that way each agency supports out of
Its own appropriation the amount that
mast be paid into the retirement fund.
That practice will be followed with re-

spect to all appropriation bills which are
still to be considered before the end of
June.

Mr. WILLIAMS. The Senator Is cor-
rect. That has been done as a result of
a law which Congress passed, requiring
each agency to contribute SU percent
by way of matching funds, with the em-
ployees contributiniT the other 6'i per-
cent out of their salaries. I think that
is the proper procedure.

Mr. MAGNUSON. It lays the whole
thing on the table. The Senator from
Delaware and the Senator from Illinois
will remember how we struggled year
after ye:ir with the total amount for the
Civil Service Commission. Congress
never appropriated its share. At one
time. I believe the Government was more
than a billion dollars behind in interest
alone. For 4 years we appropriated ab-
solutely nothing so far as the Govern-
ment's share was concerned. The Gov-
ernment employees, of course, continued
to put their mcney into the fund. We
piled up this huge debt. Last year we
appropriated an amount, but only by
way of annuity co.st.s for that year.

Mr. DIRKSEN. There have been
years

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. Earl Cooper,
of the .^taff. has just reminded me that
the Government is more than $17 billion
in arrears on its share.

Mr. DIRKSEN. There have been years
when only a very modest amount has
been appropriated.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Sometimes nothing
at all.

Mr. DIRKSEN An executive commis-
sion was appointed for the purpose of
studying the subject, and it has made
its recommendation.^. Of course it had
to be rather mindful of how much would
be recommended in any given ye!ir, in
order not to upset the budget and the
budget calculations.

To make it abundantly clear, what
happened yesterday in connection with
the agricultural appropriation bill is a
ca.se in point. The House took an
amount of money that had been allowed
for meat inspection in the agricultural
appropriation bill for 1957 and it added
$936,000 as that function's share of the
retirement fund, and the sum of the 2
was the amount allowed by the House for
the Meat Inspection Service for the fiscal
year 1958.

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is correct.

Mr. DERKSFJ^. That same device has
been used all through the appropriation
bills this year.

Mr. WILLIAMS. That Is correct.
Frankly, I think this Is the proper proce-
dure and better than the one we followed
in the past. The Government should
each year automatically make Its contri-
bution, if we are to support the retire-
ment system, and not let the obligation
accumulate for the years to come.

I have advocated this sound business
practice for years and was glad to .sup-
port the legislation last year enacting
this requirement into law,

Mr. MAGNUSON. We made a good
start with this procedure. We know
what it costs and where we are from year
to year. It has been one of the real
problems, however. Some of us have
been amused by the argument which has
been made in answer to the suggestion
that the Government contribute Its
share. The argument has been that the
Government did not need to make Its
contribution, because if the Government
went bankrupt and was not able to make
good on Its promise, and the fund were
to be liquidated, the fund would be no
good anyway. In the meantime, the em-
ployees have been putting in their share
into the fund.

I think the fund Is In much better
shape now. Of course, I still do not know
how we are ever going to make up the
amount of money that is due.

Mr. WILIJAMS. That Is one of the
problems we should have considered at
the time we were pa«-.sing bills and In-
creasing the benefits. It has always been
my position that when we pass a bill giv-
ing additional benefits, whether it Is in
connection with salaries or retirements.
Congress should put a price tag on the
bill and provide the money with which
to pay for it. It is so easy to pa.ss a bill
giving something to someone, in the hope
that some Congress in the future will
meet the cost.

The point I am trying to make Is that
on page 1 oi the report there is shown
the figure of $5,378,224,000 as the amount
contained in the bill, and it is stated also
tha' that amount is $612,617,000 below
the appropriations for 1957, for a com-
parable bill.

The bill is not $612 million under last
year's appropriation, because a substan-
tial portion of the $525 million, shown as
a saving in connection with payments to
the civil-service retirement fund. Is not
In reality a reduction in appropriations.

Mr. MAGNUSON. The Senator has
his figures wrong. It is in there

Mr. WILLIAMS. I should like to fin-
ish my statement.

\

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8909

Mr. MAGNUSON. I have the floor, I
believe.

Mr. "WILLIAMS. No; the Senator
does not have the floor. If the Senator
will permit me to finish my statement, I
would appreciate It. The point I am
making is that scattered through this
bill are the proportionate parts of the
retirement costs that the agencies in-
cluded In the bill will have to meet. The
remainder will show up in other appro-
priation bills. Therefore the $525 mil-
lion is not, in effect, a true saving, be-
cause that money will have to be in-
cluded throughout the other agency
appropriation bills.

Mr. MAGNUSON. So far as the Sen-
ator has gone, he is correct, with his
figures.

Mr. WILLIAMS. In other words,
while that figure was eliminated from
the pending bill It will appear later in
other places.

Mr. MAGNUSON. It was never put
in the bill before. We had never appro-
priated for the Government's share.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Mr President

Mr. MAGNUSON. Last year was the
first time we appropriated money for the
Civil Service Commission for the retire-
ment fund, and that was only to pay the
interest. Therefore we are dealing with
something that was never contained in
the bill in previous years.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I know it was not
done in all years but it was in several
years. Including last year.

Mr. MAGNUSON, It was not done at
all.

Mr. WILLIAMS, It was done last year
and in other past years.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Only with respect
to annuity costs.

Mr. "WILUAMS. Last year it was $525
million.

Mr. MAGNUSON. We have permitted
the interest to pile up.

Mr. WILLIAMS. It does not make
any diflerence whether It is for interest
or for principal. I am referring to dol-
lars appropriated.

Mr. MAGNUSON. It makes a great
deal of difference to the Government em-
ployees.

Mr. WILUAMS. When the Senator
has finished his statement, I have a ques-
tion to ask the Senator from Illinois.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Mr. MAGNUSON. and Mr. DIRKSEN
addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Illinois has the floor. To
whom does the Senator from Illinois
yield?

Mr. DIRKSEN. Rather than yield to
any Senator, I should like to yield the
floor.

Mr. MAGNUSON. I wish to yield the
floor also.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Would the Senator
from Illinois comment on that point, so
as to get the record straight? He is a
member of the committee. I do not
think it is entirely correct to say that we
are passing a bill with a saving of $612
million below last year's appropriation.
The Senator from Illinois has already
pointed out that approximately $200 mil-
lion represent obligations which the Gov-
ernment will have to meet either today

or later so far as the veterans are con-
cerned. None of us are proposing to
reduce the veteran benefits as provided
for in existing law and all of us recognize
that we will have to meet these obliga-
tions, even if it requires a supplemental
appropriation bill tomorrow. Is that not
correct?

Mr. DIRKSEN. That Is correct.

Mr. Wn.T.T\MS. Therefore, that $200
million is not, in effect, a saving, so far
as the taxpayers are concerned.

Mr. DIRKSEN. If there is a supple-
mental request next year, then, of
course. It could be determined whether
It would be a saving on not.

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is correct.

Mr. DIRKSEN. The cold statistic at
the moment, it is a saving: but it may
not be a saving in actuality if more cases
are presented, and the Veterans' Admin-
istration needs additional funds.

Mr. WILLIAMS. The point I make is
that the Veterans' Administration and
the other Departments have estimated,
they are going to need X amount of
money to meet their obligations under
the existing law. There is no thought, so
far as I know, on the part of anyone to
change the existing law.

Mr. DIRKSEN. That is correct.

Mr. WITT JAMS. Therefore, if these
estimated obligations are accurate, we
are going to put the money back at a
later date.

Mr. DIRKSEN. Yes. I like to have
my position known, so that the complete
picture can be seen.

I think I carried the flag pretty well
for the Postmaster General under some
diflQculties; but there is pending at pres-
ent in the House of Representatives and
also in the Senate Committee on Appro-
priations a supplemental estimate for
$149 million. That represents the $58
million we took out plus the additional
estimate based upon what the Depart-
ment believes the increased mail volvune
will be for the fiscal year 1958. If Con-
gress should allow that amoimt, then,
of course, what was claimed as a sav-
ing in the first instance will not only
not be a saving, but we will, in fact, have
appropriated more for the Post OflRce
Department than the amount of the
original estimate. That would be true
In the case of the Veterans' Admin-
istration.

The reason I emphasize this now is
that there will be an influx of letters
from rather anxious veterans and the
dependents, from the American Legion,
from the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and
from the Disabled American Veterans.
I do not want to be particularly scolded;
I simply want to make it plain to them
that this is not a flscal year-end ap-
propriation.

Therefore, they can spend it as they
go; and when more than the estimated
number of cases are presented, they
should come to Congress and with clean
hands say, "We need more money."
Then It will be our duty to provide more
money if they need it.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I agree with the
Senator from Illinois. Certainly If that
point is reached. Congress should
recognize the situation and take action.

So far as the retirement system is con-
cerned, I agree fully with the procedure

now being followed by the committee and
Congress. But I think we should have
a true picture to present to the American
people of what we are doing at this time.

The civilian employee payroll is now
around $10 billion a year. Under the
existing law, which was passed last year,
each agency will put up 6 Mi percent of
its annual payroll into the civil service
retirement fund. It is true that part, of
which is included in this bill will repre-
sent the agencies' contribution into the
retirement fund but that amount will
not be $525 million, which we appro-
priated last year. That difference which
will later appear in other appropriation
bills cannot be claimed as a saving here
today.

The $525 million which is claimed as
a saving in this instance is not a saving
of $525 million as far as the American
taxpayer is concerned. It will be offset
by approximately $650 million scattered
throughout this and other appropriation
bills. "Whether the $525 million appro-
priated last year represented back in-
terest or represented principal is im-
material. It is not a comparable saving,
except as that portion is represented in
the retirement systems of the agencies
directly involved in this particular bilL

Mr. DIRKSEN. So far as the funds
which were carried in the bill have been
distributed through other appropriation
bills, whatever the amount is, the Sena-
tor from Delaware is eminently correct.

Mr. President, before I yield the floor,
I wish to pay tribute to the very genial,
efficient, hard-working clerk of the sub-
committee, Earl Cooper. Early and late,
with great capacity, with great fidelity,
and with a fine knowledge of the whole
appropriation technique, he has been in
attendance on the committee and the
bill for a long time. I do not quite know
how the Committee on Appropriations
would ever function without these very
capable, imselflsh public servants who,
unheralded and unsung, perform their
duties in behalf of the Senate and the
people of the United States. I think all
of them deserve a salute.

But as the ranking Republican on this
particular subcommittee, I emphasize
the fact that I have enjoyed the fruit of
Earl Cooper's labors, of his counsel and
his help. So I salute him for the out-
standing work he has done.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, at
this point I join in the rwnarks of my
friend from Illinois. I think we ex-
pressed our feelings to Mr. Cooper pri-
vately, but we are glad to say so publicly.

Mr. President, I do not know what the
Senator from Delaware [Mr. Williams]
is driving at. I want the record to be
clear that if he has any objection to the
figures, he can change the record. The
amount of the appropriations for fiscal
1957 was $5,990,841,826, The amount in
this bill as reported to the Senate is
$5,378,224,800. That is a reduction from
the 1957 appropriation.

I think the record should be clear that
when one talks about savings and speaks
about reductions, It should be made clear
that we are dealing with something
which in Congresses previous to this was
never Included in the bill at all. The
Bureau of the Budget never included any
money for retirement purposes.

4t

i^?^'

tki

'?' A

.m

I

■■'■ -t^'- '\ " '

A ■; >•■ ■!•.» :>■ -
J|J<'S if"],;

8910

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

Hi

i I

• Laat year Congress took care of only
the annuity costs, and that amounted to
$500 million. That was the first time
It had ever been In the bill.

Now we have adopted a new procedure,
with which I am certain the Senator
from Delaware agrees. We have laid the
figures on the table. In this bill there
ia an appropriation of a sizable sum of
money for this purpose for each of 17
regular agencies and 8 corporate agen-
cies. The Veterans' Administration pays
out more Government retirement money.
I think, than does any other agency in
the Government, except possibly the De-
partment of Agriculture.

Regardless of whether the amount Is
called a reduction or a saving, the ap-
propriation in this bill Is under the
amount for 1957; and we have saved con-
siderable money because many of the
departments have grown. To operate a
department or an agency such as the
Interstate Commerce Commission, the
Federal Communications Commission.
the Federal Trade Commission, the Se-
curities and Exchange Commission, the
Veterans' Administration, the General
Services Administration, or the Housing
and Home Finance Agency, with the
many and Increasing activities which
Congress sometimes imposes upon them,
within the same amount as was appro-
priated last year is a savmrr. So the
amount provided in this bill is a reduc-
tion.

I do not know what the Sen.itor from
Delaware is trying to prove. The com-
mittee worked hard. We made some
substantial cuts. I think we have com-
b.ned justice with efficiency.

The matter of the Government em-
ployees retirement fund is something
which can be put in one place or an-
other. The Senator from Illinois (Mr.
DiRKStNl pointed out very vividly and
explicitly what was done concerning the
Veterans' Administration payments.
This is a sum of $3 billion, or pretty close
to it. within a few thousand dollars.
What we did was to vary that figure
about one-half of 1 percent. Of course.
we shall be morally and legally obligated
end committed some time next year,
when there may be some estimates which
may be under that amount.

I am certain the Senator from Dela-
ware would not want to have money ap-
propriated which it was not necessary
to appropriate until it was actually
needed. It does not harm the program
at all. The whole trouble is that for
many years Congress did not face up to
the matter of the Government's con-
tribution to retirement. Last year we
made a half gesture by saying we would
appropriate the annuity costs and noth-
ing on the interest on the deficit.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Mr President, much has been said about
the retirement fund. When the Com-
mittee on Post Office and Civil Servica
held investigative hearings concerning
the retirement law and got ready to re-
port a bill, we learned that the Govern-
ment had woefully failed to appropriate
the proper amounts each year to match
the funds of the workers. So the com-
mittee thought somethmg should b«
icne about the matter.

As the Senator from Delaware will
remember, we provided in the law that
each year hereafter each department
should Include its annual share of re-
tirements to be appropriated and not let
the fund run behind.

For the Information of the Senate, at
the present time the deficiency in the
fund, as of October 1956. Is $17,454,088.-
000. I also wish to call attention to the
fact that, with the total Interest for
1957 also lacking. $496,883,000 can be
added to the other amount.

We thouijht scmethmg should be done
to prevent the fund from running on
and on in this manner, with the result
t.hat in the years to come the Govern-
ment would be called upon to provide
a huge amount, perhaps not the $17
billion, but possibly $30 billion or $40
billion or $50 billion. That is what it
could amount to unless the Government
meets its obligation year by year.

I also wish to point out that the Gov-
ernment is paying only 3 percent at the
present time for this money, which be-
longs to the employees, although the
Government Is paying 3-2 percent to
those on the outside. So the Govern-
ment is not paying any more than it
should pay to this particular fund, for
the money it is using.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
Morton m the chair*. The bill is open
to further amendment.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President. I do
not think there is the disagreement be-
tween the Senator from Washington and
myself that he thinks there is. I believe
there is simply a misunderstanding.

When we compare the amount pro-
vided by the bill a^ reported to the Sen-
ate with the amount of last year's appro-
priations, it IS said that there is a sav-
ing of $525 milhon, insofar as the retire-
ment payments are concerned. I un-
derstand that approximately 40 percent
of the estimated obligation for retire-
ment payments us represented by the ob-
ligation in connection with the agencies
covered by the bill. In that case, if we
assume that $200 million represents the
retirement obligation of these agencies,
then 60 percent of the claimed $525 mil-
hcn of savings are not in effect a true
saving but will show up In other appro-
priation bills. I think the Senator from
W.ushingtcn w:ll agree on that point.

I am not taking exception to what has
been done, as regards having the Govern-
ment make Its contribution on an annual
basis. In fact. In 1948, when the Con-
gress made a major revision in the Civil
Service Retirement Act, I offered such an
amendment. It has alwa3rs been my
position that the Government. In the
case of any retirement system, should
make its annual payments Into the re-
tirement fund the same as any other em-
ployer. I advocated the same principle
a few days ago. when the Metropolitan
Police bill was before us; and I took ex-
ception to the fact that there was no
fund into which the employer or the Dis-
trict of Columbia was making contribu-
tions, along with the employees.

What we are doing nationally now. in
the case of the civU service retirement
system, is what I think should have t)een
done many years ago. That would have

eliminated all the claims about making
an appropriation one year, and the fol-
lowing year claiming that a saving liad
been made when an appropriation was
not made. Everyone knows that the
Government's obligations must be met,
regardless of when the appropriation Is
made.

So I think the Senator from Wash-
ington will agree with me to that extent,
namely, that in the case of the Govern-
ment employees not affected by this bill,
their proportion of the $525 million can-
not correctly be claimed as a saving, in-
sofar as the pending appropriation bill is
concerned.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there
be no further amendment to be proposed,
the question is on the engrossment of
the amendments and the third reading
of the bill.

The amendments were ordered to be
en-:rossed and the bill to 'oe read a third
tune.

The bill was read the third time.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFTICER. The
clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDLNG OFFICER. With-
out objection. It is so ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I ask for the
yeas and nays on the passage of the bllL

The yeas and navs were ordered.

Mr JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Mr. President, I notice, on page 17 of the
bill, beginning on line 8. the following
langua;;e;

Th* Administrator U authorla«d. without
regard to th« Classinratlon Act of 1940. aa
arr.ended. to place 10 positions at the field
level, m addition to \tnx.e otherwise author-
ized. In grude OS- 16 In the Oeneral Schedule
esiabUiihed by said act.

If Senators will look at page 17 of the
bill, begmnmg on line 8. they will see
that particular language has been in-
serted in the appropriation bill. There-
fore, it constitutes legislation in an ap-
propriation bill. The provision has al-
ready been adopted, but had I noticed
It previously I would have raised a point
of order.

I call this matter to the attention of
Senators because in the Committee on
Post Office and Civil Service we have a
great deal of trouble with respect to
placing some personnel in certain classi-
fications. If that is done here and there
in appropriation bills, it becomes a
patchwork proposition, and does not be-
come subject to the proper study which
it should be given by the committee
which is supposed to keep this matter
in line.

I ask members of the Appropriations
Committee not to do this. I ask them
to please call it to the attention of the
Committee on Post Office and Civil Serv-
ice, so that we will do what is right in
the best interest of all the employees in
the Government.

I thought I should make these re-
marks for the Record, even though the
provision has already been adopted, I

^m.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8911

thought I should call the matter to the
attention of the Senate and to the at-
tention of all Senators who are now
present.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, I
think I ought to take half a minute to
say to the Senator from South Carolina
that I entirely agree with what he has
said. This year we made a serious at-
tempt In the committee to put into one
group all the suggestions which were
made with reference to personnel and
then to approach the Committee on
Post Office and Civil Service with re-
spect to the matter. It turned out that
some agencies were more Insistent than
others. I think the Senator from South
Carolina is absolutely correct in the
point he has made, but I firmly believe
that the General Services Administra-
tion needs the higher type of personnel
in the field.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina. I
thank the Senator from Washington.
Taking the bill overall, he has done an
excellent job. I have called attention
to this matter because If this is done
with respect to one department, we can
expect other departments to ask that
they be accorded the same privilege.

Mr. MORSE subsequently said: Mr.
President, because of the fact that I was
writing the minority views on the mutual
security bill. I was unable to be present
In the Chamber for participation in any
of the debate on the independent offices
appropriation bill.

However, the Record should show that
I had a consultation with the very able
chairman of the subcommittee the Sen-
ator from Washington [Mr. Macnuso?^].
and made certain suggestions to him. I
received the usual accommodations from
him. I wish to say that I think he is
deserving of the highest commendation
for the excellent job he did as chairman
of the subcommittee. I wish particular-
ly to commend him for the position the
subcommittee took, and to commend all
the members of the subcommittee for the
position they took with regard to the
District of Columbia Hospital Center.

Later today I shall have something to
say about the appraisal which was made
on the floor of the Senate yesterday con-
cerning the report of a subcommittee of
the Committee on the District of Co-
lumbia on the so-called hungry-chil-
dren issue. This morning I received
several protests In regard to what I am
sure was an imintended critical evalua-
tion of that report, and one which can-
not be substantiated on the record. The
report is filled with specific recommen-
dations and Is based on a voluminous
body of evidence. It is based upon weeks
of very careful study and investigation
by a great number of persons holding
official positions in the District of Co-
lumbia in addition to members of the
committee.

We intend to make the specific recom-
mendation of the study the basis of a
series of legislative proposals affecting
the District of Colimibla. not only in this
session of Congress, but in the next ses-
sion of Congress. In our judgment It
is an exceedingly sound report, and is
anything but a report based upon gen-
erahtles and platitudes. However, when

the Senator Involved who is a very dear
friend of mine is on the fioor of the
Senate I shall discuss the subject of his
criticism later in the day on my own time.
I am of the opinion that the press state-
ment this morning about this incident
does not reflect the true views of my col-
league in respect to his evaluation of the
report of the subcommittee of the Dis-
trict of Columbia on the hungry children
problem.

Further by way of legislative histtjry
with respect to the independent offices
appropriation bill, I should like to ex-
press my keen disappointment at the ac-
tion of the Appropriations Committee in
limiting the funds of the National Science
Foundation to the $40 million approved
by the House despite a request by the
administration for $65 million. As lin-
dlcated in a statement to the subcommit-
tee, this is. Indeed, false economy. For
the reasons more fully developed In my
remarks on June 3, as noted in the Rec-
ord. I feel that it is urgent that the fa-
culties for support of basic research and
graduate fellowships in all the sciences,
including the social sciences, be main-
tained at levels that will not injure the
national welfare.

Even within the $40 million limitation
set by the Appropriations Committee. I
trust that the National Science Founda-
tion will move ahead with the social
science research program I had previ-
ously recommended. I note that the
subcommittee has introduced greater
flexibility in the Foundation's budget by
removing a limitation of $9,500,000 fixed
by the House for support of institutes for
high -school teachers.

I thank the Senator from Washington
[Mr. Magnuson] for the great help he
was to me in support of this recommen-
dation, which I made to him in personal
consultation.

I hope that the Foundation will take
advantage of this increased flexibility to
provide adequate research and fellow-
ship support for the social sciences.

I also wish to say that I appreciate the
fact that the Senator from Washington,
as chairman of the subcommittee, agrees
with me that it would be appropriate
and desirable for the National Science
Foundation to spend $1 million of the
$40 million appropriated, or only 2V2
percent, for Its developing program in
the social sciences.

Mr. President, I had Intended to cover
another point because it demonstrates,
in my opinion, the relationship that
should exist between the Senate Appro-
priations Committee and a legislative
committee of the Senate. I refer to the
Item included in the independent offices
appropriations bill of $1,710,000 to equip
the Hospital Center in the District of
Columbia.

It will be recalled that last week I re-
ported to the Senate a rather extraordi-
nary procedure which was followed by
the District of Columbia Committee in
regard to the hospital center bill. We
had spent practically the entire day. Mr.
President, listening to witnesses testify-
ing in support of the bill 8. 2194, which
would authorize the $1,710,000 necessary
to equip the Hospital Center wh':h is to
be opened on September 1 — a hospital

center, by the way, which Is the result
of congressional action taken some 11
years ago, when the Congress of the
United States took note of the fact that
hospital facilities in the District of Co-
lumbia were in many respects so obso-
lete that something had to be done to
improve them.

As I pointed out in my brief remarks
on this matter the other day, some of
the hospital facilities went back to 1876
or earlier. As doctors, surgeons, and
other health experts testified before the
District of Columbia Committee the
other day, a terrific waste of money is
Involved in the maintenance of some of
the obsolete facilities.

It will be recalled I reported to the
Senate that the situation was considered
to be so serious that, after we listened to
doctors, surgeons, and other health offi-
cers make a case that we thought was
unanswerable, we were greatly surprised
to have representatives of the Bureau
of the Budget suggest that the $1,710,000
request for authorization in S, 2194
should be cut down to $500,000. The
medical authorities, without exception,
testified if that were done, It simply
would be impossible to make full use of
the facilities.

The committee took a recess and went
Into another room, in executive session,
and unanimously voted to report the bill.
The committee knew the Appropriatlbns
Committee was meeting at the same
time. In fact, the Appropriations Com-
mittee had made a request of the Dis- "
trict of Columbia Committee to send each
witness directly from our committee
room to the Appropriations Committee
room. There the witnesses repeated
their testimony. We then requested a
member of our subcommittee, the dis-
tinguished Senator from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Clark], to appear before the Ap-
propriations Committee and present the
point of view of the subcommittee of the
Committee on the District of Columbia,
and give the Appropriations Committee
our reasonable assurance that when the
full committee met to consider the bill
our recommendation for its favorable re-
port would be adopted. That is exactly
what happened. The full District of
Columbia Committee tmanimously ap-
proved S. 2194, and the Appropriations
C(»nmlttee was notified.

Not only that, Mr. President, but I had
a personal discussion with the chairman
of the subcommittee and with certain
other members of the Appropriations
Committee, in which I presented to them
the conclusions of the District of Co-
lumbia Committee and the evidence
which supported our conclusions and
recommendations.

I desire to say, Mr. President, as chair-
man of that subcommittee — and I am au-
thorized to speak for that great humani-
tarian, the chairman of the District of
Colimabia Committee, the Senator from
West Virginia [Mr. NuttY], who wished
to have the same point of view expressed
in his behalf this afternoon as I am ex-
pressing in my own behalf — ^that we are
deeply appreciative of the cooperation
we have received from the Appropria-
tions Committee in regard to this mat-
ter. I am sure the people of the Dis-
trict of Columbia are going to be as

I'

• !

% f^^

i^m

i>j -1.3

II V!*--

■C

J

8912

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

f^

deeply appreciative of It, also. I pray
the appropriation will be agreed to In
conference. I use the word pray ad-
vuedJy. because I think it is the proper
term to employ with reference to th«
fi.ck and the aged people of the District
cf Columbia who will need the care af-
forded by the hof^pital facilities which
the appropriation will provide. I pnxy
that the conference will retain the
axount. I want to thanJc the Appro-
priations Committee for ita coopera-
tion.

I say this, Mr. President, b''cau<^e cf
the criticism I made yesterday after-
noon— or, rather, a qufstion I raised
yesterday afternoon in the course of de-
bate— with respect to the relationship
which should exist between a leiiislalive
committee and the Apprcpnations Com-
mittee. That relationship should be a
relationship whereby a presumpt.on
exists in favor of the recommendations
of the legislative cnmmifCe.

Mr. President. I have heard this mat-
ter discu&sed on ether occasions; not
very often, but .sev.*ral time.s in the pa>t
13 years. I think it would be mo.st un-
fortunate, Mr. President, if the Appro-
priations Committee did not always re-
spect that presumption. By that I do
not mean the Appropriations Committ* ?
should always accept the recommenda-
tions of any legislative committee, be-
catlse. as I have said so many times, the
system of checks and balances we talk
about IS not a system of checks and
balances only among the three coordi-
nated branches of Government but. if
we understand our constitutional his-
tory, it is also a system of checks and
balances within each of the three coordi-
nate branches of Government. This is
an example of the Appropriations Com-
mittee exerclsini? a check upon a legis-
lative committee, but not a veto, in the
sense, Mr. President, that the Appropri-
ations Committee should ever proceed on
the basis of performing the functions of
a legislative committee. It should only
check to find out whether or not this re-
buttable presumption, which I think
should prevail in support of the legisla-
tive committees recommendations, is in
fact rebutted by the evidence before the
Appropriations Committee.

I cannot think of a finer example of
the relationship I am talking about than
what transpired between the District of
Columbia Committee and the Senate Ap-
propriations Committee with respect to
6. 2194. Therefore, on behalf of the
chairman of the Committee on the Dis-
trict of Columbia, and on behalf of my-
self as chairman of the subcommittee —
and I am sure, if I took the time to poll
the members of the Committee on the
District of Columbia, there would be a
unanimous expression of appreciation —
I thank the Appropriations Committee
for including in the independent offices
appropriation bill the amount of S1.710.-
000, the full amount needed, as the ex-
perts unanimously testified, to equip the
Ho.spital Center so that it can be made
available In humanitarian service to the
sick. Injured, and hospitalized on Sep-
tember 1 of this year.

It is to be understood, also, that my
remarks on this matter will be incorpo-
rated in the Record along with the re-

marks I made on the Independent offlces
appropriation bill earlier.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.

The question is on the final passage of
the bill. On this question the yeas and
nays have been ordered, and the cleric
will call the roll.

The Chief Clerk called the roll.

Mr MANSFIELD. I announce that
the Senator from Virginia I M.". BvrdI,
th« Senator from New Mexico IMr.
CH.wci'l. the Senator from Pennsylvania
IMr. Cl.\kkI. the Senator from Illinois
IMr. Doughs!, the Senator from North
Carolina [Mr EhvinI, the Senator from
Arkan.^.as (Mr. F'U!.bricht1. the Senator
from Tennes.see (Mr. KEFAtvERl. the
Senit.-r from VVe.^t Virginia [Mr.
NkklyI. the Senator from Virginia [Mr.
Robertoon!. the Senator from Alabama
IMr Sparkm^.nI. and the Senator from
Tex.^.s (Mr YarsorodghI are absent on
oiTlcial business.

The Senator from Arkamas (Mr. Mc-
Clei.i AN! is ab.sent by leave of the Senate
on otilcial busin ss

I further announce that. If present
and votinT. the St^nator from Virginia
(Mr Byrd'. the Senator from New Mex-
ico IMr. CJt.\vE7l, the Senatt^r from
Penn.sylvania IMr Cl\rk!. the Senator
from Illinois IMr Docgl^sI, the Senator
from North Carolina IMr. ErvinI, the
Senator from Arkansas (Mr, Pul-
BRiGHTl, the Senator from Tennessee
IMr. KF.r.^cv^Rl. the Senator from Ar-
kansas IMr. McCleixanI, the Senator
from West Virginia I Mr. NeelyI. the
Senator from Virginia I Mr Rcbcttson],
the Senator from Alabama 'Mr. Sparx-
Mx.Nl, and the Senator from Texas fMr.
Yarbor ugh! would each vote "yea."

Mr. DIRKSEN. I announce that the
Senator from New Hampshire (Mr.
Bridces' and the Senator from North
Dakota IMr. Langu! are absent t>ecause
of illness.

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr.
Bush I. the Senator from Indiana (Mr.
CArtHARTl. the Senator from South Da-
kota (Mr. C.\sii, the Senator from Ne-
braska (Mr. Curtis), the Senator from
Vermont IMr. Flanders 1, the Senator
from Nevada I Mr. Maloue 1 . the Senator
from Mas.«;achusetts IMr. Saltonstall],
the Senator from New Jersey [Mr.
SMrrHl. and the Senator from North Da-
kota 'Mr. YouNcl are absent on ofRcial
business.

If present and voting, the Senator
from New Hampshire IMr. Bridges 1. the
Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BushI,
the Senator from Indiana IMr. Capi-
hartI. the Senator from South DakotJt
IMr. CasiI, the Senator from Nebraska
[Mr. CcRTisI, the Senator from Vermont
[Mr. Flanders] , the Senator from Ne-
vada [Mr Mautnz], the Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Saltonstall], and
the Senator from New Jersey [Mr.
Smith 1 would each vote "yea."

The result was announced — yeas 72,
nays 0, as follows:

YKAS— 73

Alk^n

Bible

Church

Allott

Brick er

Cooper

Anderaoa

Butler

Cotton

Barrptt

Curlson

Dincsen

BpaII

Carroll

Dworahak

B«imett

C««e, N. J.

EastUnd

Fl lender

Kennedy

P&stor*

Frr«r

Kerr

Payne

Ooldwmter

Knowlknd

Pofer

Ooro

Kvjchel

Pxineli

OrMn

L!iU.5Ch«

Revorcomb

Hiyden

I»ng

F lasell

Hfaninci

Macimvin

Schoeppel

HirkeiUooper

Man!> field

Scott

UUI

MArtiu. Iowa

Smatbera

Pollfind

M-.r*:n. Pa.

Smith, Mall

RrviskA

MoNaiiiAr^

Stennu

Humphrey

Viuroney

Syni'.nffton

Ive«

Mor5e

TalrradKe

Jarkscn

M jrton

Thurmond

J.AVlia

Miindt

Thve

Jennrr

Vnrniy

Witklni

Jolinson. Tex

No.tNKrgcr

Wi>v

Johi;jlou, S C

O Mahoney

WUliama

NOT VOTINO— 23

Drldur*

Ovjii,: a»

Neely

Buah

F'V!:i

RjrxTteon

Pvrd

riandrrs

BalCooxUll

CBp*h.»rt

rulhrlRht

Pnlth. N.J.

Cas< s D»k.

KefHivtr

Sparkman

Chtt\tz

L I uger

Yurhnrougb

ClarS

M!\!"Tie

Young

Curtis

fc:(-c.eii»n

So the bill tH. R 6070 > was pa.vsed.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President. I
move that the Senate Insist on Its
amendments, reque't a conference there-
on with the Hr>use of Representatives,
and that the Chair appoint the conferees
on the part of the Senate.

The motion was atrreed to; and the
Presiding Officer 'Mr. Martin In the
chair > appointed Mr. MAcwrsoN, Mr.
Hill, Mr ELLiNnrR. Mr. Robertson. Mr.
Russell, Mr McClellan, Mr. DniKsrw,
Mr. Saltonstall, Mr. Mundt. Mr. Pot-
ter, and Mr Young conferees on the part
of the Senate.

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I should like the Rxcord to show
that the minority leader&hip has pre-
sented us with a calendar which clean
the following measures;

Calendar No. ill. 8. 913. to provide
permanent authority for the Postmaster
€reneral to establish postal stations at
camps, posts, or stations of the Armed
Forces, and at defense or other stra-
tegic Installations, and for other pur-
poses.

Calendar No. 130, H. R. 4815. to pro-
vide permanent authority for the Post-
master General to establish postal sta-
tions at camps, posts, or stations of the
Armed Forces, and at defense or other
strategic instsdlations, and for other
purposes.

Calendar No. 131, Senate Concurrent
Resolution 20. authorizing an investiga-
tion by the Federal Trade Commlssioa
Into the activities and practices of com-
panies engaged in the production, distri-
bution, or sale of newsprint in interstate
commerce.

Calendar No. 192. S. 495. to authorise
the acquisition of the remaining pro(>-
erty In square 725 In the District of
Columbia and the construction thereon
of additional facilities for the United
SUtes Senate.

Calendar No. 193, S. 728, to authorize
the acquisition of the remaining prop-
erty in squares 725 and 724 In the Dis-
trict of Columbia for the purpose of ex-
tension of the site of the additional office
building for the United States Senate.

Calendar No. 249. S. 1164, to make the
evaluation of recreational benefits re-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

iO.

8913

r

IHl<

suiting from the construction of any
flood -control, navigation, or reclama-
tion project an integral part of project
planning, and for other purposes.

Calendar No. 301, 8. 8«4. to provide
for the transfer of certain lands to the
State of Minnesota.

Calendar No. 302. 8. 2051. to amend
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. as
amended, and for other purposes.

Calendar No. 331. S. 60. to authorize
the construction, operation, and mainte-
nance by the Secretary of the Interior
of the Fryingpan-Arkansas project. Col-
orado.

Calendar No. 341, 8. 943, to amend sec.
218 (a) of the Interstate Commerce Act,
as amended, to require contract carriers
by motor vehicles to file with the Inter-
."^tate Conmierce Commission their actual
rates or charges for transportation serv-
ices.

Calendar No. 382 through Calendar
No. 388.

Calendar No. 407 through Calendar
No. 414.

Calendar No. 417 through Calendar
No. 437.

We are glvinc consideration to having
all those measures taken up.

In addition, although It has not been
cleared by the minority, we expect to
have the Senate proceed to the consid-
eration of Calendar No. 330. Senate bill
555, to authorize the construction of the
Hells Canyon Dam, as soon as we can
find time to have the bill brought up by
motion.

I want all Senators to know that the
appropriation bills have high priority.
The mutual aid authorization bill will
follow them, and also the atomic treaty,
which is due to be reported in the next
day or two from the Foreign Relations
Committee.

If we have any time between those
measures, it may be that the Senate will
proceed to the consideration of any of
the measures I have listed today.

Of course, before the Senate proceeds
to the consideration of the Hells Canyon
Dam bill. I shall give adequate notice to
the minority leadership, because they
have asked that the bill be held, and I
have not determined a definite date when
a motion will be made to have the bill
brought up. But I shall do so in the
near future.

Mr. President, when we have con-
cluded action on the appropriation bills.
I hope later in the day. or later in the
v.eek. to bring up by motion all the bills
on the calendar which may have been
cleared. They will Include private bills
and other noncontroversial bills which
have been cleared by the respective lead-
erships.

DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR AND
HEALTH, EDUCATION. AND WEL-
FARE APPROPRIATIONS, 1958

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I move that the Senate proceed to
the consideration of House biU 6287.
Calendar No. 423.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The biU
wiU be stated by Utle for the information
of the Senate.

The Cmxr Clerk. A bill (H. R. 6287)
making appropriations for the Depart-

CIII 661

ments of Labor, and Health. Education,
and Welfare and related agencies, for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1958, and
for other purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Question is on agreeing to the motion of
the Senator from Texas.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to consider the bill,
which had been reported from the Com-
mittee on Appropriations with amend-
ments.

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I wish to announce that when the
Senate concludes action upon House bill
6287. it is the Intention to proceed with
the consideration of the mutual security
authorization bill. It is not expected
that there will be any votes on that bill
today but there will be general discussion.
There will not be a late session. If we
are able to dispose of the pending appro-
priation bill and have general discussion
on the mutual security bill, we can con-
clude today's business rather early.

Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. President,
may we have order?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ate will be in order.

Mr. POTTER. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield.

Mr. POTl'ER. It was Impossible to
hear what the Senator had to say.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I stated that
the Senate would proceed with the con-
sideration of House bill 6287, the bill
making appropriations for the Depart-
ments of Labor, and Health, Education,
and Welfare, and related agencies, for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1958. and
for other purposes. In the event action is
completed on that bill, it is planned to
proceed with the consideration of the
mutual security authorization bill, but I
do not expect any votes on that measure
today.

In the event the Senate is able to con-
clude action on the pending appropria-
tion bill, which I believe will not require
a great deal of time, there will not be an
evening session. I wislT Senators to
have that definite notice, so that if they
have engagements they can keep them.

Unless something unforeseen develops.
It is expected that the appropriation bill
for the Departments of Labor, and
Health. Education, and Welfare will be
passed within a few hours, to be followed
by general discussion on the mutual se-
curity authorization bill but without
votes on that bill today. Minority views
are to be filed tonight, and I do not wish
to have action on the bill until copies of
the minority views are available to Sen-
ators.

Mr. POTTER. Will there be a vote on
the mutual security bill tomorrow?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I do not
know when there will be a vote on it.
There will be general discussion this aft-
ernoon. Probably several amendments
will be offered. Just when a vote will t>e
reached, I am unable to tell this far in
advance. I have set aside Wednesday,
Thiu^day, Friday, and Saturday for con-
sideration of that bill. I hope we shall
be able to dispose of it by late Saturday.

Mr. MORSK Mr. President, accord-
ing to the announcement of the major-
ity leader, he hopes to take up the mutual
security bill today. I have no objection
to taking up the mutual security bill to-
day based upon any parliamentary point,
because of any pending minority views.
The Recced is clear that I have until 5
o'clock this evening to file minority views.
I finished dictating them 30 minutes ago,
and they will be on the desks of Senators
tomorrow.

My understanding Is that during the
course of the discussion today the major-
ity will begin the presentation of their
point of view on the mutual security au-
thorization bill, but that no votes will be
taken upon any amendment to it. The
minority views are based upon a proposal
involving the submission of an entire
series of amendments which would save
the taxpayers hundreds of millions of
dollars which, in the opinion of the
minority, are now being Inexcusably
wasted.

PRINTING OP INDIVIDUAL VIEWS
OP SENATOR MORSE ON MUTUAL
SECURITY AUTHORIZATION BILL
Mr. MORSE subsequently said: Mr.
President, I have been advised by the
Parliamentarian that it is necessary for
me to ask unanimous consent to file my
minority views on the mutual security
bill by 5 o'clock this afternoon. The rec-
ord is as follows:

There was a colloquy the other day,
when we aimounced from the Commit-
tee or. Foreign Relations that the bill
had been favorably reported by the com-
mittee, and that the minority views
would be filed by 5 o'clock today. Ap-
parently at that time a request should
have been made for permission to file
them by 5 o'clock today. X now ask
imanimous consent that I may lae au-
thorized to file my minority views and
the supplementary views of the Senator
from Louisiana [Mr. Long] by 5 o'clock
this afternoon, with the understanding
that they will be printed overnight and
placed on Senators' desks tomorrow
morning.

Mr. KNOWLAND. The Senator has
stated the situation correctly. It was
certainly understood in the Committee
on Foreign Relations that the distin-
gvushed senior Senator from Oregon
would have an opportimity to file his
views by 5 o'clock today. The legislative
history is clear on that point. If a tech-
nicality was not complied with, the Sen-
ator certainly should be entitled to have
the permission to comply with it.

Mr. MORSE. I wish to say that the
distinguished minority leader has once
more demonstrated the many coiutesies
he has extended to me in the 13 years
I have been a Member of the Senate. I
appreciate his attitude very much.

Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I have not
had an opportimity to read the views
prepared by the Senator from Oregon.
I thought that perhaps I should like to
associate m.»self with the statements in
the Senator's minority views. However,
the Senator from Oregon believes, since
he feels so strongly on this matter, the
views should be personal to him.

Si

m

> IK I

i^K

f ■ 3 S *

-si!

■f- HT'-T

'^1

• "".i

-h

( *» I. ^ -

?l ::|-t II'"

"'I

f*i#

8914

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

Mr. MORSE. I thank the Senator
from Louisiana for his comment. He
will see my statement before it is filed,
as will the Senator from North Dakota
I Mr. Lancer 1 . However, because of the
position I took in committee with re-
spect to certain legal aspects in con-
nection with the matter under discus-
sion. I would not wish to ask my col-
leagues to associate themselves with my
point of view, but. rather, speak only
for myself. I state in my minority views
that I share the views of the Senator
from Louisiana tMr. LongI and the
Senator from North Dakota [Mr. Lan-
cer 1, that the bill should be drastically
cut in many particulars. The Senator
from Louisiana will have an opportu-
tity to read my views, although my posi-
tion in the committee was somewhat
different from the position the Senator
from Louisiana took in respect to some
of the reasons for dissenting. I do not
think it would be fair to the Senator to
ask him to join in my minority views. I
have taken it for granted that the Sen-
ator from Louisiana, by his expression
of his own personal minority views, will
make his position very clear on this is-
sue.

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. RUSSELL. I am not a member
of the Committee on Foreign Rela.tion.s,
but I shall read the Senator's statement
with a great deal of interest. I am par-
ticularly concerned about some phases
of the program as reported to the Senate
by the Committee on F\)reign Relations.
I am particularly concerned about the
so-called revolving fund, which removes
all the economic aid from any real con-
gressional control, by setting up a per-
manent fund, over which Coneress will
have, at best, very limited control.

I do not know whether the S;>nator
from Oregon approves of that particular
phase of the bill. Some of us. who are
concerned about it. will have an op-
portunity to vote to retain in the Con-
gress of the United States some meas-
ure of control over the program. A
number of other items in the bill dis-
turb me also.

I shall look forward eagerly to the
Senator's amendments, in the hope that
some of them will be along the line of
my thinking, so that I may support the
effort to make the program more realis-
tic.

Mr. MORSE. It was not my Inten-
tion, in making my unanimous-consent
request, to open debate on the mutual-
security bill. I do not think it would
be courteous to the chairman of the
Committee on Foreign Relations for me
to do so.

I wish to say very quickly in passing,
to my good friend from Georgia, that I
am not at all surprised, inasmuch as he
is such a great constitutional lawyer,
that he should make the observations he
has made. I wish to as.sure him that one
section of my minority views is given
over to the constitutional question, and
to what I consider to be an abdication
by Congress of Its legislative duties un-
der the Constitution.

Having served with the Senator from
Georgia for a number of years on the

Committee on Armed Services, and
although there may have been some
times when we voted differently, I can-
not recall when we ever vot^d differ-
ently on any major item before the com-
mittee, and. in fact, I cannot recall any
minor one, for that matter, when we
voted differently: I should like to say to
him that I also take the position in my
minority views that tremendous savings
can be made in the military budget. It
should no longer be considered a sacred
cow. but should be put on the legislative
operating table of Congress in order that
we may cut out some of its cancers.

I prej« my unanimous-consent request.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the request of the Senator
from Oregon' The Chair hears none,
and It is so ordered.

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT OF 1957—
MINORITY AND SUPPLEMENTAL
VIEWS

Subsequently. Mr. Morse, as a member
of the Committee on Foreign Relations,
submitted his minority views, together
with the supplemental views of Mr. Long.
on the bill iS. 2130) to amend further
the Mutual Security Act of 1954. as
amended, and for other purpovses. here-
tofore reported by Mr Green from that
committee which were ordered to be
printed as part 2 of Report No. 417.

DEPARTMENTS OP LABOR AND
HEALTH, EDUCATION. AND WEL-
FARE APPROPRIATIONS, 1958

The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill iH. R. 6287' makin.^ appropri-
ations for the Departments of Labor,
and Health, Education, and Welfare and
related agencies, for the fl.'^cal year end-
ing June 30. 1958, and for other purpo.ses.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, in order that Senators may be on
notice. I ask unanimous consent that on
the question of the pa.ssage of the p>end-
ing measure, the Labor and Health. Edu-
cation, and Welfare Departments appro-
priation bill, the yeas and nays be
ordered.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, the bill un-
der con.'sideration provides an appropri-
ation of $2,885,290,781 for the Depart-
ments of Labor, and Health. Education,
and Welfare. This amount is an in-
crease of $38,459,200 over the House bill,
but is under the budget estimates for
1958 by $96,636,800.

The committee has approved a total
of $354,348,600 for the Department of
Labor, an increase of $5,288,400 over the
House bill. Included in the committee's
recommendation are items totaling $321.-
800.000. or 90.81 percent of the budget
estimates, for which funds must be pro-
vided. Included are grant." to States for
unemployment compensation and em-
ployment service administration, $260
million, paid out of the earmarked Fed-
eral unemployment tax revenues; In
other words, that amount comes out of
revenues raised by special taxes and does
not come out of the Federal Treasury.

For unemployment compensation for
veterans, the bill provides $36,800,000.

For unemployment compensation for
Federal employees, $25 million Is In-
cluded.

For the Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare the committee rec-
ommends a total of $2,516,707,381. In-
cluded in the recommendations are Items
totaling $1,768,700,000, representing
70 27 percent of the Department's esti-
mates, for which funds must be pro-
vided for grants to States for public as-
sistance, $1,600,000,000: for payments to
school districts. $127 million: and for as-
sistance for school construction In fed-
erally Impacted areas, $41,700,000. The
t>asic legislation for these three programs
definitely commits the Congress to pro-
vide whatever funds are required.

Not included in the above category, but
certainly programs which permit little or
no reduction from the budget estimates,
are those for grants to States for mater-
nal and child welfare; for grants to
States for vocational rehabilitation; for
grants to States for hospital construc-
tion; for grants to States for waste treat-
ment works construction; and for as-
sistance to States for local public health
units. These together with the items for
public assistance and school construction
and school maintenance and operation
total In excess of $2 billion.

The increases recommended through-
out the bill are at a minimum when
consideration is given to the fact that
this bill was under consideration by the
House for 10 days, with extensive
amendments offered on the floor of the
House and numerous reductions made
In the amounts recommended by the
House Committee on Appropriations,
following extended, detailed, and ex-
haustive hearings, during which the bill
was thoroughly examined and consid-
ered. Senators will recall that on the
day of passaee of the bill In the House
there were 14 yea-and-nay votes.

Increases recommended by our com-
mittee for the Department of Lat>or only
partially restore the reductions effected
by floor amendments under the Hou.se
committee recommendations. Por one
Item — the Mexican farm labor pro-
gram— we recommend the same amount
as the Hou.se committee allowance.

The substantial Increases approved
by our committee are for medical re-
search in the killing and crippling dis-
eases— cancer, heart disease, mental Ill-
nesses, arthritis, and metabolic dis-
eases, neurological disorders, and bllnd-
ne.<:s. For each of these Items the com-
mittee recommends increases In excess
of the budset estimates. In total, we
have approved increases of $32,027,000
for the National Institutes of Health for
use in the fl;;ht a^:alnst killing diseases.

Last year our committee reported to
the Senate a bill containing amend-
ments for increases in these same Item.s
amounting to $56,282,000 over the budget
estimates, or 44 48 percent over the
amounts requested.

This year's recommendation of in-
crea.ses. totaling $32,027,000. amounts to
16.84 percent over the amounts re-
quested.

It Is recalled that there were doubts
expres.sed last year as to whether the
funds recommended by the committee
last year would be wisely and prudently

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8915

spent and whether there was available
manpower to carry on the additional
research possible with the greatly In-
creased funds. The Senate committee
considered the matter very thoroughly,
and the position of the Senate commit-
tee was fully vindicated. Manpower
was available, and the funds have been
wisely and prudently expended.

Mr President, following the usual pro-
cedure, I ask unanimous consent that
the committee amendments be consid-
ered en bloc, and that the bill as
amended be considered as original text
for the purpose of amendment, with
this exception:

The distinguished Senator from South
Carolina [Mr. Johnston 1, who Is the
chairman of the Committee on Post Of-
fice and Civil Service, has called atten-
tion to the language on page 30, line 18:

Provided, That the Cblef and AssistAnt
Chlpf of th« Training and Standards Branch
of the National Initltuta of Mental Health
Rh.ilt each be compensated at a salary rate
nut to exceed 917.600 per annum.

The committee Included this proviso
in tlie bill, conscious of the fact that
more than half of the hospital beds In
the United States today are occupied by
patients suffering from mental Illness,
and that the cost of mental illness runs
Into billions of dollars each year.

The Senator from South Carolina has
called attention to this proviso, and I
have con.sulted with the distinguished
Senator from Minnesota I Mr. ThyiI
who Is the ranking minority memt)er of
the subcommittee, and formerly was the
distinguished chairman of the subcom-
mittee.

So m asking imanlmous consent that
the Senate amendments be agreed to en
bloc, we do not ask unanimous consent
that the proviso beginning on line 18.
page 30. and ending on line 22, which I
have just read, be included. That means,
then, that the proviso will be stricken
from the bUl.

The Senator from South Carolina has
advised me that he and his committee
are giving their thought, attention, and
consideration to this very matter now;
they are examining Into the question at
this very time.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Along that line. last year. If Senators will
recall, approximately 800 of the super-
grade positions were acted upon. At
present, the Committee on Post Office
ana Civil Service is holding hearings and
is considering the matter. Even today,
in order to conserve the time of the Sen-
ate, i am having lunch with the chair-
man of the Civil Service Commission, to
discu.ss with him matters pertaining to
the various grades, such as the one con-
cerned In this Instance. The committee
will then look Into the matter.

As I tmderstand. the provision begin-
ning on line 18 and ending on line 22,
of page 30, will be stricken from the bilL

Mr. HILL. That Is correct.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. HILL. I yield.

Mr. THYE. I may say to the distin-
guished chairman of the Committee on
Post Office and Civil Service that the
salary range of $17,500 for this particu-

lar position would be proper. I regret
that it is found to be necessary to strike
the provision from the bill. But with
the assurance that the chairman of the
Committee on Post Office and Civil Serv-
ice, the committee having jurisdiction
of the question of salaries and qualifica-
tions, and all other matters relating to
the civil service, will take the matter
under consideration and will include it
in a study to make certain that tlie sal-
ary range will be adjusted as it should
be adjusted, I shall not object to the
striking of the provision. But in the
committee the decision was made to re-
port the bill to the Senate with this pro-
vision included.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Inasmuch as the committee had already
Included the provision in the bill, I wish
to state that we shall give the matter
special treatment. But the Senator from
Minnesota, who served for so many years
on the committee of which I am chair-
man, knows what we have to do in the
case of placing certain employees in the
super grades under the Classification Act.
In that connection there are many head-
aches, because when one case of that
sort comes up, other employees wish to
be treated similarly.

Mr. THYE. I appreciate that. If I
had remained on the Committee on Post
Office and Civil Service. I would now be
its senior Republican member. However,
I had long endeavored to obtain a seat
on the Appropriations Conunlttee; and
a number of years ago I had to decide
whether I would leave the Conunittee
on Post Office and Civil Service, in order
to become a member of the Appropria-
tions Committee. I regretted leaving the
Committee on Post Office and Civil Serv-
ice, because of the excellent work it does
on matters relating to the classification
of employees.

Let me say that the Senator from South
Carolina Is doing an excellent Job as
chairman of the committee, and I am
confident that this particular position
will have his personal attention. In all
justice, the proposed increase in salary
should be made.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Mr. President, I thank the Senator from
Minnesota for his kind remarks concern-
ing me. During the many years he and
I served together on the committee,
everything was very, very pleasant; and
he did excellent work there. At that
time we worked together both on sub-
committees and on the full committee.
His work was excellent, and I know he
is doing equally fine work at present (m
the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. THYE". I thank the Senator from
South Carolina.

Mr. President, let me Inquire whether
the distinguished chairman of the Sub-
committee on Appropriations for Health,
Education, and Welfare has completed
his statement on the bill.
Mr. HILL. Yes.

At this time I wish to join In what
the senior Senator from Minnesota has
said, namely, that the salary in this
case certainly should be $17,500. I
know how able and devoted is the senior
Senator from South Carolina [Mr. John-
ston], the chairman of the Committee
on Post Office and Civil Service; and it

is gratifying to have him tell us now that
the matter will receive his particular at-
tention, and that, in fact, he is already
giving it his best attention. I wish to
thank the Senator for what he Is doing
in regard to this item, because the salary
in this particular case really should be
$17,500. So I thank my very able and
distinguished friend, the Senator from
South Carolina.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Mr. President. I thank the Senator from
Alabama for his remarks about me, and
also for what he has said about this
particular item.

I wish to say that I have examined
this appropriation bill, and it shows a
great deal of study. The Senator from
Alabama has done an excellent job on the
bill.

Mr. HILL. I thank the Senator from
South Carolina. We have a very hard-
working subcommittee, and the bill as
reported represents the teamwork of all
of us. We particularly appreciate what
the distinguished Senator from Minne-
sota (Mr. Thye] has done in connection
with bringing the bill before the Senate.

Mr. President, following the precedent,
I ask unanimous consent that the com-
mittee amendments, except for the pro-
viso on page 30. in line 18. be considered
and agreed to en bloc; and that the bill
as thus amended be considered for the
purpose of amendment, as original text;
provided, however, that no point of order
against any amendment shall be deemed
to have been waived by the adoption of
these committee amendments.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
Chubch in the chair). Without objec-
tion, it is so ordered.

The amendments agreed to en bloc are
as follows:

Under the heading "Title I — ^Department
of Ijabor — Office of the Secretary", on page 2.
line 11. after the figures "•1.480,000", to strike
out the comma and "of which not more than
•170.000 shall be for International labor af-
fairs", and in line 13, after, the amendment
Just above stated, to insert a colon and "Pro-
vided, That the limitation of •154.490 for
International labor affairs appearing In the
Department of Labor Appropriation Act, 1957
(70 Stat. 423) is increaaed to •159.490.-

Under the subhead "OfQce of the Solicitor**,
on pa^ 3, line 9, after the word "Solicitor,"
to strike out "•2.021.000" and Insert "•2,191,-
000", and in the same line, after the amend-
ment Just above stated, to strike out the
conuna and "together with not to exceed
•385,000 to be derived from the highway
tnist fund created by section 209 of the
Highway Revenue Act of IBSe."

Under the subhead "Bureau of Employ-
ment Security", on page 5. line 8. after "(5
U. 8. C. 55a) ". to strike out "•5.568.000" and
Insert "•6,000,000. of which •5,874,400 shaU
be derived by transfer from the Federal un-
employment account in the unemployment
trust fund. and".

On page 6, at the beginning of line 7, to
strike out "•349.814,000" and insert "•200.-
000,000**, and in the same line, after the
amendment Just above stated, to insert "of
which •10.000,000 shall be available only to
the extent necessary to meet increased casta
of administration re8ul€[hg from changes In
a State law or Increases In the numbers at
claims filed and claims paid or Increased
•alary coats resulting from changes in Stats
salary compensation plans embracing em-
ployees of the State generally over those upon
which the State's basic grant (or the alloea-
ttoa for the Dlstnct of Columbia) was based.

4.

■*ik -r'.'l

i*<

>.>

Him

i

8916

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

which Increased coata of admlnlatratlon can-
not be provided for by normal budgetary ad-
justments."

On page 9. line 15. after the word "laws",
to strike out "$2J236.200" and Insert "$3-
600,000.'

Under the subhead "Bureau of Labor Sta-
tistics", on page 11. line 7. after "(5 U. 9. C.
65a)". to strike out "»7.124.0OO" and Insert
"f7,225,000."

Under the heading "Title H— Department
of Health. Education, and Welfare — Pood
and Drug Administration", on page 12. Una
25. after "(21 U. S. C. 61-64)". to Insert "In-
cluding purchase of not to exceed 89 passen-
ger motor vehicles of which 51 shall be for
replacement only."

On page 13. line 22, after the word "equip-
ment", to Insert "purchase of not to exceed
four passenger motor vehicles for replace-
ment only "

Under the subhead "Office of Education ".
on page 16, line 22. after *|20 U. 3. C. ch.
2", to Insert a semicolon and "70 Stat. 1126";
on page 17. at the beginning of line 1. to In-
sert "and section 9 of the act of August 1,
1956 (70 Stat. 909)"; In line 3. after the word
"training" to Insert "and •228. GOO for voca-
tional education In the fishery trades and
Industry Including distributive occupations
there"; In line 5, after the amendment Just
above stated, to strike out "»33.442.08r' and
Insert "•33.750.081", and In line 9. after the
word "year", to Insert a colon and the fol-
lowing additional proviso:

"Provided further. That the amount of
allotment which States and Territories are
not prepared to use may be reapportioned
among other States and Territories applying
therefor for use In the programs for which
the funds were originally apportioned "

On page 17. line 20. after the figures
"•5.000.000" to insert a colon and the fol-
lowing proviso:

"Provided. That the amount of any State's
allotment from this appropriation which
such State certifies will remain unpaid to
It on June 30. 1959, may be reallotted by
the Commissioner amons; other States apply-
ing therefor In proportion to their rural
population, and deemed part of such allot-
ments, except that no State's allotment shall
be so Increased as to exceed the allotment
which would be made to it were this appro-
priation equal to the maximum authorized
under such act."

On page 19, after line 18, to Insert:

"President's Committee on Education Be-
yond the High School: For salaries and ex-
penses for the President's Committee on
Education Beyond the Hli?h School, includlna:
services as authorized by section 15 of the
act of August 2. 1946 ( 5 U. S. C. 55a>. and
expenses of attendance at meetings. •200.000 '

Under the subhead "Public Health Service ".
on page 22, line 15, after the word "General",
to strike out •19.592,000" and Insert "»22,-
o9'J.000 •■

On page 24. line 6. after the word "air-
craft', to strike out ' •6,JOO.0OO ' and Insert
'•6 :25O.0O0 ••

On page 24. after line 18. to strike out:

"Grants for waste treatment works con-
struction: For payments under section 6 of
the Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
•50 000 000. to remain available only until
Jure 30. 1959 "

And In Ueu thereof to Insert:

"Grants for vaste treatment works con-
struction F'lr payments under section 6 of
the Water Pollution Control Act. aa amended
(70 Stat. 502 1. •45.000,000 which together
with the amount appropriated under this
head In the Second Supplemental .Appropria-
tion Act, 1957 (70 Stat. 7«y ) shall be Hpplied
to payment on account of allotmenrs made
for the current and preceding fl.scal years
pursuant to said att. such sun'..s to remain
available only until June ,30. 1959 Pro>id^-d,
That allotments under such section 6 tor the

current fiscal year shall b« made on th«
basis of •50.000.000."

On page 25. after line 24. to inaert:

"Survey! and planning for hospital con-
struction: The funds appropriated under
this head in the Supplemental Appropriation
Act. 1955 (68 Stat. 810) shall remain available
lor expenditure until June 30, 1959. "■

On page 26, line 6. after "(5 U. S. C. 150)".
to Inaert "Including •1,186.000 to be available
only for payment* for medical care of de-
pendents and retired personnel "

On page 27, line 15. after the word "Gen-
eral", to Insert "purchase of not to exceed
75 passenger motor vehicles, of which 50 shall
be for replacement only;", and In line 22.
after the word "act", to strike out "•40,(X)0.-
000 ' and Insert "•42,500,000 '"

On page 28, line 11, after the word "proj-
ects" to Inaert "and training grants'", and In
line 14. after the word '"thereto", to Insert
"purchase of not to exceed eight passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only"

On page 28, after line 19, to Insert:

"National Institutes of Health Manage-
ment Fund For the purpose of facilitating
the economical and efficient conduct of op-
erations In the National Institutes of Health
which are financed by two or more appro-
priations where the costs of operation are
not readily susceptible of distribution as
charges to such appropriations, there Is
hereby established the National Institutes
of Health Management Fund. Such amounts
as the Director of the National Institutes
of Health may determine to represent a rea-
sonable distribution of estimated costa
among the various appropriations involved
may be advanced each year to this fund and
shall be available for expenditure for such
costs under such regulations as may be pre-
scribed by said Director, including not to
exceed •2.500 each fiscal year for entertain-
ment of visiting scientists when specifically
approved by said Director, and for the opera-
tion of facilities for the sale of meals to em-
ployees and others at rates to be determined
by said Director to be sufficient to cover the
cost of such operation and the proceeds
thereof shall be deposited to the credit of
this fund: P^nitdfd. That funds advanced to
this fund shall be available only In the fiscal
year In which they are advanced Protided
further. That final adjustments of advances
in accordance with actual costs shall be ef-
fected wherever practicable with the appro-
prlatloivs from which such funds are ad-
vanced '"

On page 30 line 1. after "grants-in-aid,"
to strike out "and to contract for supplies
and services by negotiation, without regard
to section 3709 of the Revised Statutes. In
connection with the chemotherapy pro-
gram.'" and insert "and to contract on a
cost or other basts for supplies and services
by negotiation, without regard to section
3709 of the Revised Statutes, in connection
with the chemotherapy program. Including
Indemnification of contracUjrs to tlie ex-
tent and subject to the limitations provided
in title 10. United States Code, section 2354,
except that approval and certification re-
quired thereby shall be by the Surgeon Gen-
eral,", and In line 12. after the word act",
to strike out "•46 902.0<50" and Insert

• 58 543 000 '"

On page 30. line 16 after the word "dl<»-
eases ". to strike out ""•.3.'i 217.00<T' and Insert

• •39.421 000. to«:ether with not to exceed
•4.573.000 of the unobligated balance of the
fl^sral veiir 1957 appropriation granted under
this head "

On page 30. at the beginning of line 25.
to strike out '"•33.436.000" and insert
'"•38 784 000 "•

On page 31, line 7. after the word "dis-
eases'", to strike out ""•17,885.000" and Insert
"•23.548 000 '"

On page 31, line 17. after the word
"bUndnes.<» ', to strike out ' •18.887,000" and
insert »a4.058.0)0. '

On page 31, after line 33. to Insert:

"Retired pay of conunlssloned offleera:
For retired pay of ccmmlaaloned offloera, as
authorized by law. and paymenta under the
Uniformed Servlcea Contingency Option Act
of 1953. auch amount aa may Im required
during the current flacal year."

Under the subhead '"St. Kllubeths Hos-
pital'", on page 32. line 16. after the word
"Ulnesa". to strike out "•3,000,000" and In-
aert "•3.085.800. "•

Under the subhead '"Social Security Ad-
ministration'", on page 33, after line 22, to
Inaert :

'"Conatructlon, Bureau of Old-Age and
Survivors Insurance: For an additional
amount for 'Construction, Bureau of Qld-
Age and Survivors Insurance" for construc-
tion of an office building and appurtenant
facUltlee. Including acqulaltlon of land,
•5,710,000, to be derived from the Federal
Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Truat Fund
which, together with auma heretofore ap-
propriated for thtwe purpcaea. ahall eatab-
Ilah a limitation of coat of •31,080,000: Pro-
tided. That the eaubllahed limit of coat may
be exceeded or ahall be reduced by an
amount equal to the percentage Increase or
decreaae. If any. In conatructlon coata gen-
erally dating from October 1, 1956, aa deter-
mined by the Admlnlatrator. General Serv-
lcea Admlnlatratlon. and the amount to be
derived from the aforeaald truat fund ahall
be Increased or decreased accordingly: Pro-
vided further. That the Immediately pre-
ceding proviso shall be effective only If a
contract for construction la executed on or
before December 1, 1957"

On page 34, line 22. after the word "year",
to strike out the colon and "Prortded, That
not more than ^104,000.000 of the amount
herein appropriated ahall be used for ex-
penaea of State and local admlnlatratlon :
Prot tded further, That none of the amount
herein appropriated shall be used to cover
any coats of State and local admlnlatratlon
Incurred prior to July 1. 1957 "

Under the aubhead "Office of the Secre-
tary."' on page 38. line 3. after the word
"exceed ". to strike out "•425,000"" and Inaert
"•449.000 "

Under the heading "General Provlalona,"
on page 39. after line 23. to strike out:

"Sec 208 None of the funds provided
herein shall be used to pay any recipient of
a grant for the conduct of a research project
an amount for Indirect expenaea In connec-
tion with such project in exceaa of 15 percent
of the direct costs '

On page 40. line 8. after the numerals
'•1959". to Insert a colon and the following
proviso

Provided. That existing obllgatlonal au-
thority to the Department of Health. Educa-
tion, and Welfare for preparation of plans
and specifications for the conatructlon of the
general office and the dental reaearch bulld-
Inga of the National Inalltutea of Health,
and the National Library of Medicine build-
ing of the Public Health Service, ahall re-
main available until June 30. 1958."

On page 40. after line 23, to Insert:

"Sic 211 To the extent and under the
conditions provided by regulations of the
Secretary, officers ( Including commlaaloned
officers of the Public Health Service) and
employeea of the Department of Health. Ed-
ucation, and Welfare may he,-eafter. In con-
nection with their attendance at meetings or
In performing adviaory aervlcea concerned
with the functions or activities of the De-
partment, be permitted to accept payment.
In cash or In kind, from non-Federal agen-
cies, organizations, and Individuals, for
tra\el and subsistence expenses, to be re-
tained by them to cover the coat thereof or
deposited to the credit of the appropriation
from which the cost thereof Is paid, aa may
be provided In such regulallona."

Under the heading "Title VI— Federal
Mediation and Conciliation Service, " on page

193

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8917

44. line 8. after the words "per diem", to In-
sert a semicolon and "Government listed
telephones In private reeldencea and private
(.partmenta for official use In cltlea where
mediators are officially stationed, but no Fed-
eral mediation and conciliation service office
U maintained."

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, I wish to
join the chairman of the Appropriations
Subcommittee, the distinguished Senator
from Alabama [Mr. Hill], in comment-
ing on this particular appropriation bill.
The only appreciable increase in the
- Appropriation items included in the bill
a.s reported to the Senate, over those in-
cluded in the bill as passed by the House
of Representatives, is in the items for the
National Institutes of Health, in the
fields of cancer research, mental health,
heart disease, dental health, and other
diseases. We felt completely justified in
following the recommendations of the
National Association on Health in the
case of these items, becau.se the history
of this matter has been that when funds
could properly be used and when the
necessary facilities, research workers,
.scientists were available, the funds were
allocated and were made available for
continued research; but that if the
necessary facilities, research workers,
technicians and scientists, were not
available the funds have not been allo-
cated So we felt perfectly justified in
recommending these increases in the
nem.s.

Otherwise, the bill is very much the
.«ame as it was when it was passed by
the House of Representatives.

I wish to say that the distinguished
chairman of tiie Appropriations Subcom-
mittee, the Senator from Alabama [Mr.
Hill), held extensive hearings: and in a
most searching manner he proceeded to
obtain information regarding every
item, whether in the field of health, edu-
cation, and welfare, or in the field of
labor.

In my opinion the bill as reported is
nn excellent one In the case of every item.
Most certainly the Senator from Ala-
bama has done a splendid job in getting
iJie bill into such shape that all Memt)ers
of the Senate are able to understand
V hat it contains. I hope it can be passed
without further amendment.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Minnesota yield to me?

Mr. THYE. I am glad to yield to the
Senator from Alabama.

Mr. HILL. The distinguished Senator
from Minnesota has been a member of
the subcommittee handling the bill long-
« r than any other member of the sub-
committee. He has been a most devoted
member of the subcommittee, and for-
merly he was Its distinguished chair-
man. Certainly he knows about all the
1 terns and provisions of the bill, and he
has contributed very greatly to the work
of the subcommittee and to the writing
of the amendments to the bill.

Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Mixmesota yield to me?
Mr. THYE. I am delighted to yield to
the Senator from Mississippi.

Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, as a
member of the subcommittee who at-
i«'nded as many hearings as possible, I
wish especially to commend the Sena-
tor from Alabama I Mr. Hill], the chair-

man of the subcommittee, and the Sen-
ator from Minnesota (Mr. ThyeI, the
ranking minority member of the sub-
committee, for the very fine attention
they gave to the vast number of subject
matters included in the bill. They did
so day after day, week after week, and
month after month; in fact, their atten-
tion to these subject matters extends
from one year to another, during every
month of the year, I am sure.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, during the
recesses of Congress there have been
times when many of us who serve on the
subcommittee have gone to various uni-
versities, colleges, and research centers,
and have tried to acquaint ourselves with
the work being done in the field of re-
search. We have done that right at the
laboratories, where the scientists have
demonstrated what they were actually
accomplishing by means of the research
funds which had been made available.
That Interest on our part has not only
carried us Into the field, so as to become
acquainted with the work l>eing done by
the scientists, but it has also kept us In
close contact with those who work In
these fields.

In its report the conunittee has stated
what has been done to expand the re-
search facilities, as well as to encourage
the best of our youth to engage in such
research work.

Mr. STENNIS. I thank the Senator
for that information. Mr. President, If

I may have the floor

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
CKTmcH In the chair). The Senator
from Mississippi has the floor.

Mr. STENNIS. Let me further say
that of the many subjects on which the
subcommittee, led by those whose names
I have mentioned, has passed on, I think
none is more Important than the health
program, to which they have given such
fine attention. In this connection, the
Senator from Maine I Mrs. Smith] should
also be mentioned, because of her very
fine knowl^ge of the subject matter,
and her special attention to It.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. STENNIS. I yield.
Mr. HILL. I wish to join the Senator
from Mississippi In the richly deserved
tribute which he has paid to the Senator
from Maine.

Mr. STENNIS. I thank the Senator
from Alabama. He is a Senator dedi-
cated to his work, his State, and the Na-
tion. He is most dedicated to those con-
structive activities that serve mankind.
I wish particularly to point out at this
time the close attention which the sub-
committee gave to the public-health pro-
gram's operations at the State and
county level, and which resulted In the
Increase voted by the subcommittee in
that particular appropriation.

Mr. President, those programs oper-
ate, not through the public-health office
alone of each State, but through the doc-
tors, the nurses, the various patriotic or-
ganizations, the PTA's, and other groups
and citizens generally.

If I may take a few minutes, I should
like to read some of the remarkable ac-
complishments of this particular service
in my State, led by an outstanding doc-
tor, Felix J. Underwood. I asked him to

send me these figures. I marvel so at
what they show that I want to preserve
them in the Record.

For instance, in Jasper County, Miss.,
In 1940, there were 345 recorded cases of
malaria. In 1955, there were no cases of
malaria.

In another coimty, in 1940, there were
150 such cases. In 1955, there were
none.

In the same county, in 1940, there
were 33 cases of pellagra. In 1950, there
was not a single case of pellagra.

In the same county there were 254
cases of measles in 1940, and only 2
cases in 1955.

In' another county, there were 94 cases
of malaria in 1940, but there were no
cases in 1955.

In still another county, there were 302
cases of malaria In 1940, but not a sin-
gle case in 1955.

In another county, there were 21
deaths from malaria In 1925. but not a
single death from such cause In 1955.

In that particular county, there were
24 deaths from pellagra In 1925. In
1955, there was not a single death from
that disease.

The same comment could be made
with respect to many of the other coun-
ties.

Those statistics illustrate the very fine
and effective work the program has ac-
complished over the years, with a very
small contribution by the Federal Grov-
emment, and the expenses shared by
the State and county governments. It
represents an excellent Illustration of
cooperation and contribution at the
three government levels, and most ef-
fective accomplishments as a result.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. STENNIS. I yield.

Mr. HILL. I happen to be familiar
with the work Dr. Underwood has done.
The Senator has spoken about coopera-
tion between the Federal Government
and the States. I am glad the Senator
did so, because fine a doctor as Dr. Un-
derwood is, he certainly had the whole-
hearted support and cooperation of the
Senator from Mississippi, which was
necessary. Unless Dr. Underwood had
had the support which he received from
the Senator from Mississippi, it would
not have been possible for him to do the
work he did. The Senator from Mis-
sissippi has been an outstanding leader
In carrying forward this program, par-
ticularly In supporting the local county
health units, as well as other great pro-
grams for the health of the American
people.

Mr. STENNIS. I appreciate the re-
marks of the Senator from Alabama. I
am a latecomer in this field. I appre-
ciate particularly what the Senator
from Alabama has said about Dr. Un-
derwood, who is an outstanding doctor,
and one of the most consecrated men I
have ever known.
Mr. MORSE obtained the floor.
Mr. JAVrrS. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr, MORSE. I yield to the Senator
from New York.

Mr. JAVrrs. Mr. President, I ex-
press my appreciation to the senior Sen-
ator from Oregon LMr. Morse J, who has

St- ' •*^ **

twrt;

M

it

8918

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

1957

firraciously allowed me to take the floor
before him. because I have an engage-
ment waiting for me to fill now.

I wish to make a few comments on
this very important bill. I have had a
great many people Inquire as to the
work of the committee. I think the
committee, on balance and in total, has
done a splendid job.

I had a great deal of experience with
such measures in the Hou.se of Repre-
sentatives when I served there, and I
had the great honor of being the author
of the national heart disease research
program bill. So I am very familiar
with the criterion which should be used
in a judgment on this appropriation bill.
I might say, too. that no bill dealme
with the National Institutes of Health,
with regard to a program for health re-
search, ought ever to be discussed in the
Congre&s without mentioning the name
of one of our colleagues in the House.
Prank Keefe. of Wisconsin — a very con-
servative man. a very economy-minded
man, who nevertheless got his teeth
Into the whole problem of Federal re-
search into serious diseases and other
medical problems, and carried his efforts
through to fruition, and initiated, in the
other body of Congress, appropriations
which are now standard, as rejected In
this appropriation bill.

With respect to specific matters. I
should like to commend the committee
very highly for recognizing one of the
most important problems v.hich face our
institutions of higher learning, and for
allowing, in spite of the fact that it was
not allowed in the other body. $200 000
for the Presidents Committee on Educa-
tion Beycnd the High School. I hope
very much, knowing the caliber of the
men concerned, they will stand fast by
that item in conference.

We have 1,400,000 boys .ind girls who
are expected to graduate from high
school this year. By 1965 the number
will be in excess of 2 milhon By 1970
It will be about 2,200.000. Yet we find
that about 200.000 .students who are of
college caliber have difficulty in trying to
attend college for financial reasons; and
about 100.000 m the gifted category, who
could be leaders in .sciences and profes-
sions, will not be able to attend college
because of financial difflcultie.i;.

Such a situation cries aloud for action
on a loan bill for college student.^, such
as I have sponsored, or a so-called col-
lege bill, which has been sponsored by
others. Such action certainly demands
the greatest priority, even as an ele-
ment— and I think this is writing It down
considerably, but it still mu^t be said—
in the anti -Communist struggle. The
Soviet Union graduates twice as many
engineers as we do. It trains students
from other countries — one of the most
critical elements of foreign policy in
which we could engage— to the number
of about 250,000. while we train 36,000,
which IS a new high.

I commend the committee for some
recognition of this problem and for giv-
ing consideration to the matter.

I think also the committee has done
splendidly in giving attention to libraries
and hospitals, particularly m rural areas,
which are necessary to bring the cultural

level of the country even higher than
It is.

Moreover, the committee has done very
well with resp>ect to the matter of the
organized trucking industry and the ad-
ministration of the minimum-wage
levels on Federal highway construction.
I should like to address a question to
the chairman of the subcommittee upon
one matter, and that relates to the pro-
vision contained in the bill for dental
research. I think the committee is to
be commended for its recok'nition of the
critical contribution to health of dental
research.

I should like to suggest to the chair-
man of the subcommittee that some re-
ply should be given to the dental soci-
eties, especially the American Dental
Fociety and the Dental Society of the
3tate of New York, which feel that at-
tention should have been given to the
recommendation for an appropriation of
$3,700,000 for conrtruction of a research
building for a National Institution of
Dental Research.

I might -say to the chairman of the
subcommittee that the reference made
to that que.slion is nt pase 854 of the
hearings, relating to a preliminary ap-
propriation for plannmg of the build-
ing.

I hasten to add that I am not in any
way finding fault, but I feel that when
such a great body of professional people
express an interest, some reply ought to
be Kiven to them.

Mr, HILL. Mr President. I am de-
liehted that the Senator from New York
raised this question. I want him to know
I feel just as he does, that that build-
in": should be constructed, and should
be constructed at the earliest possible
moment.

Let me say also that at the present
time there is what we might call a freeze
on construction, as the Senator perhaps
realizes The administration is not
soing forward with construction of new
buildines at this time.

But the committee has provided for
the continuation of the availability of
some $200,000. so that there will be
no delay so far as preparing the plans
for this building is concerned. In other
words, the committee continues the
availability of $200,000, appropriated
la.^t year, so that the administration may
go forward and make blueprints and
plans for the building contemplated. As
soon as the freeze is lifted and the ad-
ministration is ready to proceed with
new construction, we certainly hope we
have the funds provided in a supple-
mental or deficiency bill.

As is the Senator from New York, the
Senator from Alabama is most anxious
and eager to see this construction under
way. to see this building started, and
to see :t finished.

Mr. JAVITS. I thank the Senator
from Alabama very much, and I wish
to commend him personally. I know
how hard he has worked on this mat-
ter, and what a great contribution he
has made to the cause of the American
people, in this appropriation bill and
otherwise. I would have expected the
Senator to say what he has said. I feel
the dental profession should be tremen-
dously encouraged by the disposition

.shown by the chairman of the subcom-
mittee I thank him very much.

Mr. HILL. I thank the Senator from
New York.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr, President. I yield
the floor.

Mr. MORSE obtained the floor.

Mr CARLSON. Mr President, will the
Senator yield *

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I yield to
the Senator from Karisas with the under-
standing I do not lo.sc my rlfc'ht to the
floor.

Mr. CARLSON. Mr. President. I much
nppreclate the courtesy of the very able
Senator from Oregon for giving me this
opportunity to pay tribute to two out-
standing members of the committee, who
have de\-oted so much time to preparing
and bringing beforr the Senate not only
the fine report submitted, but an out-
standing appropriation bill, which I
think deals fairly with health, education,
and welfare.

I know that the three agencies could
not have had more able Senators han-
dling their appropriations, or. what I ap-
preciate most. Senators who handlejl the
matter with greater syTnpathy I think
they have rendered an outstanding .sen--
Ice by their work on this bill.

I wr.h to mention one Item In which I
am particularly interested, namely, the
mental health program. If I read the
report correctly, an additional amount of
$3,777,000 was recommended lor that
program.

I have had some experience In dealing
with mental health proi.'rams, and I ap-
preciate the increase in the sum appro-
priated by the bill. I sincerely hope the
Hou;e will approve the increase.

My State has been fortunate, in that it
has had Uie privilege of usins the Men-
ningcr Foundation, not only nationally
known but internationally known, in
establishing its mental health program.
In cooperation with StaU- health agencies
and the medical profession, my State
adopted a mental health program in
1547.

I sJiouId like to report to the Senate
that. In 1955. 75 percent of the people
who were admitted to the SUte hospital
for mental illness were released before
the end of 12 months. That is an ex-
ample of the experience we are having
in our State. Mental illness can be cured.
It can be treated at home.

The expansion In the pro^iram made
possible by the increase recommended In
the appropriation will. I think, mean
much not only to the patients themselves,
but to their friends, their families, to the
State, and to the Nation.

To the very able Senator from Ala-
bama I Mr. Hill I and the ranking minor-
ity member, the Senator from Minnesota
I Mr. ThyeI. the junior Senator from
Kansas wishes to say he is deeply in-
debted for the fine way in which they
have handled this appropriation.

Mr. HILL. Mr, President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. CARLSON. The Senator from
Oregon has the floor.

Mr. MORJBE. I yield.

Mr. HILL. I wish to thank the dis-
tinguished Senator from Kansas for the
kind and generous words he has spoken

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8919

to the Senator from Minnesota and the
Senator from Alabama.

I might say that the distinguished
Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Pas-
TORC] has been one of the most inter-
ested and effective members of the sub-
committee. Particularly has he been
helpful in the matter of the health ap-
propriations.

I wish to say to the distinguished Sen-
ator from Kansas that his State Is rec-
ognized as the great pioneer State in the
matter of mental health. The State of
Kansas has done many things in that
field. It has set an inspiring and chal-
lenging example for the other 47 States.
The great program which the State of
Kansas is now carrying forward was ably
aided and abetted by the distinguished
Senator when he wiis the governor of
Kansas. The Senator from Kansas,
while Governor, had the vision to see the
possibilities in the field of mental health,
and, as governor, took the lead in
launching the great programs which
have done so much not only for the men-
tally ill in the State of Kansas, but, by
setting this challenging example, have
done so much for all the States and all
the people of the United States.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Oregon yield to me?
Mr MORSE. I yield.
Mr, THYE. I wish to thank the dis-
tinguished Senator from Kansas for re-
ferring to the work of the subcommittee.
I can say. Mr. President, that every mem-
ber serving on the subcommittee has
been diligent, although we have busy
schedules, and oftentimes there would be
more than two appropriation subcom-
mittee meetings scheduled for hearings
at the same time. There were times
when it was almost mandatory on some
of the Senators to attend other appro-
priation subcommittee sessions, or other
legislative committee sessions, and
therefore It was not possible for all the
subcommittee members to l>e sitting at
the same hearing.

However, on this particular subcom-
mittee there serves the distinguished
Senator from Michigan [Mr. Potter],
who was present at a great number of
the hearings, as well as the Senator from
Rhode Island [Mr. Pastori], and the
Senator from Maine I Mrs. SMmi].

I could proceed to name every one of
the subcommittee members, each of
whom devoted an enormoiis amount of
personal time to study of the question
of appropriations aflecting health
matters.

I should like to refer now to the work
of the State of Kansas and of the distin-
guished Senator from Kansas [Mr.
Carlson] while he was Governor of the
State. In the field of menUl health.

I was Governor of Minnesota during
the war years, when we were oftentimes
denied the full complemem of institu-
tional employees necessary, because they
were not available. We could not build.
However, we had an interim committee
which was studying the needs for Insti-
tutional improvements, Including what
was necessary in building expansion, as
well as program development.

Our State was fort\inate to have as
Its next executive. Governor Youngdahl.
He made a most outstanding record for

treatment of mental health and the de-
velopment of facilities for treatment of
mental health.

I know that the distinguished Senator
from Kansas [Mr. Carlson] is familiar
with what was done in Minnesota, be-
cause he, as Governor of Kansas, was
working in that field along with Gov-
ernor Youngdahl, and they both were
availing themselves of the enormous
amount of research which the military
was compelled to do in the mental-
health field, because of the mental fa-
tigue and mental breakdowns which oc-
curred In the military services imder the
pressures of World War n.

So we have advanced far by reason of
the assistance of Congress, and because
of men like the Senator from Kansas
(Mr. Carlson] and Governor Youngdahl,
who were serving as governors of their
respective States. They were availing
themselves of the knowledge which had
been gained in the military mental
health work. The people of the Nation
are beginning to appreciate the work of
the Senator from Kansas and Governor
Youngdahl, now Judge Youngdahl, as
well as the work of the distinguished
Senator from Alabama [Mr. Hill], who
has served as chairman of this subcom-
mittee and has done such constructive
work in the committee and in the Con-
gress.

Mr. CARLSON. Mr. President. wUl the
Senator from Oregon yield me another
minute?

Mr. MORSE. I am glad to yield to the
Senator from Kansas.

Mr. CARLSON. I regret to trespass
on the time of the Senator from Oregon,
who has been so generous, but I cannot
let this opportunity pass without stating
that I did not intend to omit the name
of any member of the Appropriations
Subcommittee. I did not start by nam-
ing the individual members, because I
could not recall all the names. Every
member has worked diligently, and has
done an outstanding piece of work in
bringing forth this appropriation bill.
The Senator from Alabama [Bdr. Hill]
and the Senator from Minnesota [Mr.
Thye] have performed a great service.

With regard to the mental health work
in Kansas, let me say, in no spirit of
egotism, that in all my public service I
gained more satisfaction from the men-
tal health program which was started in
my State in 1947 than from any other
phase of my activities. It was not the
Governor of Kansas who did it. The
people of Kansas did it. At one time, we
were ranked 47th in the list of States in
the field of mental health. Today we
are third among the States of the Union,
and our record is outstanding in obtain-
ing results. It is a great satisfaction to
know that in Kansas when people are
committed to a mental institution, 75
percent of them are returned home well
and cured within a year. That is the
record within my State.

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield to the Senator
from Rhode Island.

Mr. PASTORE. I visited the Senate
of the United States when I was Gov-
ernor of my State 7 or 8 years ago. I
shall always remember that the very

first personality to whom I was Intro-
duced on the floor of the Senate was the
distinguished Senator from Alabama
[Mr. Hill]. If my memory serves me
correctly, he was the party whip at that
time.

I need not tell his colleagues, who
know him possibly better than I do. that
that friendship has grown over the years.
He left an impression with me on that
day which will remain with me always.

It has been my pleasure to serve as
a member of the subcommittee. It is
one of the most exhilarating, satisfsring,
and proudest associations I have had in
my service in the Senate.

I believe that Lister Hill Is one of the
great personalities in this body. He is
a great humanitarian. He loves his fel-
low men. I think he exemplifies the
eternal commandment to love one's
neighbor as oneself. Lister Hill de-
serves a great deal of credit for the fine
Job he has done as a member of the sub-
committee. The people of the Nation are
fortunate to have a man of his caliber
and quality as chairman of the subcom-
mittee, and I am proud to call him my
friend.

Mr. POTTER. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Oregon yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield to the Senator
from Michigan.

Mr. POTTER. I thank the disUn-
guished Senator from Oregon for yield-
ing in order that I, too, may pay tribute
to the chairman of the subcommittee
which handled this appropriation bill.

It has been my privilege to serve on
that subcommittee ever since I became a
memt>er of the Appropriations Commit-
tee. I am constantly amazed at the
knowledge of the Senator from Alabama
[Mr. Hill] with respect to all phases of
the agencies whose appropriations are
considered by the subcommittee, partic-
ularly as they relate to health matters.
He brings to the subcommittee not only
profotind knowledge, but sympathetic
understanding. I assure Senators that
that spirit radiates to the other members
of the committee, by reason of his lead-
ership.

I again commend the chairman for a
masterful presentation. I know, from
the work which has already been done in
the field of research in the great insti-
tutes of health, that thousands of lives
have been saved as a result of such re-
search. We should be impressed when
we stop to realize the areas we are about
to break through in the field of medical
research, and the great potentialities for
safeguarding the lives of the people of
this country. Only a small amount of
money is appropriated for these pur-
poses, as compared with the amount
appropriated for research in the military
field, whether it be in connection with
aircraft, or any other feature of military
endeavor.

This research program costs probably
less than the research on a bomber.
Nevertheless, this is a program which
saves and preserves the lives of American
citizens, rather than being used for de-
stnicUve purposes.

Once again I wish to express my great
admiration for the senior Senator from
Alabama [Mr. Bill],

34; mi

m

v<m

m

'M'.

im

i-fi;

^1^

t 1

8920

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

1037

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, wiU the
Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield to the Senator
from Alabama.

Mr. HILL. I thank the Senator from
Michigan for his mo.st kind and generous
words. I repeat what I said a few min-
utes ago. that it was teamwork which
brought this bill to the floor.

Mr. POTTER. The team needed a
good captain, however.

Mr. HILL No member of the team
was more faithful and devoted than the
distinguished Senator from Michigan,
and no one contributed more than he
did.

Mr. POTTER. I thank the Senator.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Oregon yield?
Mr. MORSE. I yield.
Mr. LONG. I wish also to compliment
the distinguished chairman of the sub-
committee for the fine work he has done
in the preparation of this bill and bring-
ing it before the Senate.

I note that in some instances there
have been increases over the amounts
allowed by the House. I am particularly
happy that there were increases In the
fields in which they were made, dealint?
primarily with health research, and the
effort to find a cure for cancer, for vari-
ous heart diseases, allergies, arthriti.s,
metabolic diseases, and various other ail-
ments, also neurological studies, studies
In the field of blindness, and other activ-
ities.

Someday we shall find the cure for
most of these causes of human suffer-
ing and early death. It is unfortunate
that in many Instances the cure will
be found much too late to benefit those
who are living today. However, many
people will be benefited, and many will
live better hves and longer lives because
of the additional funds bemg provided
by this bill to carry forward the program
of health research. I know of no ex-
penditure which could be made by the
Government which would pay greater
dividends than the funds expended in
health research.

The Senator from Alabama [Mr.
Hn.Ll was one of those who first recog-
nized the great need in this field. He
has fought diligently in behalf of health
research. The bill provides less money
than he would like to see available for
these purposes, but I suppose it is as
much as could be provided at this time
to go forward with the program.

I thank the Senator from Alabama for
seeing to it that at least the items in
the field of health research did not suf-
fer In the process of reducing govern-
mental expenditures.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, w.Il the
Senator from Oregon further yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield to the Senator
from Alabama.

Mr. HILL. I thank the Senator from
Louisiana for his kind and generous
words. We have made definite progress
In the field of the diseases to which the
Senator refers, but there is much yet to
be done. Every 2 minutes during which
we have been considering this bill, a
man. woman, or child In this coimtry
has died from cancer. More people die
each year from diseases of the heart and

circulatory system than from all other
causes combined.

More than 50 percent of the hospital
beds of the country today are occupied
by people suffering from some form of
mental illness. We have made progress,
but the battle must continue. As the
distinguished Senator from Louisiana
has so well said, we must stand dedi-
cated to winning this battle over crip-
pling and kilUng diseases.

Mr. LONG. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Oregon further yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. LONG. In line with what the
Senator from Alabama has said, I would
be the first to agree that there are a
great number of places in the budget
where worthwhile economies can and
should be made. But certainly the
items which have been increased are
Items which should be increased. The
program should be expanded.

I hope the Senator from Alabama
u-ill be successful in maintaining these
items when he goes to conference with
Meml)ers of the House.

Mr. MONRONEY. Mr. President. I
should like to join my colleagues who are
not members of the subcommittee In ex-
pressing appreciation for the excellent
work which has been done on the appro-
priation bill before the Senate, not only
by the members of the subcommittee, but
by its great chairman, the Senator from
Alabama (Mr. Hill). I doubt if any
other man in the past decade has done
so much for so many in attempting to
eradicate or eliminate or reduce human
suffering from every phase of American
life and in establishing health facilities
and great research projects in cancer and
other diseases which have afflicted man-
kind for generations, and In bringing
about appropriations commensurate with
the importance of such projects in the
national picture.

We can feel that America Is a much
better place because the Senator from
Alabama has been able to guide, with
the fine abflity he has, the development
of this great research program In medi-
cine.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, I
feel certain that Senator Hill knows my
particular interest in the urgent subject
we are discussing today. It is a mar-
velous tribute to the Senator from Ala-
bama that the funds have been increased
over the budget estimate and over the
House allowances for the various vital
aspects of the National Institutes of
Health, such as the National Cancer In-
stitute, the Institute of Mental Health,
the National Heart Institute, and related
activities.

I doubt If any Senator, no matter how
eloquent he might be, could say anything
on the fioor of the Senate today that
would add to the encomiums which have
come so deservedly to the Senator from
Alabama.

However, I should like to presume on
the time of the Senate to refer to a
tribute to Lister Hat that I heard from
another man who Is far better equipped
than any Senator could possibly be to
tell of the good deeds and the marvelous
work of the Senator from Alabama in
this very critical realm.

Perhaps because of my Interest In the
field of medical research, I have had an
opportimlty recently to become well ac-
quainted with Dr. Sidney Parber, the
great professor of pathology at the Har-
vard Medical School and head of the
Children's Hospital for Cancer and Re-
lated Diseases In Boston. Dr. Parhcr has
the heartbreaking and challenging task
of having responsibility over 300 children
who are affllicted with cancer and with
various forms of cancer, such as leu-
kemia. I doubt if any human being could
have such a responsibility without being
deeply moved and emotionally touched*.
Sidney Farber is a person of warm hu-
manitarian impulses. Dr. Parber said to
me: "Senator. I could not carry on the
task each day of being with hundreds of
children who are doomed to die of cancer
unless I felt that somehow, somewhere,
we would make a discovery, a break-
through which would spare children In
the future of this dreadful fate."

Then Dr. Parber went on to say— and
I am trying to paraphrase his words as
accurately as I can from remembering an
experience which was so vivid to me—
"Senator, when that time comes, and
when that marvelous event occurs, there
is one man. not in the field of science or
medicine, who will deserve credit along
with those in the field of medicine and
related sciences, and that man Is your
colleague In the United States Senat-^
LisTCT Hill."

I doubt that anyone could go through
either dictionaries or various thesauri of
the English language and express a
greater tribute to a person than what was
said about Senator Hill by this man who
Is trying to keep alive little children who
suffer from leukemia or other forms of
cancer.

A few weeks ago Mrs. Neuberger and I
visited the National Institutes of Health
because I felt that we should see for our-
selves this phase of our Government
about which we have been talking In the
Senate. We spent the better part of a
day in the companionship of the doctors
who are studyirig at the clinical center
the cases which might lead to further
discoveries in the field of malignancies,
heart disorders, arthrlUs, mental di-
seases, and other ailments that plague
the human race. We saw for ourselves
the dedicated service of the doctors.
nurses, and technicians at this core and
heart of the Governments medical-
research program.

I would presume too much on the thne
of the Senate if I were to relate all the
favorable things that I heard said about
the pioneering work of Senator Listir
Hill in this field. I can say. however.
that few men m their time leave behind
them enduring monuments, but the pro-
longing (rf human life and the relieving
of human suffering will be the most en-
during monument that any Senator
could possibly leave. Such an edifice
will be the work done In the field of
health research and the required appro-
priations for imdertaklng that work by
our colleague, the Senator from Ala-
bama.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, I wish to
express my very humble and deep ap-

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

preclation to the Senator from Oregon
for his generous words.

Mr. NEUBEROER. I merely wish to
add that every word was meant from the
heart. I cannot emphasize that too
strongly.

Mr. President, in conclusion I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the Rkcoro at this point an excerpt from
the newsletter of June 11. 1956, written
by my wife Maurlne and myself, which
indicates our appreciation and thank-
fulness over the increases In support for
the National Institutes of Health last
year. The same sentiments prevail
now as were expressed in this news-
letter of ours entitled "On the Frontier
of Ufe and Death."

There being no objection, the excerpt
from the newsletter was ordered to be
printed in the Rzcohd, as follows:
Washinoton Calling

(By Richard and Maurtne Neuberger)

ON THK fHOtCnSM OW LITE AND DEATH

Reader* of our new&letter will remen;t>er
the speeches we made In the 1954 campaign,
urging an Increase In Federal funda for med-
ical research, particularly toward trying to
And the cause and cure of that grim killer,
cancer. Some eclltoriala were boetUe. Oth-
ers claimed we were extravagant, forgetting
that 40 million people among our present
population are doomed to be afflicted by
cancer.

Anyhow, we have pounded away ever since
•rrlvlnff in the Senate. I became a cospon-
•or (>r Senator Maroaket Chase SMrrn's bill
for greatly expanded appropriationa in the
realm of medicine and medical education.
After all. a Nation which spends billions for
armament and for liquor aiid tobacco, should
not be parslmonloua when methods for pro-
longing human life may be lurking Just be-
yond the research scientist's mlcroecope or
test tube.

Our efforts have helped, perhaps, to bring
results. Where the moat troubleaome of
all maladies exist, appropriations for fiscal
1957 have pracUcally been doubled over the
present flacai year. Compare the figures, as
Just reported by Senator Listei Hill's com-
mittee;

8921

195fi

NiUloiial CuK-er InsUtute .
Nstiondl In^timti- o; IleaHh,

oiwrattnz hurtrt

MoiiUi lit-ttlUi luiiciioiu ..

Nstloiinl Honrt Institute I

l>f;iial liPHlUi runctioos

r24. 978,000

s,<>»,noo
iNuui,iiuu

IH.KBH.lim
% 170^ 000

1«>57

(48,132,000

11.92^000

35, WTi, UK)
33, .T<i«,(inO

^(>^6,aoo

In our opinion, these are Tlrtaally the
most Important Oovemment appropriations
of aU. Can a warship, a dam. a highway,
compare even remotely with some miracu-
lous discovery which might le«d to the solv-
ing of the terrible riddle of malignancy?
Oregon residents will l>e proud to know that
Senator Watke Mobse made a powerful
speech against fiscal stinginess where funda
involving human life are concerned.

I still believe these present sums, sub-
stantial though they are In contrast with
earlier years, are not enough. The atom
was never cracked untU President Frank-
lin D. Roosevelt set aside «3 biUlon for a
crash program to do the Job. Under this
impetus, a generation of research and dis-
covery was crammed into a few years. Why
not the same sense of urgency In launching
an all-out aUack by science and knowledge
against cancer, heart disease, and mental Ul-
nessT

All of you have read how this administra-
tion Is supposed to emphasize human values.
Vet budget requests by tbe admlnlstratlozi

in these vital areas of cancer, mental heaHh.
heart, and dentistry totaled only 61 percent
as much as the funds authorized by ths
Senate. Actions speak louder than words.

Mr. EASTLAND. Mr. President. I de-
sire to endorse everything which has
been said on the floor about the distin-
guished Senator from Alabama [Mf,
Hill]. I do not believe there has ever
been a Member of the United States
Senate who has had a more distin-
guished career In this body than has
Senator Hill. I do not believe there is
a Member of this body who has more
personal friends among his colleagues
than has Senator Hill.

I think history will record that dur-
ing its long history there has never been
a Member of the Senate who has more
constructive legislation bearing his
name than has Senator Hill. The
country is better off because of the dis-
tinguished service which he has ren-
dered. I wish him many more years of
constructive service in the Senate.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, I express
my heartfelt appreciation and thanks
to the Senator from Mississippi for his
very generous remarks.

Mr. EASTLAND. I thank the Sena-
tor. I think he deserves them.

APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DIS-
TRICT OF COLUMBIA

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President. I should
like to refer briefly to a matter to which
I referred earlier this morning when I
said that at a later time today I would
discuss a misunderstanding which I be-
lle-e developed In the debate on the
floor of the Senate yesterday. Not that
It concerns me particulary, because I
know the Senator from Rhode Island
very well, and I know of the kindness
of his heart and the absence of any In-
tention on his part of any desire to
make any criticism of the work of any
committee.

However, because of the unfortunate
reference In the press this morning to
a part of the debate, I believe In fair-
ness to all concerned, there should be
clarification of an exchange which oc-
curred on the Senate floor yesterday In
regard to a document relating to the
problems of hungry children In the Dis-
trict of Columbia, which was printed as
Senate Document No. 43, by authoriza-
tion of the Senate. "Rie Senator from
Rhode Island and I were engaged in
debate. We were discussing the position
taken by the District of Columbia Com-
mittee with regard to the need for 89
additional schoolteachers.

The Senator from Rhode Island said:

Mr. Pastoke. Did the Committee on the
District of Columbia hold a hearing on that
item?

Mr. MoBSB. We had a Icmg hearing on the
educational system of the District at Co-
lumbia.

Mr. Panoax. Am I to understand that th*
District of Columbia Committee held a hear-
ing on this particular Item whUe the Ap-
propriations Committee was also consid-
ering it?

Mr. MoasB. Not in the ease of the 89
teachers.

Mr. Pastou. Of course not.

Mr. MoBsx. But we made a survey of the
entire matter.

Mr. Pastosk. But the whole survey Is a
platitude and a generallxsation.

Mr. MoBSK. Mr. President, why does the
Senator from Rhode Island say the whole
survey Is a platitude and a generalization?
The survey Is based upon detailed evidence
on Issue after Issue, as the evidence was pre-
sented before the committee.

It is apparent that the Senator and
I were talking about two different things.
He was talking with regard to one item,
the 89 teachers, and I was talking about
the report of the committee, in which
reference was made to a good many is-
sues. Certain references in the prefs
this morning allege that the statement
of the Senator from Rhode Island was
interpreted as criticizing the report of
the Committee on the District of Co-
lumbia, which certainly was not the in-
tention of the Senator from Rhode Is-
land. I am sure he will understand why
I make this statement on the floor of
the Senate. Some ardent supporters of
the District of Columbia Committee
within the District of Columbia have
called this morning about this matter.
I do not want from what appears in the
Rbcord any unjust inference to be drawn
about the Senator from Rhode Island,
the committee or anyone else.

Mr. PASTORE. I thank the Senator
frcm Oregon. Let me say that if in
any way I have caused any distress to
my distinguished and very intimate
friend from Oregon, I regret it very
much. On the other hand, if it is a mis-
understanding, I am very quick to try
to clarify the matter. Naturally, in the
heat of debate, there occur retorts and
refutations and rebuttals and other
statements, and sometimes on the spur
of the moment a general statement is
made that may lead to some misunder-
standing.

Certainly that was not the intent of
the juniw Senator from Rhode Island.
We were talking at the time, as I recall,
about the 89 schoolteachers. I was try-
ing to pinpoint that as a specific matter.
When I said, "platitude and generaliza-
tion," I had reference to the whole
panorama of the survey with reference
to the school problem and the social
problem. I meant to say. I hope I did
say. and I am sorry that anyone should
have misimderstood what I did say, that
so far as the 89 teachers were concerned,
that matter had not been discussed in
the survey; that the survey, of Its very
nature, had to be a general, overall study
of the educational and the social prob-
lem in the c<xnmiinity.

Mr. MORSE. The Senator Is com-
pletely correct.

Mr. PASTORE. If there has been any
misunderstanding, I hope my remarks
this morning have clarified the situation.

I repeat: If I have caused any embar-
rassment or distress to my friend, the
distinguished Senator from Oregon, I am
very sorry for it. and I hope what I have
said will clarify the matter.

Mr. MORSE. It has not caused any
embarrassment or distress to me. As the
Senator knows, that Is pretty hard to do.
But in fairness to the Senator from
Rhode Island I think it should also be
pointed out that when the surveys were
presented to the Subcommittee on the
District of Columbia, the Senator from

I

t

mm

«? h' f'.

;;«

mm

i

f '

M.

*t«

S922

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Rhode Island, I felt, went out of his way
to be very helpful and very compli-
mentary of the work which the Commit-
tee on the District of Columbia was
doing.

I told the Senator then, and I tell him
now. that I appreciate that very much.
I Siiy for the Record today that I am
satisfied — in fact, I am willing to predict
today — that with respect to the lecom-
mendations on which we shall seek action
by way of legislative change in tho years
immediately ahead, recommendations
which are covered by this particular
survey, and which go to the matter of
human welfare, the Senator from Rhode
Island will be on our side more often
than he will be against us.

Mr. PASTORE. I remember very well
the incident to which the Senator has re-
ferred. As a matter of fact, the appear-
ance of the distinguished Senator from
Oregon before our committee was very
helpful. I say as sincerely and honestly
as I can say it that if there was only one
motivation which the distinguished
Senator from Oregon had in presenting
his report to our committee, it was the
bigness of his heart. I said then, and I
now repeat, that I have the highest re-
spect and admiration for the distin-
guished Senator from Oregon. He in-
cluded in his report many thing .s — and
many of the statements he made before
our subcommittee to relate to things —
which are very close to my interest and
of great concern to me. I hope the day
will come in this community when seri-
ous attention and thought will be given
and action will be taken with respect to
the report submitted by the Senator
from Oregon.

Mr. MORSE. I appreciate that state-
ment. The Senator from Rhode Island
Is quite correct in saying that in the
heat of debate, when we as lawyers are
pressing as hard as we can the points
we are urging, sometimes others mis-
understand the motivation of our
language.

I want the Senator from Rhode Island
to know that if, in our debate yesterday
anything I said could possibly be inter-
preted as a reflection upon him, that was
not my intent, because he knows, as I
think it is very proper for me to say, that
our friendship is one which I consider
to be one of the most intimate I have.
No criticism of the Senator from Rhode
Island was intended by any of our ex-
changes yesterday.

Mr. PASTORE. If I loved the Sena-
tor from Oregon before the debate took
place, then I love him even more after-
ward.

Mr. MORSE. I thank the Senator
from Rhode Island.

DEPART\rENTS OP LABOR AND
HEALTH. EDUCATION, AND WEL-
FARE APPROPRIATIONS, 1958
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill iH. R. 6287' making appropri-
ations for the Departments of Labor
and Health, Education, and Welfare and
related agencies, for the fiscal year end-
ing June 30, 1958, and for other purposes.
Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President,
earlier in the day, when I was discu.ssing
the remarkable work done by the Sena-

tor from Alabama in the field of appro-
priations for health research, I neglected
to mention a matter which I believe
should be stated today on the floor of
the Senate. After all. I am of the opin-
ion that none of these great gains could
have been made, had it not been for the
complete cooperation of the distin-
guished senior Senator from Arizona
I Mr. Hayden]. the chairman of the full
Appropriations Committee. I certainly
believe his name should be mentioned
here, in com ection with the great strides
which have been made in the making
available of funds for the National Insti-
tutes of Health, in particular, under the
appropriation bill for the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare. I be-
lieve that the Senator from Alabama
I Mr. Hill I , who is always magnanimous,
will have no objection to my making ref-
erence to the complete cooperation he
has received in this respect from the
senior Senator from Arizona (Mr. Hay-
den 1 . the chairman of the Appropriations
Committee.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Oregon yield to me:*

The PRESIDING OFFICER .Mr. Tal-
MADGE in the chair >. Does the Senator
from Oregon yield to the Senator from
Alabama?

Mr. NEUBERGER. I yield.
Mr. HILL. Mr. President, not only
have I no objection, but I am gratified
and very happy that the Senator from
Oregon has paid this tribute to the Sen-
ator from Arizona IMr. Hayden 1 . because
certainly the Senator from Arizona rich-
ly deserves every word that has been said
of him by the Senator from Oregon.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President. I
feel certain that we would not have had
the salutary results in medical-research
funds which have been achieved through
the direct guidance of the Senator from
Alabama I Mr. Hill) if it had not been
for the excellent work of the Senator
from Arizona IMr. Hayden 1.
Mr. HILL. That is entirely correct.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. President, I should
like to call attention to the item of $5
million for grants for library services.
I know the Senator from Alabama is
aware of the fact that Congress author-
ized an annual appropriation of $7,500,-
000, I believe, for a period of 5 years.

Mr. HILL. The Senator from Ken-
tucky is correct.

Mr. COOPER. Last year, there was an
appropriation of $2 050.000. Of course,
the item in this bill is more than twice
that large; namely, $5 million.

My State is one of those which has
taken advantage of this program. By
means of these contributions bookmo-
biles have been placed in service- in the
counties of Kentucky. Kentucky has
joined with private organizations in pro-
viding all the matching funds required
in order to make the program wholly
effective; and in a period of 3 years the
circulation of books through this serv-
ice in my State has increased from
zero — except for the circulation of books
through agencie.s already in existence —
to 2 million books in 1953-54, and to 5
million books in the next year and to 6
million books last year.

I wish to ask the Senator from Ala-
bama whether, from his study of the pro-

gram and the bill, he can say that the
$5 million appropriation wil) permit
States such as mine. wh<ch have taken
advantage of the program, to complete
their programs; and will the Federal
Government be able to match the funds
provided by the States?

Mr. HILL. Let me say to the Senator
from Kentucky — and I know of his great
interest In this matter— that I cannot
say it will permit his State to complete
its program. But I can say that the $5
million provided in the bill will permit
the State of Kentucky to make very defi-
nite progress with its program. As the
Senator from Kentucky knows, the $5
million item in the bill is $2 million above
the budKet estimate, which was for only
$3 million.

As the Senator from Kentucky also
knows, the program is a new one. The
authorization legi.slation was enacted
only at the last session of Con-
gress; and in one of the very last de-
ficiency appropriation bills at the last
session, we included an appropriation of
$2,050,000 for the program.

The pending bill carries an appropria-
tion of $5 milhon, which is $2 million
above the budget estmiate of S3 million,
which means that certainly very definite
progress can be made by Kentucky. Ala-
bama, and other States

Furthermore, the committee has In-
cluded in the bill language which will
permit all the $5 million to be used. In
other words, we have followed a prece-
dent which we have followed with refer-
ence to other funds, when there Is a co-
operative program between the Federal
Government and the States or the local
communities, namely, inasmuch as some
States will not be able to go forward with
their programs, since perhaps their leg-
islatures have not met, or have not
passed the nece.ssary enabling legisla-
tion, we provide that when the funds are
not used by some States, such unused
funds can be allocated to the States
which are ready to go forward, and are
going forward, with their programs.

So. I think we can say that by means
of the increa.se of $2 million over the
budget estimate, the State of Kentucky
and the other States which are ready to
go forward can make very definite prog-
ress with their progrRms.

Mr. COOPER. Mr. President. I appre-
ciate the Senators statement, and I
know he joins me in the belief that this
library program offers an opportunity to
bring books to thousands and even mil-
lions of people who live In remote areas
and do not have an opportunity to share
in the .service of the city libraries.

Mr, HILL. Yes; as the Senator from
Kentucky says, today there are millions
of persons who have no library service
at all. and many more millions who have
wholly inadequate library service.

I know how interested the Senator
from Kentucky is In this matter. He
made to our committee a strong state-
ment In behalf of this appropriation
item.

Mr. COOPER. I thank the Senator
from Alabama.

Mr. President, let me say there Is really
nothing I could add to the well-deserved
tribute which has been paid to the Sena-
tor from Alabama for his support of

8923

many humanitarian, humane measures
in many fields of legislation. Not only
has he given them his support, but. as
has been stated, be has initiated great
programs which well serve the country,
I know something of the high regard
in which the Senator from Alabama is
held in my own State, where he has vis-
ited and has spoken. I know that the
people of Kentucky have said that he is
a humanitarian and that he has humane
Ideals; but. better still, he has carried
his ideals into practical effect.

So I join with the other Senators who
have paid their tribute to the distin-
guished Senator from Alabama.

Mr, HILL. Mr. President, I thank the
Senator from Kentucky, and I express
to him my deep appreciation for his kind
and generous words.

Mr. BIBLE. Mr. President, I should
like to ask a question of the able chair-
man of the subcommittee, the Senator
from Alabama (Mr. HillI. I, too. wish
to join in the very fine and well-deserved
tribute which has been paid to him.

Previously. I talked to the Senator
from Alabama about a problem concern-
ing my State: it involves the Indian
colony at Elko, Nev. The committee
was asked to include in the bill an item
of $40,000. for the purpose of building
sewer and water facilities, as an emer-
gency health matter, within the city
limits of Elko, Nev.

In the committee. I pointed out that
there Is precedent for making this par-
ticular approach, because exactly the
same thing was done in the case of the
needed sanitary facilities in other Ne-
vada towns.

After complete control of the con-
.struction of sanitary facilities was given
to the Department of the Interior, the
duties of the Department in that regard.
in the case of sanitation and health
matters, were transferred to the Health
Service, in 1955.

In the committee I asked why, with
that precedent in mind, these steps
could not be taken, insofar as the Pub-
lic Health Service and the E>epartment
of Health, Education, and Welfare are
concerned with this particular situa-
tion.

I have been advised by the chairman
of the subcommittee that this Item was
not allowed. I wonder whether he win
give us an explanation of the reason
therefor.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President. I am de-
lighted to have the distinguished Sena-
tor from Nevada ask the question.

He appeared before our subcommittee,
and he made an excellent and most per-
sua-Mve statement.

The difficulty In this case Is that there
Is no authorization for this appropria-
tion Item, although there Is pending be-
fore the Committee on Interior and In-
sular Affairs of the Senate and before
the House Interior and Insular Affairs
Committee a bill which would authorize
the appropriation to which the Senator
has referred.

From the statement of the Senator
from Nevada, It seems to me that this Is
an appropriation which should be made,
and that this work should be done. I
hope the Senator may be able to get ac-
tion on the authorization bill, and that

we may take the matter up at a lltUe
later date, in a supplemental appropri-
ation bill. As the Senator knows, un-
der the rules of the Senate it is not nec-
essary for the authorization of an ap-
propriation to pass both Houses of Cc«i-
gress and be signed by the President.
If the bill can be reported by a Senate
committee and passed by the Senate, it
is completely in order to put the appro-
priation in an appropriation bill.

Certainly, the Senator made a very
strong rase before our committee. I
hope the authorization may be provided,
so we can go forward with the appropria-
tion.

Mr. BIBL£. I very much appreciate
the cooperation, the friendly attitude,
and the statement of the Senator from
Alabama.

I may point out that there was an area
of doubt as to the necessary authority
In this particular matter. It was my
hope, since it had been accomplished be-
fore, when the Interior Department had
exactly the same functions, that the pur-
poses could be accomplished under a
transfer.

I may say further that there Is pend-
ing before the House a specific author-
ization bill, In order to clear up the area
of doubt. It has passed a subcommittee
of the House. It is before the full com-
mittee of tiie House on this very day.

I thank the distinguished chairman of
the subcommittee for his assurance that,
as this bill moves along Its legislative
path, we shall have the opportunity of
having the matter considered again
when a supplemental appropriation bill
comes before the Smate. I cannot
stress too strongly the critical health
problem involved and the need for at-
tention to it.

Mr. HILL. I will say to the Senator
from Nevada he will have my full co-
operation in getting consideration of this
matter.

Mr. BIBLE. I certainly appreciate
that statement.

Mr. MORSE. If I may have the at-
tention of the Senator from Alabama
[Mr. Hn,L], I wish to say first that noth-
ing has been said by way of commenda-
tion of the Senator from Alabama, the
Senator from Minnesota tMr. Thyb],
the ranking minority member of the sub-
committee, and the distingiiished chair-
man of the full committee, the Senator
from Arizona [Mr. Haydbn], with which
I do not completely wish to associate my-
self.

I should like to add, Mr. President,
that In the day-by-day grind of our
work In the Senate — and that accurately
describes It. because I believe I can be
a witness to the fact that probably few
people realize the strenuous nature of
service In the Senate and the amount of
effort individual Senators put Into It —
I think sometimes we are not alwajrs. as
Senators, fiilly appreciative of the serv-
ices other Senators render to each one of
us and render to the people of the States
we represent. I do not know of a case in
which such a comment is more apropos
than In connection with the distin-
guished senior Senator from Arizona
[Mr. Hayden]. I believe no Member of
this body win dissent from the point of

▼lew I now express, that each of the
other 94 Senators is greatly indebted to
the Senator fnmi Arizona for the many
services he renders. On behalf of tha
people of my State I wish to express
these words of appreciation today.

We are dealing here with a bill which
embraces appropriation provisicxis with
respect to health. I share in all the trib-
utes and commendations which have
been uttered with respect to the Senator
from Alabama [Mr. Hiu.] and the Sena-
tor from Minnesota [Mi-. Thye], but in
my judgment, Mr. President, there is no
man in the Senate who could more ap-
propriately be called the major sponsor
of himianitarian legislation in the appro-
priation field, as it relates to the health
of American citizens, than the senior
Senator from Arizona [Mr. Hayden].

I like to think of Ljstei Hill as a dis-
ciple of Carl Hayden In this field. If
we wish to use another figure of speech,
he Is a very able pupil of a wonderful
legislative teacher, Caw. Hayden. I like
to think of these health bills as monu-
ments which will constitute for decades
living tributes to Carl Hayden's wonder-
ful legislative work.

Certainly the Senator from Alabama
[Mr. Hill] and the Senator from Min-
nesota [Mr. THYE] deserve the high
tributes of the Senate for the great
work they have done in the same field.
Year after year Lister Hill comes be-
fore the Senate with the subcommit-
tee appropriation report. It is inter-
esting that seldom, as we say in Senate
cloakroom language at least, is there a
•Tiassle" over a Lister Hill report, be-
cause he always has his reports in the
excellent shape in which this report to-
day is drawn. As one Senator I wish
to thank along with him, the Senator
from Minnesota [Mr. Thye] and the
other members of the subcommittee, for
the fine work they do on this subject
matter.

I wish to say to the Senator from Ala-
bama that any questions which I raise
about this report are not based upon any
criticism at all, but are merely seeking
information, and are designed to make
legislative history. They are only pro-
poimded in an effort to pave the way
for a future program which may really
strengthen the hand of the Senator from
Alabama next year and the year after,
as he brings other appropriation re-
quests before the Senate.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, wiU the
S«iator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. HILL. I wish to thank the Sena-
tor for the very kind words he has
spoken of the Senator from Alabama. I
particularly wish to express my appre-
ciation for what he has said about the
distinguished Senator from Arizona [Mr.
Hayden].

When I first became a Member of the
Hotise of Representatives, as a very
young man. the distinguished Senator
from Arizona was a Member there. He
was there rendering fine service. Just
as we see him here day by day contribut-
ing to what the Senate does. He is a
man whose name is seldom seen in the
headlines. In fact, we seldom see his
name in the newspaper. He Is too busy

1i;^--Jfa

-• f-:f.

fn-

i

QfiOl

rnMr,RF<;<NrnNAT RFroRn — .senate

Jii

ftp. 10

8924

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

1937

' i

*w»

I

with his work here for that. Day after
day he is faithfully carrying the tremen-
dous burden that falls to the lot of the
chairman of the Senate Committee on
Appropriations. He is always at his
place working, laboring and fighting for
the welfare of the people.

There is really no way for us to ex-
press the appreciation which is due the
Senator from Arizona for all the work
he does and the contribution he makes
to the labors of the Senate.

I am delighted that the Senator from
Oregon has paid his tribute to the Sen-
ator from Arizona.

Mr. MORSE. I think what I have
«aid about the Senator from Arizona is
a gross understatement. I hope in pri-
vate conversation with him some of
these days to express myself even more
Intimately and affectionately than I
think perhaps would be appropriate on
the floor of the Senate.

I should like to say to the Senator
from Alabama that I have been very
glad to discover, as I have studied the
report, that the Senator, as chairman of
the subcommittee, and his colleagues on
the subcommittee, have not been caught
up in what I would call a sort of whirl-
wind gust of economy at the expense of
human needs. Certainly we should save
the taxpayers money when it can be
saved, but. in my judgment, we are not
making any true saving when we seek
to reduce needed appropriations to pro-
tect the health of the people.

I am glad to read this report and the
figures contained in it. and to take note
of the fact that no meat ax was used.
On the contrary, the committee held its
grround in almost every instance by pro-
viding at least the amount of the budget
estimate. I think I would have favored
some recommendations over and above
the budget requests in certain instances,
as I shall point out in a moment, but I
have gone through the report, and I am
pleased to be able to say to my constitu-
ents that I do not think the Hill sub-
committee engaged in any false economy
in this report. By false economy I mean
the cutting of budget estimates in any
way which could not be justified on the
basis of the evidence before the com-
mittee.

For example. I notice on page 14 of
the report. In connection with funds for
the study of venereal disease problems,
that the committee held fast to the
budget request; likewise with regard to
funds for tuberculosis. There was a
slight reduction in the Item for com-
municable diseases — not much, but
some. I wonder If the Senator from
Alabama can tell us why the committee
decided that it should not recommend
the full amount in that instance.

Mr. HILL. The House allowed $6.-
200,000. We Increased the amount to
$6,250,000. which is only $10,000 below
the budget estimate. In other words,
with an estimate of $6,260,000 we are
$10,000 below the estimate. The fact is
that the Department did not ask for the
restoration of the additional $60,000, but
we put the amount back to $6,250,000.

Mr. MORSE. I am glad the Senator
made the latter point. This is a case in
which the Department did not ask for
the restoration. The responsibility,

therefore. In part at least, must be
placed at the door of the executive de-
partment Itself. After all, I think we
must admit that the presumption, in the
first instance, ought to be in favor of
the Departments request. When we go
above the Departments request, we must
have good cause, on the basis of the
evidence presented, for doing so. I am
glad we are making a record on the
point that the Department itself did not
ask for the $60,000 restoration.

Mr. HILL. We are only $10,000 below
the budget estimate. The figure is
$6250,000.

Mr. MORSE. I turn now to page 15.
under the headins: "Sanitary Engineer-
ing Activities"; also the item headed
"Grants for Waste Treatment Works
Construction."

In connection with sanitary engineer-
ing activities, the budget e.stimate was
$13,063,000 The committee recom-
mended $12,640,000.

In the case of grants for waste treat-
ment, the budget estimate was $50 mil-
lion, and the committee allowed $45
million.

I think the Senator from Alabama
knows the great interest of the Senator
from Oregon In the subject of stream
pollution control. I happen to believe
that among all our domestic Issues It is
doubtful If anyone could name one more
Important than the conservation of
Americas water supply. The Senator
has heard me say many times — but It
needs to be said many more times — that
civilizations do not climb with falling
water tables. History proves that as the
water table of a nation goes down its
civilization soon follows.

In this country, in my Judgment, we
are inexcusably wasteful of our water.
We are guilty of unconscionable pollu-
tion of our streams and our water
resources.

In 1956. a.s I recall, we pas.sed the so-
called Blatnik bill dealing with water
pollution. It contained provision for at
least some Federal aid to municipalities,
which desired to build modem sewage-
disposal plants.

In view of my great Interest In the
problem. I thought that, for the legisla-
tive record, I should ask the Senator
from Alabama the reason for the reduc-
tions below the budget estimates for
sanitary engineering activities and
grants for waste treatment.

Mr. HILL. According to the testi-
mony before the committee dealing with
grants for waste treatment, the commit-
tee recommendation of $45 million will
provide funds for all projects which
would be provided for If we had recom-
mended the full $50 million In the bill,
on this basis: Some of the States and
localities are not ready to go forward
with these works. As the Senator
knows, this is a new program. The leg-
islation authorizing It was introduced In
the House by Representative Blatnik. of
Minnesota, and was passed only In the
closing days of the previous session of
Congress.

We are assured that the $45 million
recommended by the committee will take
care of all the projects which are ready
to go forward, to a^ full an extent as

though we had provided the full amount
of $50 million In the bill. So this re-
duction In no way cuts down the pro-
gram. If the Senator will notice the
language In connection with the appro-
priation. It is made clear that the allot-
ments are made on the basis of $50
million.

All the projects can go forward. No
single project will be denied by reason
of this reduction.

Mr. MORSE. I am glad to make this
record and have the comments of the
Senator from Alabama.

Some weeks ago I spoke Rt a confer-
ence of Southern States, held at Raleigh,
N. C. on the municipal sanitation prob-
lem. I found a remarkable Interest In
the Implementation of the Blatnik bill.

I also found. In the discussions which
took place at that conference, that some
of our municipal officials were surprised
to learn that funds are available.
Therefore. I should like to use this de-
bate as a springboard for giving
a little advice to the Department con-
cerned. I think it needs to do a better
job of Informing the municipalities of
America alwut this program.

Mr. HILL. The funds are available.

Mr. MORSE. The funds are avail-
able; and next year the Senator from
Alabama will have justification for rec-
ommending a much larger Kum. on the
basis that there will then t)e a clamor
for Federal aid In this field by an In-
creasing number of municipalities. Too
many municipalities throughout the
country are polluting stream.^ by turning
them Into open sewers filled with raw
sewage, when they ought to be building
pollution-control plants and sewage-dis-
posal plants.

The purpose of the Blatnik bill was to
encourage them to do that very thing.
I am taking the time to raise the point
In regard to this Item, because If we are
to stop stream pollution, the municipali-
ties have a duty to take this problem to
their taxpayers and to urge that bond
Issues be voted. If necessary, to raise the
municipal contribution to such a pro-
gram as this, thus permitting it to quali-
fy for this aid.

We are talking In Washington. D. C,
I therefore also give that little advice to
the Commissioners of the District of Co-
lumbia and to the more than 500 "alder-
men" of the District of Columbia, the
Members of Congress. I believe that we
aldermen ought to do a much better Job
of providing for sewage disposal here In
the Capital City of the Nation. Since
Washington has a hybrid type of gov-
ernment, under which no one gets a
chance to vote on municipal affairs ex-
cept Members of the Congress, we ought
to encourage the District Commissioners
to try to apply to the District the pro-
visions of the Blatnik bill. I know of no
reason why It should not apply to the
District of Columbia. Of course. I know
It will be said, "We have some plants
and some Improvements In our plants."
However, the fact Is that the sewage-
dispo.sal improvements which have been
made in the District of Columbia In the
past few years are already obsolete. The
time has come to have a real sewage-
disposal system in the District of Co-

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

S925

lumbla, which will not dump Into the
Potomac River any material which would
make it undesirable to use the water of
the area for recreational purposes, such
as swimming and boating. That has
not hoen done.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, will the
Sonator Include also fishing?

Mr. MORSE. Yes; and good fishing,
too. I should like to be able to enjoy
i;ome good fishing in the Potomac.

I desire also to commend the Senator
for the recommendation on page 22 of
the report with respect to the National
Cancer Institute. The budget estimate
was $46,902,000. the House allowance was
tlie same, and the committee recom-
mendation was $58,543,000.

The Senator from Alabama and I
covered that point. We must face the
fact that with respect to the terrible
plague of cancer — and that Is what it is
becoming — we have a public responsibil-
ity a.s Senators to appropriate money and
to do whatever can be done to seek to
conquer it.

I wish particularly to commend the
.Spnator with reference to the Item for
mental health activities, on page 23 of
the report. The 1958 budget estimate
V as $35,217,000, and the committee rec-
( mmendation Is $39,421,000. I wish to
.say offhand that I think that Is the type
of Item which could be Increased, as a
matter of fact.

Mr HILL. Mr. Pre.sldent. will the
Senator yield at that point?
Mr. MORSE. I yield.
Mr HILL. There Ls available an un-
expended balance of $4,573,000. There-
fore the total amount available will be
$43,994,000. or practically $44 milhon.

Mr. MORSE. I believe the Senator will
agree with me that the mentally sick
are in many respects the truly forgotten
people of America.

Mr. HILL. Certainly in the past they
have been the forgotten people.

Mr. MORSE. That has been true in
State after State.

Mr. HILL. They are put into Institu-
tions and the doors are closed on them.
After that. In many cases, that Is the
end so far as they are concerned.

Mr. MORSE. The situation is being
improved.

Mr. HILL. The situation is improving
because of tranquillzlng drugs and other
druRs. and because new techniques have
been developed. It Is Interesting to note
that until last year there was an in-
crease In the number of patients in the
mental hospitals. There was an Increase
each year at the rate of approximately
10.000. In other words, each year 10.-
000 more people entered mental institu-
tions than had been In them in the
previou-s year. LcLst year, for the first
time, there was a definite trend in the
other direction, and instead of an in-
crease, there was a decrease of 7.000.

Mr. MORSE. It Is very gratifying to
hear the Senator say that, as well as
to hear the report made by the Senator
from Kansas I Mr. Carlson] eyirlier In
the discussion. It shows what can be
done when a State proceeds to make the
mental health problems of the State a
matter. If not a major concern, cer-
tainly a considerable concern of the State

government. There Is no doubt that
every dollar spent for mental health is
a dollar well spent.

There is scarcely a Senator who can-
not point to a case close to him. involv-
ing a friend or an associate or perhaps
someone else. who. to his utter surprise
all at once develops a mental condition
that tends to become progressively worse
unless quick treatment is given and fa-
cilities for quick treatment are made
available to him.

We owe it to our fellow men, from
humanitarian motivations, to see to it
that we never economize on this item.

I am glad to know the Senator says an
unexpended balance is available and
therefore the total amount available is
approximately $43 million.

Mr. HILL. The total amount avail-
able Is $43,994,000. or almost $44 million.
Mr. MORSE. I also wish to commend
the Senator for the Item concerning
arthritis and metabolic disease activities,
as shown on page 27 of the report. The
budget estimate was $17,885,000. and the
committee recommendation is $23,548,-
003.

Before I ask my question I wanted to
say these things about the report.

Mr. HILL. I may say that there is
also an increase over the budget esti-
mate for the National Heart Institute.

Mr. MORSE. Yes. I wanted to com-
ment on that also. Again I am glad to
see an Increase for that item. No one
should be guilty of any economizing with
respect to any of these research projects
or research funds in connection with any
of the serious diseases which threaten
the health of America.

Mr. HILL. I may say that there Is
also a very definite increase in the funds
available for neurology and blindness.
That takes In, of course, epilepsy and
cerebral palsy and deafness and blind-
ness, and other ailments.

Mr. MORSE. Yes. If the Senator
will permit me. I should like to have him
help me make a little legislative history
on another item. We have done that
before. I should like to refresh the
Senator's recollection as to the history
of the project. The Senator knows that
for the past 2 years the Senator from
Oregon, the 2 Senators from Virginia,
and the Senator from Alabama himself,
of course, have been very much interested
In a pilot rehabilitation center in Vir-
ginia. It is connected with the Anderson
Clinic in Arlington, Va., but not con-
nected with it in any financial way. It
Is a pilot rehabilitation center. It is
headed by a fine doctor. Dr. O. Anderson
Engh, who in my opinion performs, far
beyond anything that is called for in the
line of duty, a great many humanitarian
services for the people of this area and
the patients who are sent to him.

The Senator will recall that some years
ago, when this particular appropriation
was before the Senate, we provided with-
in it language which would authorize the
expenditure of funds to help conduct the
services of the pilot rehabilitation center,
but no funds for construction. The Sen-
ator will also recall, I am sure, that this
particular clinic is certainly an excellent
example of what the people of a commu-
nity can do by way of voluntary contri-
butions not only of 'money, but also of

personal service, in order to come to the
humanitarian aid of fellow citizens who
because they are imfortunately sufferinir
from terrible physical handicaps need
vocational rehabilitation.

In the Arlington-Alexandria are^^
and I should like to repeat this for the
Record this year — a small group of com-
munity organizations and agencies — the
Rotary Club, Kiwanis Club, the Lions
Club, the United Daughters of the Con-
federacy, and various church groups and
women's organizations — have devoted
their personal services as well as their
time and considerable money to this so-
called pilot rehabilitation center. That
center is located in Arlington, Va.

The Record should show also, before I
ask the Senator from Alabama any ques-
tions about this, that to this center,
under the direction of the distinguished
Dr. Engh. were sent a good many Federal
employees, not only from the District of
Columbia, but from elsewhere in the
United States who had been injured at
their work.

Speaking now only hypothetically, and
not in relation to any specific case — but
it is typical — assume that this afternoon
someone in the State Department should
walk into an open elevator shaft, fall
down, and injure his or her spine, and
that as a consequence partial paralysis
overtook the person. It is quite possible
that the Federal employee might be sent
to the so-called Engh Clinic for rehabili-
tation.

It happens to be the theory of Dr.
Engh that the program should be. as he
says, under one roof. There is the pos-
sibility of permanent muscular disabil-
ity fixing itself upon the patient. The
problem, then, is one of vocational re-
habilitation and guidance, so that the
person can be brought back into produc-
tive life. Such a pilot plant, we have
agreed in the past, is needed. So lan-
guage has been provided in bills hereto-
fore to make it possible for the E>epart-
ment to place some money in the clinic
to help with the program.

As the Senator from Alabama is aware,
the junior Senator from Virginia [Mr.
Robertson] has introduced a bill on this
subject, S. 2068. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the text of S. 2068 be printed
in the Record at this point in my re-
marks.

There being no objection, the bill (S.
2068) was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc.. That the second sen-
tence of section 4 (b) of the Vocational Re-
habilitation Act (29 U. S. C. 34 (b)) ia
amended to read as follows: "Sums made
available for such a pilot demonstration
center in the Washington area may be used
for the construction of facilities, including
future expansion, equipment, and such serv-
ices as hospitalization, domiciliary care, and
rehabilitation training, including costs of
board and room of trainees and other serv-
ices essential to the program, as in the dis-
cretion of the Secretary are deemed desir-
able."

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, the Sen-
ator from Alabama knows that the sen-
ior Senator from Virginia [Mr. ByrdI,
the junior Senator from Virginia [Mr.
Robertson], and I, after studjdng the
matter, came to the conclusion, to which
the Senator from Alabama agreed, that

1 J

a*

m

■ r^' --

-^

m

h'

I

8926

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

If any funds were to be used for con-
struction purposes, it would be neces-
sary to pass new authorizing legislation.
So the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Rob-
iRTSONl introduced S. 2068, which pro-
vides for an amendment of the Voca-
tional Rehabilitation Act, to read as
follows:

Sums made available for sxich a pilot dem-
onstration center In tiie Washington area
may be Uoed for the construction of facul-
ties, including futiire expansion, equip-
ment, and such services as hospitalization,
domiciliary care, aad rehabilitation training,
including costs of board and room of train-
ees and other services essential to the pro-
gram, as In the discretion of the Secretary
are deemed desirable.

Am I not correct in my vinderstanding
that the appropriation bill of which the
Senator from Alabama is in charge today
does net include any language which
would authorize the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare to use
any of the funds being appropriated to
that afe'ency for construction purposes at
the Engh Rehabilitation Clinic?

Mr. HILL. The bill does not carry
any fimds for construction purposes at
the Engh Chnic. because there is no
authorization for the appropriation of
such funds. As the Senator from Ore-
gon well knows, the purpose of the bill
introduced by our colleague, the junior
Senator from Virginia (Mr. Robertson 1.
is to authorize the appropriation of such
funds.

Mr. MORSE. Is It not true, however,
that such funds as are appropriated in
the bill to the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, can. as in the
past, in the judgment of the Secretary,
be u^ed for assistance to the Engh Clinic,
except that the funds may not be used
lor construction?

Mr. HILL. The Senator from Ala-
bama knows of nothing in the appropri-
ation bill which would in any way a.Tect
the terms of the basic act. which we
know as the Vocational Rehabilitation
Act of 1954. under which funds were
made available to the Engh Clinic for
maintenance and operation.

Mr. MORSE. If the Senator from
Alabama will now put on another com-
mittee hat for a moment, and speak to
me as the chairman of the Committee on
Labor iii.d Public Welfare, it is true, is it
not. that S. 2068 is pending before the
Senators committee, of which I also
have the honor to be a member, and that
the bill rill be scheduled for hearing, so
that Dr. Engh. the junior Senator from
Virginia, the Senator from Oregon, and
others uiterested m the bill may have an
opportunity to make an official record in
support of the bill?

Mr. HILL. We shall be deliphted to
schedule hearings on the bUI introduced
by the junior Senator from Virginia.
The present occupant of the chair, the
distirguished Senator from Michigan
[Mr. McNam.^r.a], also is a member of
our committee and Is a member of the
Subcommittee on Health. I am certain
he would be delighted to attend the hear-
ing when the Senator from Oregon, the
Senator from Virginia, and other wit-
nesses appear in behalf of the bill.

Mr. MORSE. I am authorized by the
Junior Senator from Virginia to say that
he joins with me in urging that early
hearings be held on the bill. I am au-
thorized also to speak on behalf of the
senior Senator from Virginia ( Mr. Byrd 1
in assuring the Senator from Alabama
that the senior Senator from Virginia,
too. is very much Interested in early
hearings on the bill and a favorable con-
sideration of it.

Speaking hypothetically. assuming:
th?t S. 2068 Is favorably reported, is
passed by Congress, and is signed by the
President before Con^re^s adjourns this
year — in fact, a sufficient length of time
before adjournment this year so that
further consideration could be given to
the funds necessary to implement it —
is it not the opinion of the Senator from
Alabama that appropriate requests still
rovld be made this year for considera-
tion in connection with a supplemental
appropriation request?

Mr. HILL. If the bill is passed and be-
comes law durintj this se.ssion of Con-
frress. It will be entirely in order to ask
for an appropriation in a supplemental
or a deficiency appropriation bill.

Mr. MORSE. Perhaps I should state
my question in this way; Does the Sen-
ator from Alabama expect or contem-
plate that a supplemental or a deficiency
appropriation bill probably will be re-
ported to the Senate by his subcommittee
before adjournment?

Mr. HILL. Supplemental and defi-
ciency appropriation bills are not han-
dled by subcommittees; they are handled
by the full Committee on Appropriations.
In the closing days of a session of Con-
gress, invariably a supplemental or a de-
ficiency bill is considered by the full
committee.

Mr. MORSE. I thank the Senator very
much fnr his assistance.

Mr. President. I shall close now with
a very brief sUtement. I want the Ric-
oRD to show that I shall continue to do
everything I can to assist the two Sena-
tors from Virginia in obtaining favorable
action on S. 2068. for these reasons:

I think the Engh Clmic. as a pilot
clinic for vocational rehabilitation, is one
of the great experimental rehabilitation
renters in this country. I recognize that
in the medical profession there are dif-
ferent theories and views as to the best
way to approach the vocational rehabill-
taticn problem. But the results, in my
judgment, are always the test m a mat-
ter such as this.

I believe that any evaluation of the
results of the remarkable work which Dr.
Engh and his associates have been doing
in the rehabilitation of persons in con-
nection with the pilot clinic program
which he is operating in Arlington, Va.,
would prove the soundness of the pro-
gram and justify an appropriation of
Federal funds as an aid to the construc-
tion of needed additlorvs to that clinic.

Labor has donated thousands of man-
hours of overtime In helping to build a
wing of that clinic. But the time has
come when it is necessary to complete
the physical facilities by way of construc-
tion by the expenditure of funds, rather

than In the expectation that the work
can be done completely through the do-
nation of services. There will, however,
continue to be a substantial donation of
free time on the part of labor in the
building trades.

The question, and let as get it before
the Senate by way of a preliminary hear-
ing on the bill, Is the question of Federal
interest. Are we setting up a program
that is singular, based upon a Federal
interest: or are we prcpa:iln^ support for
a program which might equally well be
requested by a clinic in San Francisco or
El Paso or Boston, Mass , or elsewhere in
the Naticn? It seems to me the answer
1.S that there Is a great Federal interest in
the clinic, for a reason I stated earher,
because many injured Federal employees
are referred there.

Furthermore, let m; make crystal
clear, as I SF>eak in advance in support of
Senate bill 2068. that this enterprise is
not in any way whatsoever a private-
business enterprise. Instead, the clinic
io conducted by Dr. E^'^h as a completely
humanitarian program. It is separate
and distinct from the Anderson Clinic or
hospital, in which Dr. Eiii;h is also, as I
recall, the head of the medical staff.
This IS a vocational rehabilitation center.
Every dollar of Federal money which
would be appropriated to It. following
the pa.ssage of Senate bill 2068, would
be well spent, and would foster what I
have been heard to say so frequently is
one of the great duties of the Congress,
to honor our humanitarian obbgation to
bring medical aid to unfortunate people
who need the specialized service that this
rehabilitation center Is dei^igned to pro-
vide.

I desire to thank the Senator from Ala-
bama for his assistance In enabling me
to make the legislative record I have
made regarding these Items.

Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President,
will the Senator from Alabama yield to
me?

The PRESIDING OFFICER 'Mr.
MoNRONEY in the chair>. Does the
Senator from Alabama yield to the Sen-
ator from Arizona?

Mr HILL. I am delighted to yield to
the Senator from Arizona.

Mr GOLDWATER. On page 2 of the
report. I notice that In the case of the
Office of the Solicitor, it was recom-
mended that there be transferred from
the highway trust fund an amount of
S365.000: but that after seeking the ad-
vice of its counsel, the committee de-
cided against doing so. Can the Sena-
tor from Alabama give us a brief explan-
ation of that matter and of why that
decision was reached?

Mr. HILL. I may say there was a
question of whether these trust funds
are available for such a purpose. We
submitted the matter to the ofBce of the
legislative counsel of the Senate, and we
received an opinion that such an appro-
priation from the trust fund is not au-
thorized. I shall be delighted to ask
unanimous consent to have the full opin-
ion of the legislative counsel printed in
the Record, if the Senator from Ari-
zona would like to have me do so.

Briefly, the legislative counsel held
that these funds are for highway-con-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8927

struction purposes, and are not to be
transferred to some other agency of the
Government, for legal service or other
services, but that they are trust funds,
and that there is imposed a trust to
make sure that they are used for the
construction of highways, and are not
transferred to other agencies, for use
for other services or purposes.

Mr. GOLDWATER. I would be very
happy to have the Senator from Ala-
bama have the opinion printed in the
Record, because I have been receiving
from the Far West suggestions that this
fund is already being tampered with in
this resi)ect. This is the first instance
I have seen In print of that. I have
heard that the highway trust fund is
being used to finance other agencies of
the Government. If that is true. I think
the Senator from Alabama has done a
very commendable thing in making the
decision he has made.

So I shall appreciate it If the Senator
from Alabama will have the full opin-
ion printed in the Rkcoro.

Mr. HILL Certainly. Then, Mr,
President, I ask unanimous consent to
have printed at this point in the Record
the opinion of the legislative counsel on
the matter of the transfer of the trust
fund to the Labor Dei>artment. or, for
that matter, to any other department.

There being no objection, the opinion
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

MKMoiuifDUM roi Senator Hill

Pursuant to your request we have exam-
ined the provisions of the Pederal-Ald High-
way Act of 19M and the Highway Revenue
Act of 1050 for the purjxiae of submitting
an informal opinion as to whether or not
such acta authorize tbe appropriation of
moneys out of the highway trust fund to
the Secretary of Labor (or more particu-
larly, to the Office of the Solicitor of the
Department of Labor) to defray expense*
Incurred in carrying out the duties Imposed
upon him under section 115 of the Federal-
Aid Highway Act of 1956. Per the reaaona
given ttelow. It Is our opinion that such an
appropriation from the Trust Fund is not
authorized.

THK LAW

Section 209 (f) (1) of the Highway Reve-
nue Act of 1950 reads as follows :

"(f) Expenditures from trtist fund. —

"(1) Pederal-ald highway program. —
Amounts in the trust fund shall be avail-
able, as provided by appropriation acta, for
making expenditures after June 30. 1966.
and before July 1, 1972, to meet thoM obU-
gatlons of the United SUtea heretofore or
hereafter Incurred under the Federal-Aid
Road Act approved July 11, 1910, as amend-
ed and supplemented, which are attribut-
able to Federal -aid highways (including
those portions of general administrative ex-
penses of the Bureau of Public Roads pay-
able from such appropriations)."

Paragraphs (3). (3). and (4) of section
209 (f) contain authorizations to make ex-
pendltxires (without further appropriations
being made therefor) from the trust fund
to repay advances, to reimburse the Treas-
ury for amounts paid with respect to gas-
oline used on farms or used for nonhlghway
purposes, and to reimburse the Treasury for
certain amounts paid as floor stoclcs refunds.
Section 310 (e) authorizes appropriations
out of the trust fund to enable tbe Secre-
tary of Commerce to make the study and
Investigation required by section 310. There
Is no other authority in the act for expend-

ing or appropriating moneys from the trxist
fund, so that If the act authorizes appro-
priations to the Department of Labor from
the trust fund it must be found In the
paragraph quoted above.

LKGISLATIVX XXCOHO

There Is UtUe In the legislative history
'Of the acts from which to derive assistance
In deciding the question posed. The House
committee report on H. R. 10660 contains
the following statement: "In most respects
the highway trust fund is to be handled In a
manner similar to that provided for the
trust fund for the old-age and survivors in-
surance program." The Senate committee
report contains an Identical statement.

In explaining the expenditures referred to
In section 209 (f) (1) of the Highway Rev-
enue Act of 1950, the House report contains
the following statement: "The expenditures
referred to are those which normally have
been paid out of the appropriation en-
titled 'Federal aid highways. Bureau of
Public Roads, Department of Conunerce'."
Again the Senate committee report con-
tained the same statement, although it
must be remembered that the bill as re-
ported by the Senate committees did not
contain the so-called Davis-Bacon Act pro-
vision.

A review of the discussion of H. R. 10600
when It was under consideration on the
floors of the House and Senate has faUed
to disclose any comments pertinent to this
Inquiry, although a good portion of the de-
bate In both Houses was devoted to the pro-
vision which was eventually enacted as sec-
tion 115.

DBCITSaiON

Section 200 (f) (1) of the Highway Rev-
enue Act of 1950 contains an express author-
ization for expenditure of the trust fund
to meet those portions of the administrative
expenses of the Bureau of PubUc Roads
which are payable from appropriations made
for Federal-aid highways. Section 21 of the
Federal Highway Act (23 U. S. C. 31) au-
thorizes the Secretary of Commerce to de-
duct a percentage of the appropriations
made for Federal-aid highways to be used
for administration of the Federal-aid high-
way program and for carrying on necessary
highway research and Investigational stud-
lea. No specific amount Is appropriated In
the annual appropriation acts for the ad-
ministration by the Bureau of the Federal -
aid highway program. Wblle It Is likely
that, even without the express authorization
contained in section 309 (f) (1). the admin-
istrative expenses of the Bureau of Public
RoaOB woxild. under the authority of sec-
tion 31 of the Federal Highway Act. have
continued to be payable from appropria-
tions out of the trust fund for Federal-aid
highways. It was evidently felt necessary to
eliminate any doubts that might arise by
putting the express authorization In the
Highway Revenue Act of 1950. This author-
ization continued the existing practice and
budgetary procedures with respect to the ex-
penses of the Bureau of Public Roads In ad-
ministering the Federal-aid highway pro-
gram. But we should emphasize that this
matter was considered to be of sufficient Im-
portance to be specifically provided for in
the act. The logical Inference Is that, If the
expenses of the Department of Labor were
also to be defrayed out of the trust ftmd.
an express authorization would have been
included In the act.

While It may be argued that the language
of section 308 (f) (1) Is broad enough to
Imply an authorization to use the trust fund
to defray the expenses of the Secretary of
Labor, we do not believe that such a
construction should be placed upon this
paragn4>h In the absence of a more speciflo
indication of legislative Intent. Such a con<
•traction wotild make it possible for the ez<

penses of the Secretary of the Treasury In
managing and operating the trust fund, the
expenses of the Internal Revenue Service in
collecting the revenues which go Into the
troBt fund, and the expenses of any other
officer or agency of the Government relating
to Federal-aid highways to be defrayed from
the trust fund. As was noted above, the
committee reports indicate that. In general,
the highway trust fund Is to be handled In
a manner similar to the Federal old-age and
survivors insurance trust fund. The Social
Secvirlty Act expressly authorizes the use of
the Federal old-age and survivors Insurance
trust fund to meet or reimburse the admin-
istrative expenses Incurred by the Treasury
Department In Implementing that act (In-
cluding the expenses of collecting the taxes
which go Into the Federal old-age and sur-
vivors Insurance trust fimd). Without
doubt consideration was given to Including
a similar authorization in the highway trust
fund, and It would l>e expected that a similar
express authorization would have been In-
cluded If the expenses of the Treasury De-
partment In implementing the Federal-Aid
Highway Act of 1956 were to be defrayed
from the highway trust fund. There appears
to be no greater reason for Inferring author-
ity to defray from the trust fund the ex-
penses Incurred by the Department of Labor
In Implementing the Federal-Aid Highway
Act of 1956 than for Inferring authority to
defray from the trust fund the expenses in-
curred by the Treasury Department In Im-
plementing such act. In view of the fact
that the highway trust fund was patterned
after the Federal old-age and survivors In-
surance trust fund, the absence of express
authorization to defray administrative ex-
penses, except with respect to the Bureau of
Public Roads, seems almost conclusive that
no such authorization was Intended.

As was stated above, the only statement in
the committee reports explaining the mean-
ing of section 209 (f) (1) Indicates plainly
that the expenditures referred to are those
normally paid .out of appropriations made
to the Bureau of Public Roads for Federal -
aid highways. This statement, far from fur-
nishing a basis for inferring a legislative In-
tent to defray the administrative expenses
of other agencies out of the trust fund, once
more shows that Congress Intended that only
the administrative expenses of the Bureau of
Public Roads be so defrayed, since such ex-
penses had. under authority of section 21 of
the Federal Highway Act. been paid from
such appropriations.

The establishment of a trust fund obvi-
ously was to prevent an encroachment upon
the Increased revenues raised by reason of
the enactnient of the Highway Revenue Act
of 1956, as well as to earmark these revenues,
and some of the revenues raised from then
existing sources, to meet the obligations of
the United States under the Federal-aid
highway program. Since Congress has seen
fit to establish a trust fund for the purpose
of meeting these obligations, we beUeve that
the objects for which the trust fund moneys
are to be expended should be narrowly,
rather than Uberally. construed.

CONCLUSIONS

1. There Is no express authorization In the
Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 or the
Highway Revenue Act of 1956 to defray the
expenses Incurred by the Secretary of Labor
under section 115 of the first-named act out
of the highway trust fund established by
section 309 of the second-named act.

2. There Is notlilng in either of the two
acts from which an authorization to meet
such expenses out of the trust fund can
properly be Implied. Since section 209 (f)
(1) contains an express authorization with
respect to the administrative expenses of
the Bureau of PubUc Roads, the accepted
rules of statutory oonstruction lead to the

^K ?

i'te

^■'

\^'\:

lip-
I

i^WC

8928

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

1957

\u

^ \%\ f

if '

I

conclusion that authority to defray the ad-
mlnlBtratlT© expenses of any other agency
out of the trust fund would also have been
expressly stated and should not be derived
by Implication.

S. There la nothing In the le^latlve his-
tory of the two acts which Indicates a legis-
lative Intent that the expenses of the Secre-
tary of Labor under sectlrn 115 are to be met
out of the trust fund. The Davis-Bacon Art
provision was thoroughly debated on the
flriors of the House and Senate, but we could
find no reference to such a u.<^ of the trust
fund to meet the expenses of carrying out
the provision. The Houre committee report
does not mention such a use. On the other
hand, the legislative history does support the
concluslrn that, with respect to administra-
tive expenses, only the expenses rf the B\i-
reau of P\ibllc Roads are to be paid from the
trust fund The committee reports of \yotii
Houses Indicate that the Hlghw.iy Trust
Fund wr\s patterned after the Federal Old-
Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund.
This latter trust fund authorizes payment
or reimbursement to the Department r-f
Health. Education, and Welfare (which ad-
ministers the old-age and survivors Instir-
mnce program! and the Treasury Department
(which administers the trust fund and col-
lects the taxes which go Into the trust fund)
for their administrative expenses TTiere-
fore, If the Highway Trust Fund Is to be
available to defray the administrative ex-
panses nf any agency other than the Bureau
of Public R.iads. the act would contain an
express authorization for such purpose.

The committee reports also state, in ex-
planatti.'n if the trust fund prcrlslon. that
the expenditures referred to are those nor-
mally paid cut of the appropriation to the
Bureau of Public Roads for Federal-aid hlrh-
ways Under existing law. the expenses of
the Bureau in admlnisteretng the Federal-aid
highway program, are paid from this appro-
priation.

4 Provisions of law reciting the purpo«efl
for which a trust fund may t)e used should
be narrowly construed In the absence of a
strong indication of legislative Intent, au-
thorizations fur expenditures out of a tru.rt
f-nd should net be created by Implication.
Respectfully.

John H SIMMS,
LegvflaUv^ Ccntnsrl.
Mat 7. 1957.

Mr GOLDWATER. Mr. President,
on pay;e 18 of the report, in connection
with the construction of Indian health
facilities. I notice that the committee
has recommended a reduction of $2.-
704,000. Am I correct in assuming that
the reduction is recommended because
an abundance of money was left over last
year?

Mr. HILL. I would say to my distin-
Bui5hed friend that $11 million was left
over lacit year, and the $11 million is
available for construction.

Mr. GOLDWATER. On the game
paiie I notice that the committee states
that—

This allowance will make available tS.-

596, (XW) to completely modernize 5 Indian
health hospitals in line with minimum HUl-
Bur'.on standards —

And so forth. Can the Senator from
Alabama ."^tate the names of the Ave
hospitals'*

Mr. HILL. I shall be very glad to ob-
tain the names; It will take a moment
to do so.

In the meantime, if the Senator from
Arizona will note the next paragraph on

page 18 of the report. I wish to call at-
tention to the following:

Funds are now. and have t>een. available
for construction of hospitals at Sells, Ariz.,
and Gallup. N Mex ; the need is unques-
tioned and great, and the committee will
expect the Department to proceed immedi-
ately with resumption of work already au-
thorized by the Congress.

Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President. I
wish to thank the Senator from Alabama
for what he has said, because txjth my
senior colleasrue fMr. HaydewI and I
have known for some time of this need.
So I hope the Department will licitcn to
the admonition of the Senator from Ala-
k)ama and the other member.s of the
committee and will get to work on the
hospitals.

Mr HILL. Mr President, the five
hospitals referred to iire as follows:

Pine Rid.;e Hospital, at Pine Ri-jc.
S Dak.

Rosebud Hospital, at Rosebud. S Da.k.
Hopi Reservation Hospital, at Keenu
Canyon, Ariz.

Port Apache Hospital, at White River,
Ariz.

Blackfoot Hospital, at Brownincr.
Mont.

Mr. GOLDWATER I thank the Sena-
tor from Alabama very much.

I wish to add my words of commenda-
tion tu those which have been expre.ssed
not only about the distinguished Senator
from Alabama (Mr. Hill), but also
about his profesfor. my senior colleague
from Arizona LMr HAYDSif).

Mr KNOWLAND Mr President, will
the Senator from Alal>ama yield to me?
Mr. HILL I am glad to yield.
Mr KNON^-LAND. I do not want this
opportunity to pass without Joining in
the remarks which have been made in
regard to the ou5tandlng job done by
the distinguished .senior Senator from
Alabama (Mr. Hill;. I regret that
earlier I was out of the Chamber when
other Senators spoke on that subject.
Let, me say that some years ago It was
my privilege, as a member of the party
then in the majority in the Senate, to
serve as chairman of the subcommittee
over which the Senator from Alabama
I Mr. HiLLl now presides. He and I
worked very closely together at that
time, when he was the ranking minority
member of the subcommittee Since
then he has become chairman of the
subcommittee; and the .senior Senator
from Minnesota [Mr. Thyk] has become
the ranking minority member.

It has been my personal observation
over the years that the Senator from
Alabama has rwt only served with dis-
tinction the people of his own State, but
he has been one of the most valued
Members of this body.

I also wish to say that the distin-
guished sezkior Senator from Arizona
[Mr. HaydenI. under whose leadership
both of us serve on the Appropriations
Committee, has been an inspiration to
the entire committee. I feel that with
the heavy burdens which sometimes are
carried by Members on both sides of the
aisle, it Is well and it is pleasant, I think,
at times for us to express the deep af-
fection we have for our coUeaguea acrosa

the aisle. Fven In the heat of parti-
sanship. I think we never lose sight of
the fact that In dealing with the great
problems of human welfare, and in the
day-to-day operations of the Govern-
ment, there are no real partisanship
divisions t>etween us.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President. I thank the
Senator from California for his very kind
mord!i. I wish to say that when the dis-
tinguished Senator from California was
chairman of the subcommittee, he did
so much and made .so many contribu-
tions in the different fields covered by
the bill, that his example is today an
Inspiration to our subcommittee, and we
are proud that he continues to be a
member of the subcommittee. He is
always extremely able, devoted, and
helpful, and makes many, many fine
contributions to the work of the sub-
committee

Mr HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Alabama yield to me?

Mr. HILL. I yield.

Mr HUMPHREY. I regret very much
that I could not be present earlier: I
have been tied up today in committee.

Will the Senator from Alabama tell
me what the committee did In terms of
the apprenticeship-training program, in
which I am very much interested.

Mr HILL We left that program
where it is today, to wit. with the Voca-
tional Education Division of the Depart-
ment of Health. Education, and Welfare.

Mr HUMPHREY. What did the com-
mittee do in terms of the appropriation
for tt?

Mr HILL. Its appropriation is a part
of the appropriation for vocational edu-
cation. We allowed the entire amount
which has t)een authorized for vocational
education. In other words, we recom-
mend the appropriation of the full
amount which today is authorized for
vocational education.

Mr. HUMPHREY. In other words,
that is for apprenticeship training in
the Department of Labor?

Mr HILL. No; this is in the Depart-
ment of Health. Education, and Welfare,

Mr. HUMPHREY. What about ap-
prenticeship training in the Department
of Labor?

Mr. HILL The House denied funds
for that purpose The committee did not
restore them. As the Senator knows,
some question has been raised as to Jur-
isdiction in this matter. We provided
the full funds for the vocational educa-
tion program under the Department of
Health. Education, and Welfare, but we
did not add the funds for the Bureau of
ApprenUceship under the Department of
Labor

Mr. HUMPHREY. Has that not been
an established activity of our Govern-
ment for some time?

Mr. HILL. No. There haa been a
question, a very serious question, of a
conflict as between the two Departments.
as to which Depmrtment should carry on
this work, I will say to the Senator.

Under the circumstances, In view of
this disagreement. In view of the fact
that the House disallowed this Item, and
it would have meant an additional ap-
propriation in the bill, the Senate com-

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

mittee did not recommend the Inclusion
of the item.

Mr. HUMPHREY, I wish to say, most
respectfully, that this program haa been
one of the most effective programs in
the history of my State. More than
10,000 apprentices have been graduated
since 1939. under this program.

Mr. HILL. The Senator has stated
that a certain number of apprentices
have been graduated. A fine job has
been done in his State. Such a program
comes under the vocational education
program.

Mr. HUMPHREY. No; it comes under
the apprenticeship training program of
the Department of Labor. The request
of the Bureau of the Budget was for |3
million.

Mr. HILL. Let me say to the distin-
cuished Senator that we allowed $3,-
600.000.

Mr. HUMPHREY. In other words.
the program is going on?
Mr. HILL Certainly.
Mr. HUMPHREY. I am not worried
about who is going to operate it, so long
as it contmues. I thank the Senator
for the information.

I also understand that the budget re-
quest for the library services was actu-
all:, increased. Is that correct?
Mr HILL. It was increased $2 million
Mr HUMPHREY. May I ask whether
there are provided physical rehabilita-
Uon facilities under the hospital con-
struction program?

Mr. HIIL. Yes. The rehabilitation
category is included in the hospital ap-
propriations.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I wish to commend
the Senator. I thank hjm very much
for his willingness to answer the ques-
tions. As the Senator will see, the peo-
ple of my SUte are keenly interested in
the item we are discussing. I have re-
ceived two or three hundred letters on
the subject. I wanted to assure my cor-
re«;pondents. through this colloquy, the
matters had been discussed fully in
committee and properly taken care of on
the floor of the Senate.

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. HILL. I yield.

Mr. ANDERSON WiU the Senator
from Alabama tell me what the library
appropriation was?

Mr. HILL. $5 milUon. which is $2 mil-
lion above the budget estimate.

Mr. ANDERSON. Therefore, I can
wire back to those who have sent tele-
frrams to me. expressing the hope that
the appropriation will be $5 million, and
say the Senator from Alabama and the
Senators on his committee have done
what they requested.

Mr. HILL. The Senator from New
Mexico can say we recommended It, and
the Senator from New Mexico and other
Senators adopted the recommendation.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Can we also say
we salute the distinguished Senator from
Alabama, the chairman of the subcom-
mittee, for his diligence and his devotion
to duty, and we thank him for the kind-
ness of his heart?

Mr. HILL. I thank the Senator from
Minnesota.

cm 663

8929

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there
be no further amendments to be offered.
the question is on the engrossment of
the amendments and the third reading
of the bill.

The amendments were ordered to be
engrossed, and the bill to be read a third
time.

The bill was read the third time.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President. I ask xman-
Imous consent that in the em-oUment of
the Senate amendments to the bill, the
Secretary be authorized to make changes
which may be necessary in the section
numbers.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President. I sug-
gest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President. I ask
imanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, It is so ordered.

The bill having been read the third
time, the question Is. Shall it pass? On
this question, the yeas and nays have
been ordered, and the clerk will call the
roll.

The Chief Clerk called the roll.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I announce that
the Senator from Virginia fMr. Byrd],
the Senator from New Mexico [Mr.
ChavbzI, the SMtfitor from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Clark], tne Senator from Illinois
fMr. Douglas], the Senator from North
Carolina [Mr. Ervin], the Senator from
Arkansas fMr. PulbrichtI, the Senator
from Tennessee [Mr. KEFAuvral, the
Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Neely],
the Senator from Virginia fMr. Robirt-
soMl. the Senator from Alabama [Mr.
SparkmanI. and the Senator from Texas
[Mr. Yarborough] are absent on official
business.

The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Mc-
Clellah] is absent by l*ave of the Senate
on official business.

I further announce that if present and
voting, tJie Senator from Virginia (Mr.
Btrd], the Senator from New Mexico
[Mr. Chavez], the Senator from Penn-
sylvania [Mr. Clark], the Senator from
Illinois [Mr. Douglas], the Senator from
North Carolina [Mr. Ervin], the Senator
from Arkansas [Mr. Pulbright], the
Senator from Tennessee [Mr. Ketauvkr],
the Senator from Arkansas I Mr. Mc-
ClellanI, the Senator from West Vir-
ginia [Mr. Neely], the Senator from Vir-
ginia [Mr. Robertson], the Senator from
Alabama I Mr. Spaskmam], and the Sen-
ator from Texas [Mr. Yahborouch]
would each vote "yea."

Mr. DIRKSEN. I annoimce that the
Senator from New Hampshire [Mr.
Bridges] and the Senator from North
Dakota [Mr. Lances] are absent because
of illness.

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr.
Bttsh], the Senator from Indiana [Mr.
Capehart] , the Senator from South Da-
kota [Mr. Case], the Senator from Ne-
braska [Mr. CuKTis] , the Senator from
Vermont [Mr. Flanders], the Senator

from Nevada [Mr. Malone], the Senator
from Massachusetts [Mr. Saltonstall],
the Senator from New Jersey [Mr.
Smith] , and the Senator from North Da-
kota [Mr. Young] are absent on official
business.

The Senator from New Jersey [Mr.
Case] is necessarily absent.

If present and voting, the Senator
from New Hampshire [Mr. Bridges], the
Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Bush],
the Senator from Indiana [Mr. Cape-
hart], the Senator from South Dakota
[Mr. Case], the Senator from Nebraska
[Mr. Curtis], the Senator from Vermont
[Mr. Flanders], the Senator from Ne-
vada [Mr. Malone], the Senator from
Massachusetts [Mr. Saltonstall], and
the Senators from New Jersey [Mr.
Smith and Mr. Case] would each vote
"yea."

The result was annoimced — yeas 71,
nays 0. as follows :

Aiken

Alkrtt

Anderson

Barrett

BeaU

Bennett

Bible

Bricker

Butler

Carlson

Carroll

Church

Cooper

Cotton

rurksen

Dworsbek

Eastland

EUender

ftear

Ooldwater

Gore

Green

Hayden

Hennlngs

Bridges
Bueh
Byrd
Capehart
Case, N. J.
Case. S. Dak.
Chavei
Clark

YEAS — 71

Hlckenlooper
mil

Holland

Hruska

Humphrey

Ivea

Jackson

Javlta

Jenner

Johnson, Tex.

Johnston, S. C.

Kennedy

Kerr

Knowland

Kuchel

LauBoiie

Long

Magnuson

McNamara

Mansfield

Martin. lows

Martin. Pa.

Monrouey

Morse

Morton

Mundt

Murray

Neul>erger

O'Mahoney

Pa.store

Payne

Potter

PurteU

Rerercomb

RusseU

Scboeppel

Scott

Smatbers

Smith. Maine

StennlB

Sj-mlngton

Talmadge

Thnrmoncl

Thye

Watklna

WUey

Williama

NOT VOTING — ^24

Curtis

DougUs

Ervin

Flanders

Pulbright

Kefauver

Langer

Malone

McClellan
Neely
Bobertson
Sal tons taU
Smith. N. J.
Sparkman
Yarborough
Toung

So the bill (H. R. 6287) was passed.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, I move that
the Senate insist on its amendments and
request a conference thereon with the
House of Representatives, and that the
Chair appoint the conferees on the part
of the Senate.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Presiding Officer appointed Mr. Hill. Mr.
Chavez, Mr. Russell, Mr. Magnuson, Mr.
Stennis, Mr. Pastork. Mr. Thyk, Mrs.
Smith of Maine, Mr. Dworshak, Mr.
Potter, and Mr. Ives conferees on the
part of the Senate.

"OPEN CURTAIN" PROPOSAL BY
SENATOR JOHNSON OF TEXAS

Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President,
the reaction to the "open curtain" pro-
posal advanced by our majority leader
last Saturday indicates clearly that the
American people respond to bold and
imaginative ideas.

There have been some who have ex-
pressed fear of the effect of Soviet Com-
munist statements mside openly by the
Russians. But most Americans have

*?.?

\i\

II

I'

1

I

I' ^

8930

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

enough confidence in the strength of our
system to realize that it is not going to
be toppled by such propaganda.

They agree with the majority leader
that the best response would be to take
Khrushchev's technique and turn it back
upon him. They feel that the Khru-
shchev broadcast was a glorious opportu-
nity that should be seized upon and
turned into a weapon for the spread of
the truth.

The Kansas City Star — one of the
leading newspapers of my State — sums
up the situation weU in an editorial. It
points out that "the issue boUs down to a
question of trust in the good sense of
the American people "

"Senator Johnson bases his approach
on confidence in the people." the edito-
rial says.

The editorial also makes the point of
the importance of the timing of Senator
Johnson's remark.s. A few years ago,
the proposal would have been impracti-
cal. Today — because of the Khrushchev
broadcast and other developments — the
'"open curtain" may be attainable.

I ask unanimous consent that the edi-
torial be inserted in the body of the
Record.

There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed In the Record,
as follows:
Beeak the Ikon Cukt.\in .\i*o Let Ideas Plow

Maybe Senator Ltwdon Johnson sounded
a little Idealistic In his New York talk to
the annual conference of the United Jewish
Appeal Saturday night. But It was idealism
grounded in the commonsense of a basic
proposition: Our search for eventual peace
must start with a policy calling f -■r an open
curtain, a p>ollcy not only of "opi'n sklea
but of open eyes. ears, and minds tor all the
peoples of the world "

.\ few years ago such a proposition might
have been so much a part of the American
dream that it would hardly have seemed
worth restating That was when Stalin's
Russia had a monop<-)ly on the Iron Curtain.

Plainly Senator Johnson was talking to
Americans who have themselves become
fearful of a free exchan(;e of Ideas, a fear
of becoming contaminated at least or influ-
enced by the sinister con man of the Krenr-
lln. One example Is the substantial criticism
of the Khrushchev TV interview for general
telecasting in this country Another ex-
ample, not mentioned by Johnson, la the
State Department's opposition to letting
American reporters go to Red China. This,
too. retlect.^ a rather widespread feeling in
this country

Strangely, many Americans, but certainly
not a majority, have C>ecome dependent on
iron and bamboo curtain* raised by their
Communist enemies. The Issue bolls down
to a question of trust In the good sense of
the American people. Senator Johnson
bases his approach on confidence In the
people. He says. "I am not afraid to have
them listen to Nlklta Khrushchev or Karl
Marx or Nlcolal Lenin himself. They have
the intelligence and Independence to make
up their own minds." To support this view
he cites his own Democratic Party's heri-
tage from the phlloeophy of Thomas Jeffer-
son.

Starting with such confidence the Senate's
majority leader calls for every effort In an
all-out exchange of Ideas or arguments. Let
the President or some other high official
ask for the right to a telecast in Russia.
Let Russian labor leaders speak in this
country on condition that American labor
leaders speak to their people. And so, he
hopes, tne exchanges might continue umli

there would be no curtain to stop the flow
of Ideas which are the basic approach to
any relaxing world tensions^ .

If you share the confldenik in American
good sense you do not become alarmed by
the fact that the Russians would sling a
lot of propaganda In this country. This
would simply require informed Americana
to stand ready to expose Russian lies to
make sure that our public was fully In-
formed. And the American pe«iple have had
a long experience with separating truth
from fancy In the speeches of some of their
own politicians.

Frankly, we would be surprised If the
Russians would have enough confidence In
their system to permit a real flow of Fre«
World Ideas li to their country They have
to fHce a lont; record of falling to make
ri.'mmunlsm stand up by any means except
force i)f arms

But JoHNst>N was talking aNiut a sound
.American, not a Russian, approach If the
Ru.-sslans wuild n it «o along they would
have to take the onus for continuing the
Iron Curtain As for the Idealum In thU
approach we oitly subtlest that It wlU be a
sad day for America If It ever loses Its native
tdealisra In the search for eventual world
peace.

Mr NEUBFIRGER. Mr President, I
think all of lus who believe in the free
exchange of ideas across the wide vistas
of the world have k)een thrilled and in-
spired during the past week by the great
challensre voiced by the majority leader
of the United States Senate, the senior
Senator from Texas I Mr. Johnson I,

In the New York Post for Monday.
June 10, there was published an illumi-
nating editorial on the proposal of the
Senator from Texas, which was origi-
nally voiced at a banquet of the United
Jewish Appeal, in New York City on June
9. In a free test of philosophies. Sena-
tor Johnson believes that democracy Is
certam to wm.

I ask unanimous consent that certain
.salient portions of the editorial from
the New York Post of June 10 be prmted
in the Record at this pomt as a part of
my remarks.

'ttKii^ being no objection, the excerpts
were ordered to be prmted in the Rec-
ord, as follows

THI OaZAT NONDCBATV

The sad, astonishing thing U that the
Con\munlats are exacting vast propaganda
dividends out of this episode without even
being challenged to permit a fre« American
presentation on their own soil.

Surely this Is a competition we should
welcome As Demix-ratlc Senate Chieftain
Lyndon Johnson wisely said the other night,
we should be demanding "an open curtain
for full discussion ■ and insisting on "the
right to state our case on disarmament In
detail to the Soviet people " We nec<l, he
said, a policy not Just of open sklee' but
■ of open eyes, ears, and minds for all peo-
ples of the world " Yet we have blunder-
ingly allowed the Russians to pose as
champions (^f free debate while Messrs. Elsen-
hower, Meaney, and others mumble discon-
solate critiques of CBS.

Frozen minds cry that debate with
Khrushchev is as worthless as det>ate with
Adolph Hitler would have been. They miss
the point that the Soviet thrtist Is Increas-
ingly being pressed In Ideological terms, and
that the nature of nuclear weapons has al-
tered all the dimensions of international
conflict. In vast uncommitted areas the
Communist mystique Is infinitely more pow-
erful, complex, and subtle than nazism ever
was. and It must be met with something
more than strident military poeturlngs.

The CBS Khrushchev Interview set the
stage for a momentous international debate
in which sble democratic spokesmen could
have exposed the last myths of Communist
despotism Mr K's comments on Hungary
alone could have provided the text for dev-
astating counterattack. But our stars seem
determined to remain coyly in the wings,
talking to themselves.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

LABOR'S DILEMMA

Mr, NEUBERGER. Mr, President. I
ask unanimous consent to Include In
the body of the Congressional Record
a most illuminating section from the
i-eport of Norman Zukowsky. ge<neral
secretary-treasurer, to the Eighth Regu-
lar Convention of the International
leather Goods. Plastics, and Novelty
Workers' Union at Atlantic City, N. J,

I particularly want to call to the at-
tention of the Senate the re<ommenda-
tions by Mr. Zukowsky that genuine and
bona fide friends of the labor movement
bring forth legislation which will seek
to prevent dishonesty, dicta tirahlp, and
emberalement in the labor movement —
lest the enemies of labor Impose puni-
tive bills that would impede the ability
of our trade unions to proU'ct the liv-
ing standards and working conditions of
their members

Mr, Zukowsky and his assc<:lates have
made a significant recommendation,
which I believe merits the attention of
thoughtful and fair Senators on both
sides of the aisle

There being no objection, the excerpt
was ordered to be printed in the R«c-
ORO. as follows:

LjiSOK's DILKKMA

The labor movement as a whole faces a pe-
riod when hysteria, born of the revelations
by the Senate committee problrg racketeers,
threatens to engulf the Nation and lead
to ultrarestrlctive, punitive legislative ac-
tion that wilt cripple the legf.lmate trade
unUtna as much — ur perhaps even more
so — than the corrupt ones whii:h are a mi-
nority

We can deplore the findings of the Sen-
ate committee, unfortunately however, we
can neither Ignore them nor deny them
For the ugly fact is that corruption and
racketeering does exist in some unions today.
It has deep roots The labor moveoMnt.
prior to the current outcry, did not clean
its own house.

So even as we point a susplcloiu finger
at the antllabor bias of many of the com-
mittee's members and speculate (perhaps
correctly In the long run) al»ut the JXJS-
aiblllty of tough laws, we must admit that
without this committee, without Its ex-
posures, without the "climate ' It helped to
create, the AFI^-CIO Itaelf would not have
been able to move against th*; crooks and
profiteers within Its lanks.

Our old and esteemed frlenc. David Du-
blnsky, president of the powerful Interna-
tional Ladles' Garment Workers' Union, m»de
that fact clear In a ringing speech In AprU
on the boardwalk of Atlantic City when he
appeared at the UAW conventlcn.

Dublnsky said, in no uncertain terms.
that the AFlr-CIO would never have been
able to clean up except for the Senate com-
mittees. He pointed out that the exposures
of the Douglas committee on tlie looting of
welfare funds provided the o:ily evidence
on which labor was able to move against
3 corrupt Internationals and 2 crooked Fed-
eral labor unions. He conceded that the ac-
tions against Beck would have been impossi-
ble without the facu unearthed by the

8931

McClellan committee. The AFL-CIOhad not
made Its own Investigation; it had no other
evidence.
There are fears which I share, that the

exposures of the McClellan committee

dicumented though they are; undeniable
though they may be — may do all of labor
irreparable harm before the storm dies
down. This fear runs through many sections
of the labor movement, including many
which arc violently antiracketeering.

There is. I believe, only one way to cope
with this problem. The answer is not. of
course, to fight the committee t>ecause it
h.is dug up facts which embarrass xis. The
imswer is not to say that after all, industry
15 corrupt too. (I beUeve that to be true
but It docs not alter the fact that some
sections of labor are corrupt or crooked.)

Tlie answer U. I believe, in an intelligent
counteroffenslve by the decent forces in
Ubur, political and community life. This
counteroffenslve must be predicated on an
ficrepiance of the fact that corruption in-
side labor has grown to the point where
Iab<ir alone cannot effectively root It out.
Lalxir must have additional tools — In this
Instance. leRl.slatlon -to aaslst it. But the
Ix'l.s niu.st be of a kind that are made by
persc'us sympathetic with the desire of
IcK.timate labtir to clean out the crooks.
'Ihtv mu£t not be tools which hack away
fit tne go<xl and bad at once

There are nviny sober minds In Congress
prappUng with this problem today. There
are men who wholeheartedly support the
liaslc alms of decent latxir who want to
help the unions devise the right kind of
Uws -laws that will hit at the corrupt but
liiJt inj\ire the clean unions.

The leaderK of legitimate labor must meet
witii the.ve men of the stripe of a Dick Nru-
BLtoEX or a Wat NX Morsk, of Oregon; or a
McNamasa of Michigan; or a Javits or an
Ivts. of New York, or a Kr.SNEDT, of Massa-
chusetts, to n.-ime but a few. and jointly
cume up with proper recommendations for
laws.

For one fHCt Is clear— and it would be sui-
cidal for the leaders of American labor to
Bideitep It — there will be laws aimed at
curbing crooked unions. There Is no way of
6t. ppln(f this trend. In my opinion.

It li no longer a question of whether or
not laws— it is Mjle;y a question of what kind
of laws.

I hope that the Meanys, Reuthers, Dubln-
»k>s. Pcitrif.skys. and other forward-looking
national leaders of American labor will take
the lead In Initiating a national conference
wl'.h Important legislators from both parties
!:) both Houses of Conpress — honest con-
servatives and honest liberals alike— for the
purpose of drawing up specific recommenda-
tl< ns f r the laws that must come.

Only In that way do I enrlslon avoiding
the kind of blunderbuss bill which wrould In-
discriminately hit all unions — good and bad.
And only In that wny can labor win the re-
spect of the community as a whole, without
which we cannot fulfill our traditional his-
toric mission r.B a force for good for our
members and for the State, city, or village
In which we live and work.

The theme of these comments has, as you
have noted, been political. This was delib-
erate, for labor mustr— more than ever be-
fi re— participate in the political arena and
not Just to act ns a check and balance against
the extremists who will try to use the Mc-
Clellan findings for hysterical purposes.
but literally to safeguard the gains union
members have made through the years.

What Is gained today in a union contract
can be wiped out tomorrow by some piece
of repressive legislation. A hard-won sUnd-
ard on one level can be offset by a reaction-
ary State legislature, for example, which caa
rewrite some statute.

The point needs no elaboration here. You
all know what I mean. And the sudden rash
of so-called rlght-to-wOTk laws in State after

State — and the introduction of national law
of that kind in Congres*— Is just the open-
ing gun.

If we sit back and hope to live as a union
•olely on the basis of a union contract, we
are not only in for a rude awakening but we
do not deserve to be Invested with the re-
sponsibilities of administering our union.
Political apathy Is political suicide today.

KAISER STEEL CORP. EXPANSION

Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, one of
the most astounding aspects of the tre-
mendous population growth and indus-
trial development in California, and in
the West generally, during and since
World War 11 has been the development
of new industries and the utilization of
resources on the Pacific coast and in the
Mountain States.

Only a century ago, California was the
American frontier. Today, with a pop-
ulation approaching 15 million, Cali-
fornia Is a vital and integral factor in
the entire American economy.

Much of the amazing development of
the past two decades can be traced to
the establishment of completely new in-
dustries. And as such new ventures
prospered, other activities started and
flourished until today California is the
source of a great variety of products
shipped all over our Nation and all
around the world.

An impressive example of the constant
expansion of our western economy was
an announcement recently that the
Kaiser Steel Corp., a company which has
contributed in a host of ways to the in-
dustrial progress of California, will in-
crease an expansion program which had
been budgeted at $113 million by an ad-
ditional $81 million.

This undertaking is emphatic proof, I
believe, of the pace at which California
is forging ahead. When the Kaiser pro-
gram is completed, the capacity of the
West's biggest steel producer will be vir-
tually doubled. A plant first constructed
in the early days of World War U, in an
area devoted to citrus growing and other
types of agriculture, it will have the abil-
ity to turn out 3 million tons annually
and supply materials which are in great
demand and essential to the expanding
economy of California and our neighbor-
ing States as well.

The new undertaking is truly ambi-
tious. It is evidence of faith in the
future, and proof that the company's
earlier confidence was justified. The
increased program will provide Elaiser's
plant at Fontana in San Bernardino
County, not far from my own home com-
munity, with a fourth blast furnace, a
mill capable of turning out 144-inch steel
plate. 3 more oxygen steelmaking fur-
naces, 90 new coke ovens, a new elec-
trolytic tinplate line, and other facil-
ities which will bolster the whole eco-
nomic and industrial foundation of the
State, the West, and the Nation.

These facilities, which will lead to em-
ployment of 2,700 additional workers at
Fontana and other Kaiser operations,
will have undeniable benefits to Cali-
fornia. But it should be noted they also
will contribute importantly to our Na-
tion's security. Most of us readily re-
member the critical shortages of iron
and steel which confronted the United

States during the national emergency
before Pearl Harbor and the early days
of our involvment in World War n. We
also can recall the superhuman accom-
plishments which made California an
important arsenal during that conflict
and the later hostilities in Korea. This
expanded California steel industry is de-
signed to serve our Nation in peace. It
will also be an indispensable adjunct in
event of another war.

I take these few moments, Mr. Presi-
dent, to call attention to the significance
of a phrase which is often used — "the
growing West"— and to note that prog-
ress continues undiminished in the State
which I have the honor in part to repre-
sent in this body.

CONSTRUCTION OP TOLL BRIDGE
ACROSS RAINY RIVER, MINN.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I move that the Senate proceed to
the consideration of Calendar No. 439,
Senate biU 1054.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill
will be stated by title for the information
of the Senate.

The Chief Clerk. A bill (S. 1054>
to extend the times for commencing and
completing the construction of a toll
bridge across the Rainy River at or near
Baudette, Minn.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion of
the Senator from Texas.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to consider the bill.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the distinguished senior Senator
from Minnesota [Mr. Thye] has brought
to the attention of the minority leader
and myself the importance and urgency
of passing this bill at the earliest possible
date.

The Committee on Public Works,
which considered the bill, recommends
its passage.

The bill would extend the time for
commencing and completing the con-
struction of a toll bridge across the Rainy
River at or near Baudette, Minn.

It may be that the distinguished senior
Senator from Minnesota, the author of
the bill, has a statement to make. If
so. I yield for that purpose.

Mr. THYE. Mr. President, I thank
the distingtiished majority leader for
having the bill considered at this time.
The existing act authorizing the con-
s;,ruction of the bridge expires on the
16th day of this month. Unless we pass
the bill there will be the question of the
expiration of the authorization for the
construction of the bridge. That is the
urgency. It is as simple as that. It is
merely an authorization bill.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
Mansfield in the chair). The bill is
open to amendment. If there be no
amendment to be proposed, the question
is on the engrossment and third reading
of the bill.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the first section of
the act entitled "An act to revive and re-
enact th« act authorizing the village of

'-wt

- .'•* •-l:-l'^5

n

^ : ■ mm

■'*'«>*

s Si 'SI •*-,'■

ml

Ofi'i'rt

rr»v'r.DP<;<;inNiAT RFrnRH

<;fmatf

Jinifi 10

', '

H^

8932

CONGRESSIONAL RICORD — SENATE

June 12

1957

Baudette. State of Minnesota It-S public suc-
cesaors or public aaslgna. to construct, main-
tain, and operate a toll bridge acrosa the
Riiny River, at or near Baudett«. Minn . ap-
proved December 21. 1950." approved June
16. 1955 (69 Stat 159 i . Is amended by strlltln^
out "commenced within 2 years and com-
pleted within 4 years ' and inserting in lieu
thereof "commenced within 4 years and com-
pleted within a years ■•

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT OP 1957

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I move that the Senate pnxeed to
the consideration of Calendar No. 424,
S 2130

" The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill
will be stated by title for the information
of the Senate.

The Legislative Clerk. A bill 'S.
2130 • to amend further the Mutual Se-
curity Act of 1954, as amended, and for
other purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Question is on agreeinK to the motion of
the Senator from Texas.

The motion was agreed to and the Sen-
ate proceeded to consider the bill, which
had been reported from the Committee
on Foreign Relations with an amend-
ment to strike out all after the enacting
clause and insert

That this act may be cited as the "Mutual
Security Act of 1957 "

Skc 2. Title I. chapter 1. of the Mutual
Security Act of 1954. as amended, which re-
lates to military assistance, is further amend-
ed as follows

(a) Amend section 103, which relates to
authorizations, as followi:

(II Strilce out subsection (ai and substi-
tute the following:

"(a> There is hereby authorized to be ap-
propriated to the President for Uf^e beginning
in the fiscal year 1958 to carry out the pur-
poses of il'.is chapter not to exceed $1,800-
OOOCOO. which shall remain available until
expended There is hereby authorized to be
appropriated to the President for use begin-
ning In the fiscal year 1959 to carry out
the purposes of tins chapter net to exceed
$1,500,000,000. which shall remain available
until expended '

(2 1 In subsection (bi. strike out "and of
section 124."

l3i In subsection (ci. add at the end
thereof the following new sentence "When
appropriations made pursuant to this sec-
tion are used to furnish military assistance
on terms of repayment within 3 years or
earlier, dollar repayments, including dollar
proceeds derived from the sale of foreign
currency received hereunder to any United
States Government agency or program, may
be credited to the current applicable appro-
priation and shall be available until ex-
pended for the purposes of military assist-
ance on terms of repayment, and, notwith-
standing section 1415 of the Supplemental
Appropriation Act. 195.}. or any other provi-
sion of law relating to the use of foreign
currencies or other receipts accr\ung to the
United States, repayments in foreign cur-
rency may be used for the purposes of this
chapter Provided. That the authority In this
sentence shall apply to repayments from not
t.i exceed $175,000,000 of the appropriations
used for such assistance."

(b) In section 104 (a), which relates to
Infrastructure, strike out In the first sen-
tence the word "already": strike out "$780.-
000.000" In the first sentence and substi-
tute ■$1,000,000". and strike out the second
sentence.

(ci In section 105 ib) (3). which relates
tu condltlo.ns applicable to military assut-

ance strike out the words betv-een "Asia"
and ". the President "

idi Amend section 107. which relates to
waivers of law. as follows:

(li In subsection (ai, strike out "1262
(at and title 34. United States Code, sectloa
54rt lei •• and substitute "7307 (a) "

i2i In subsection ibi. strike out "Revised
Statutes 1222 (10 U S. C 576i " and sub-
stitute ■ tirle 10 United States Code, sections
354* ( bi and 8544 (b) "

(ei Repeal section 108. which relates to
transfer of military ecjulpment to Japan

Sec 3 Chapter 2 of title I of the Mutual
Security Act of 1954. as amended, which re-
lates to southeast Asia and the Western
Pacific, and direct forces support. Is hereby
repealed.

Sec 4 Title I. chapter 3, of the Mutual
.Security Act n( 1954. as amended, which re-
lates to defense support, is further amended
as follows

(a I .'Xmend .section 131, which relates to
general authority, as follows:

ill In subsection lai. before "designed"
in the ttrst sentence insert "s|>eciflcaily "

i2i btnke out subsection ibi and sub-
stitute the f.)llowlr.i<

■ ibi There Is hereby authorized to be ap-
propriated to the Prpsident for use beginning
in the fiscal year 19S8 to carry out the pur-
poses of this section not to exceed MOO mil-
lion. whK!i shall remain available until
experi'ied There is hereby authorized to be
appropriated to the President for u»e begin-
ning m the fi.scal year 1959 to curiy f)ut the
purposes of this section nut ti> exceed $710
milli'^n. which shall remain available until
expended "

i3i Strike out subsection lO and redesig-
nate subsection "idi" as subsection "ici "

1 4 1 Add a new sulMectlon i d i as follows -

"(di To the extent necessary tu accomplish
the purposes of this section in Kiirea (1)
assistance may be furnished under this sec-
tion without regard to the other provisions
of this title and i2i the authority provided
in section 307 may be exercised In furnishing
assistance under subsection (ai of this sec-
tion: and funds available under this section
may be used for payment of ocean freight
charges on shipments for relief and rehabili-
tation Hi Kirea wiihuut regard to section 409
of this act "

ibi Repeal serti.m 132. which relates to
the Korean proKram

Sec 5 Title I, chapter 4, of the Mutual
Security Act of 19.54. as amended, which re-
lates to general provisions relating to mutual
defense iissistance, is further amended as
loUows

lai In section 142 (bi, which relates to
agreements, strike 'tin in the first sentence
"chapter 2 or ' and "or under title II."

(bi Section 143 is amended to read as
follows

"Sec 143 Assistance 'o Yugoslavia: In fur-
nishing assistance to Yugoslavia, the Presi-
dent shall continuously assure himself ( 1 »
that Yu<oslavla co.uinues to maintain Its
Independence. i2) that Yugoslavia Is not par-
ticipating In any policy or program for the
Communist conquest of the world, and (3)
that the furnishing of such assistance is In
the Interest of the national security of the
United States. The President shall keep the
Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate,
the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House
of Representatives, and the Appropriations
Committees of the Senate and of the House
of Representatives fully and constantly In-
formed of any assistance furnished to Yugo-
slavia under this act "

(c) Add a new section 144 as follows:
"Sec 144. St^utheast Asia Assistance un-
der this title shall be made available subject
to the provisions of sections 141 and 142,
except that ( 1 1 In the case of assistance to
the Associated States of Cambodia, Laos, and
Vietnam, and (2) in the case of assutance
(not to exceed in the aggregate 10 percent

of the amount appropriated punuant to sec-
tion 121. excluding unexpended balance* of
prior appropriations) to other nations In
the area of s^iutheast Asia, tiie Prealdent
may waive specific provlaluna o:' section 142
to the extent be may de«in neci'saar^ in the
national Interest to carry out 'he purposes
of this act. The Prealdent or such officer
Hs he may designate shall rei>)rt each in-
stance of such waiver to the Foreign Rela-
tions. Appropriations, and Armed Services
Commiitees uf the Senate and the Foreign
AtTairs. Appropriations, and Armed Services
Committees of the House of Re jreaentatlves
within 30 da>8 "

Sec 6 Iitie II of the Mutual Security Act
of 1954. as amended, which relates to devel-
opment assistance. Is further amended by
striking out the heading of the • Itle, "DeveU
opment Ass stance, " and subst tutlng "De-
velopment Loan Fund"; by striking out the
section number and heading of section 201
and striking out subsections (a) and lb)
<.f section 201: by redesignating subsection
(Ci of section 201 as bubsectlon (d) of sec-
tion 537 and striking out therein "this title '
and "411 ici" and substituting, respectively,
"section 400 I a I" and "411 (bi"; and by in-
serting the following new sections:

"Sec. 201 Declaration of purfmee: The
Congress of the United States recognizes
that the progress of free peoples In their
efforts to furiiier their economic develop-
ment, and thus to strengthen their freedom.
Is Important to the security and general
welfare of the United States The Cxingreas
further recognizes the necessity In some cases
of assistance to such peoples if they are to
succeed in these efforts. The ti'ongreas ac-
cordingly reaffirms that It Is tie policy of
the United .'States, and declares It to be the
purpose of this title, to assist, en a basis of
self-help and mutual cooperation, the efforts
of free j^eoples to develop tlielr economic
resources and to Increase their productive
capabilities.

"i:=>rc 202 General authority a) There Is
hereby establi.-ihed a fund to be known as
the Development Loan Fund' (hereinafter
referred to in this title as "the Fund) to t)e
used by the President to flnan?e attlvUles
carried out pursuant to authority contained
in this title.

"ib» To carry out the purp-Mes of this
title, the President Is hereby authorized to
make loans, credits, or guarantleg. or to en-
gage In other financing operations or trans-
actions (not to include grants or direct pur-
chases of equity securities), to or with such
nations, organizations, persons, or other en-
titles, and on such terms and conditions, as
he may determine, taking Into account lU
whether financing could be obtained In whole
or In part from other free worid sources on
reas<3nable terms, (2) the economic and
technical soundness of the activity to be
financed, and (3i whether the activity gives
reasonable promise of contributing to the
development of economic resourcec or to the
Increase of productive capacities in further-
ance of the purposes cf this title. The Fund
shall be administered so as to support and
encourage private Investment and other pri-
vate participation furthering the purposes
cf this title, and It shall be administered so
as not to compete with private Investment
capital, the Export-Import Bank or the In-
ternational Bank for Reconstruction and De-
velopment. The authority of soction 401 (a)
of this act may not be used to waive the re-
quirements of this title or of the Mutual
Defense Assistance Control Act of 1951 with
respect to this title, nor may the authority
of section 501 of this act be used to increase
or decrease the funds available under this
title. Guaranties under this subsection
shall be subject to the provisions of section
413 (b) (4 I, except subptaragraph (F) there-
of. The administrator of the Fund shall
furnish to the Foreign Relations Committee
of the Senate and to the Foreign Affairs Com-

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

mittee of the House of Representatives a re-
port on each financing operation or transac-
tion involving more than |10 million of the
Fund's assets and Involving an activity re-
quiring longer than 1 year to complete.
Such report shall be made at the time such
financing of)eratlon or transaction is con-
summated.

"Sec. 203. Capitalisation: (a) There is
hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
President without fiscal year limitation, for
advances to the Fund, not to exceed $500
million. In addition, unless disapproved In
the appropriation act appropriating funds
pursuant to the authorization contained In
the preceding sentence, the Secretary of the
Treasury is authorized and directed to make,
beginning In the fiscal year 1969, loans to
the Fund In amounts needed to cover obli-
gations Incurred against the Fund. Except
as provided in section 204 (b) of this act.
the maximum amount of obligations In-
curred against the Fund during the fiscal
year 1958 shall be •500 million, during the
fiscal year 1959 shall be $750 million, and
during the period beginning In the fiscal
year 1960 shall be $750 million; and any un-
used portion of the maximum applicable to
any {)erlod shall be added to the maximum
applicable to the succeeding period.

"lb) For purpKMes of the loans provided
for In this section, the Secretary of the Treas-
ury Is authorized to use the proceeds of the
sale of any securities lasued under the Sec-
ond Liberty Bond Act as now In force or as
hereafter amended, and the purposes for
which securities may be issued under the Sec-
ond Liberty Bond Act are hereby extended
to include this purpose. The President shall
determine the terms and conditions of any
advances or loans made to the Fund pursu-
ant to this section.

"Sec. 204. Fiscal provlsloru: (a) All re-
celpu from activities or tranaactlons under
this title shall be credited to the Fund and,
notwlthsUndlng section 1415 of the Supple-
menui Appropriation Act, 1953, or any other
provision of law relating to the use of foreign
currencies or other receipts accruing to the
United States, shall be available for use lor
purposes of this title.

"(b) The President Is authorized to incur.
In accordance with the provisions of this
title, obligations against the Fund In
amounts which may not at any time exceed
the assets of the Fund. The amount of such
obligations also may not exceed the limita-
tions specified in section 203 (a) of this act
except that, to the extent that assets of the
Fund other than capitalization provided pur-
suant to section 203 (a) are available, obli-
gations may be Incurred beyond such limi-
tations. Obligations Incurred against the
Fund which are subsequently canceled shall
not be counted for purposes of the Umltatlona
on obligations specified In section 203 (a).
The term assets of the Fund' as used In this
section shall mean the amount of liquid
assets of the Fund at any given time Includ-
ing any amount of capitalization authorized
pursuant to section 203 (a) of this act which
has not been advanced or loaned to the Fund
as of such time. The Fund shall be avail-
able without fiscal year limitation for any
obligations or expenditures In connection
vlih the performance of functions under this
title. Including repayment of loans made to
the Fund pursuant to section 203 (a) of this
act.

"(c) In the performance of and with re-
spect t.o the functions, ]x>wers, and duties
vested in him by this title, the President
shall prepare annually and submit a budget
program in accordance with the provisions
of the Government Corporation Control Act,
as amended: and he shall cause to be main-
tained an Integral set of accounts which
shall be audited by the General Accounting
Office in accordance with principles and pro-
cedures applicable to commercial corporate
transactions as provided by the Government

8933

Corporation Control Act, as amended, and no
other audit shall be required.

"Sec. 205. Powers and authorities: In
carrying out the purpoeea of this title, any
officer or agency of the United States desig-
nated to exercise authorities provided for
hereunder may. in addition to other powers
and authorltiea provided to such officer or
agency pursuant to this act or otherwise
by law. and as the Prealdent mr • direct:
enter into, perform, and modify contracts,
leases, agreements, or other transactions, on
such terms as may be deemed appropriate,
with any agency or instrumentality of the
United States, with any foreign government
or foreign government agency, or with any
person, partnership, association, corporation,
organization, or other entity, public or pri-
vate, singly or in combination; accept and
use gifta or donations of services, funds, or
property (real, personal or mixed, tangible,
or intangible): contract for the services of
attorneys; determine the character of and
necessity for obligations and expenditures
under this title, and the manner in which
they shall be incurred, allowed, and paid,
subject to provisions of law specifically ap-
plicable to Government corporations; ac-
quire and dispose of, upon such terms and
conditions and for such consideration as
such officer or agency shall determine to be
reasonable, through purchase, exchange, dis-
count, rediscount, public or private sale,
negotiation, aaslgiunent, exercise of option
or conversion rights, or otherwise, for cash
or credit, with or without endorsement or
guaranty, any property, real, personal,
mixed, tangible or intangible, including, but
not limited to, mortgages, bonds, debentures
(Including convertible debentiu-es). liens,
pledges, and other collateral or security, oon-
tracu, claims, currencies, notes, drafts,
checks, bills of exchange, acceptances includ-
ing bankers' acceptances, cable transfers and
all other evidences of indebtedness or own-
ership (provided that equity securities may
not be directly purchased although such
securities may be acquired by other means
such as by exercise of conversion rights or
through enforcement of liens, pledges or
otherwise to satisfy s previously incurred
Indebtedness), and guarantee pajmient
against any Instrument at>ove specified; Is-
sue leuers of credit and letters of commit-
ment; collect or compromise any obligations
assigned to or held by, and any legal or
equlUble rlghU accruing to, such officer
or agency, and, as such officer or agency may
determine, refer any such obligations or
rights to the Attorney General for suit or
collection; and otherwise take any and all
actions determined by such officer or agency
to be necessary or desirable In making, car-
rying out, servicing, compromising, liquidat-
ing, or otherwise dealing with or realizing
on any transaction or operation authorized
by this title. No officer shall be designated
to be the administrator of the Fund except
by appointment by the President by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate.

"Sbc. 206. Advisory Loan Committee:
There is hereby established an Advisory Loan
CcHnmlttee, referred to in this section aa
the 'Committee', which shall advise and con-
sult with the President, or such officer as
he may designate to administer the Fund,
with respect to basic policy matters arising
In connection with the operations of the
P^ind and with respect to each new obliga-
tion against the Fund In excess of $10 mil-
lion. The Committee shall consist of the
Deputy Undersecretary of State for Economic
Affairs, the Chairman of the International
Development Advisory Board acting In his
individual capacity, the administrator of
the Fund, and representatives designated by
the President from the Export-Import Bank,
the Department of Agriculture, the Depart-
ment of Commerce, the United States repre-
sentation in the International Bank for Re-
construction and Development, and such
other representatives of Government agen-

cies as the President shall deem necessary
to insure proper coordination of the Fund's
activities with the activities of other sources
of capital which flows abroad. The Deputy
Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs
shall be Chairman, and the administrator of
the Fund shall be Vice Chairman, of the
Committee. The administrator of the Fund
BhaU furnish to the Committee all neces-
sary Information to enable the Committee
to form a Judgment with respect to the sub-
jects referred to in the first sentence of this
section. If the administrator of the Fund
follows a course contrary to the advice of a
majority of the Committee with respect to
any such subject, he shaU furnish to the
Committee and to the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate and the Committee
on Foreign Affairs of the House of Repre-
sentatives a statement of his reasons for
doing BO."

Sec. 7. Title in of the Mutual Security Act
Of 1964. as amended, which relates to tech-
nical cooperation, is further amended as
follows :

(a) In section 304. which relates to au-
•thorlzation. strike out subsections (a) and
(b) and substitute the following: "There Is
hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
President for the fiscal year 1958 not to ex-
ceed $151,900,000 to carry out the purposes
of this title."

(b) Amend section 306, which relates to
multilateral technical cooperation, aa fol-
lows:

(1) Strike out the text of subsection (a)
and substitute the following:

"•15,500,000 for the fiscal year 1958 for
contributions to the United Nations Ex-
panded Program of Technical Assistance:
Provided, That, notwithstanding the limita-
tion of 33.33 percent contained in the Mu-
tual Security Appropriation Act, 1957, the
United States contribution to this program
may constitute for the calendar year 1958
aa much as but not to exceed 45 percent of
the total amount contributed to the program
for that period, for the calendar year 1959
aa much as but not to exceed 38 percent of
the total amount contributed to the pro-
gram for that period, and for the calendar
year 1960 as much as but not to exceed 3333
percent of the total amount contributed to
the program for that period."

(2) Strike out the text of Bubaectlon (b)
and substitute the following:

"One million five hundred thousand for
the fiscal year 1958 for contributions to the
technical cooperation program of the Organ-
ization of American States."

Sec. 8. Title IV of the Mutual Sectirlty Act
of 1954, as amended, which relates to other
programs, Is further amended as follows :

(a) Insert before section 401 the following
new section:

"Sec. 400. Special assistance: (a) There Is
hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
President for the fiscal year 1958 not to
exceed ^250 million for use on such terms
and conditions as he may specify for assist-
ance designed to maintain or promote politi-
cal or economic stability or for assistance In
acQordance with the provisions of this act
applicable to the furnishing of assistance
under title I. section 304, section 405. or
section 407 jf this act. One hundred million
dollars of the funds authorized to be appro-
priated pursuant to this section for any fiscal
year may be used In such year In accordance
with the provisions of section 401 (a).

"(b) For the purpose of promoting eco-
nomic development in Latin America there
Is hereby authorized to be appropriated to
the President not to exceed (25 million,
which shall remain available vmtll expended,
and In the utilization of such sum preference
shall be given to (A) projects or programs
that will clearly contribute to promoting
health, education, and sanitation in the area
as a whole or among a group or groups of
countries of the area, (B) Joint health, edu-
cation, and sanitation assistance programs

5 ■ ? ■* "^ "^ ' 1

-ite

■ '< 'i :

.i^-.<

.''• '

'^\

lit! '^.'

t

f

m

i<

w

m

II

3 • ■ • I

M

*;

li

i.i

t.

:4i

»l

II

It

i«.

8934

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

by mamben of the Organlsatkm
at American Statee. and (C) lucb land re-
•ettlement prognune as will oontrlbuta to tn«
reeettlement of foreign and native mlcraata
In the area as a whole, or In any country of
the area, for the purpoee of advancing eco-
nomlo development and agricultural and
Industrial productivity: Provided, That as-
sistance under this sentence shall emphasis*
loans rather than grants wherever poeslble,
and not lean than 90 percent of the funds
made available for assistance under this sub-
section shall be available only for furnishing
asslstano* ca terms of repayment in accord-
ance with the provisions of section 505."

(b) Amend seetlon 401, which relates to
special fund, as follows:

(1) Strike out the title of this section and
substitute "President's Special Authority".

(3) In subetjctlon (a), strike out "to be
appropriated under subsection (b) hereof"
In the first sentence and substitute "for such
use by section 400 (a) of this act"; before
•*, m furtherance oT' In the first sentence.
Insert "or any act appropriating funds pur-
suant to authorizations contained In this
act."

<3) Strike out subsection (b).

(4) Redesignate subsection "(c)" as sub-
•ectlon "(b)."

(c) In seetlon 403. which relates to ear-
marking of funds, strike out all preceding
"shall be used" in the first sentence and
substitute "Of the funds authortaed to be
made available in the fiscal year 1958 pur-
suant to this act (other than funds made
available pursuant to title 11). not less than

taoo.000.000."

(d) Amend section 403. which relates to
special assistance In Joint control areas, as
follows :

(1) In subsection (a), strike out the sub-
section designation "(a)"; and In the sec-
ond sentence strike out all following "the
President" and substitute "Tor the fiscal year
1938 not to exceed 111,500.000 to carry out
this section."

(2) Strike out subsection (b).

(e) Amend section 408, which relates to
migrants, refugees, and escapees, as follows:

(1) In subsection (a), strike out the
words between "appropriated" and "such
amounts": and strike out the last sentence.

(2) In subsection (c). strike out the
words between "appropriated" and "for con-
tributions" and substitute "for the fiscal
year 1958 not to exceed •2.233,000."

(3) In subsection (d). strike out the
words between "President" and "for con-
tinuation" and substitute "for the fiscal
year 1958 not to exceed $5,500,000."

(f) Amend section 408, which relates to
children's welfare, as follows:

(1) In subsection (a), strike out the sub-
section designation "(a)"; and strike out all
following "exceed" and subetltute "»11,000,-
000 for the fiscal year 1958 for contributions
to the United Nations Children's Fund."

(2) Strike out subsection (b).

(g) In section 407, which relates to Pales-
tine refugees In the Near Cast, strike out the
first two sentences In subsection (a) and
subetltute In lieu thereof the text of the
present subeectlon (b) with the addition of
ths following sentence: "In determining
whether or not to continue furnishing assist-
ance for Palestine refugees In the Near East,
the President shall take Into account whether
Israel and the Arab host governments are
taking steps toward ths resettlement and
repatriation of such refugees.": strike out
the subsection designation "(a)"; and strike
out subsection (b).

(h) In section 408. which relates to the
North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, strike
out m subsection (a) the words between
"appropriated" and "sijch amounts.'

(l) Amend section 40«, which relates to
ocean fretuht charges, as follows:

(U Strike out the text of subsection (c)
and substitute "There is hereby authorized

to be appropriated to the President for the
fiscal year 1958 not to exceed 93,300.000 to
carry out the ptirpoees of this section."

(2) In subsection (d), strike out all pre-
ceding "to pay' m the first sentence and
substitute "Id addition, any funds made
available under this act may be used, in
amounts determined by the President."; and
strike out the second sentence.

(]) In section 410. which relates to Control
Act expenses, strike out the words between
"President" and "for carrying out" In the
first sentence and substitute "far the fiscal
year 1958 not to exceed 81 million."

(k) Amend section 411, which relates to
administrative and other expenses, as fol-
lows:

( 1) In subsection (b) , strike out the words
between "President" and "for necessary" and
substitute "for the fiscal year 1958 not to
exceed 833 million"; strike out "and section
124"; and before the period at the end of
the subsection. Insert "and functions under
the Agricultural Trade Development and As-
sistance Act of 1954. as amended (7 U. 8. C.
1691 and the following) performed by any
agency or officer administering nonmllltary
assistance."

2) Strike out subaectlon (c). and redesig-
nate subeecUons "(d)" and "(e)" as subaec-
tlons "(c)" and "(d)", respectively.

(I) Repeal section 412, which rcUtes to
Chinese and Korean students.

(m) Repeal sections 419 and 431, relating,
respectively, to World Health Organization
and Pood and Agriculture Organization,
which repeals shall not be deemed to affect
amendments contained in such sections to
acts other than the Mutual Security Act of
1954, as amended; and add the following new
sections :

"Sic. 419. Atoms for peace: (a) The Presi-
dent Is hereby authorized to furnish from
funds made available pursuant to this sec-
tion. In addition to other funds available for
such purposes, and on such terms and con-
dlUons as he may specify. assUUnce de-
signed to promote the peaceful uses of
atomic energy abroad. There Is hereby su-
thorlzed to be approprtated to the President
for the fiscal year 1958 not to exceed $7 mil-
lion to carry out the purposes of this section.

"(b) The United States share of the cost
of any research reactor made available to
another government under this section shall
not exceed 8350.000.

"(c) In carrying out the purposes of this
section, the appropriate United States de-
partmenU and agencies shall give full and
continuous publicity through the press,
radio, snd sll other available mediums so as
to Inform the peoples of the particlpstlng
countries regarding the asslsUnce, Including
lU purpose, source, and character, furnished
by the United States. Such portions of any
research reactor furnished under this sec-
tion as may be appropriately die stamped or
labeled as a product of the United States
shall be so stamped or labeled.

"Sk:. 430. Malaria eradication: The Con-
gress of the United States, recognizing that
the disease of malaria, because of its wide-
spread prevalence, debllltaUng effects, and
heavy toll In human life, constltutee a major
deterrent to the efforts of many peoples to
develop their economic resources snd pro-
ductive capacities snd to improve their living
conditions, and further recognizing that It
now appears technically feasible to eradicate
this disease, declares it to be the polltry of
the United States and the purpoee of this
section to assist other peoples In their efforts
to eradicate malaria. The President is hereby
authorized to furnish to such nations, or-
ganizations, persons, or other entitles as he
may determine, and on such terms and con-
ditions as he may specify, financial and other
assistance to carry out the purpose of this
section. Not to exceed 833,300,000 of the
funds made available pursuant to authoriza-
tions contained in this act (other than title

X. ch. 1. and title XI) may be tisad during
the fiscal year 1988 to carry out tb« purpoM
of this section."

ewe. 9. TlUs V. chapter 1, of the ICutual
Security Act of 1954. as amended, which re-
lates to general provlalona, U further amend-
ed as follows:

(a) Amend section 503, which relates to
termination of assistance, as follows:

(1) Strlks out the subsection designation
"(a)"; and in the last sentence of subsection
(a) strike out "subsection" and substltuts
"section."

(3) Strlk^ out subsection (b).

(b) In section 604 (a), which relatea to
small business, strike out "chapters 3 and"
and substitute "chapter."

(c) Amend section 606, which relatea to
loan assistance and sales, as follows:

(1) In subsection (a), strike out "assist-
ance" In the first sentence and substltuta
"Kxoept as otherwise speciUcally provided in
this act. assistance": and after "ooramodi-
tiss" both times It appears in the second sen-
tence. Insert ", equipment, materials.'

(3) In subsection (b), strlks out the first
sentence; and strike out "shall" both times
It appears In the second sentence and sub-
stitute "may."

(d) In section 500, which relates to ship-
ping on United SUtas veaaeU. atrlka ottX the
first sentence.

(e) In section 611 (c). which relates to re-
tention and return of equipment, after "ma-
terisls" the first time it appears. Insert "on
a grant basU"; and strike out "(other than
equipment or msterlals sold under the pro-
visions of section 108)."

(f) In section 613, which relates to notice
to legislative committees, after "act" the
second time It appears In the first sentence.
Insert "or acts spproprlatlng funds pursuant
to authorizations contained In this act."

Ssc. 10. Title V, chspter 3, of the Mutual
Security Act of 1954. as amended, which re-
lates to organization and administration, la
further amended as follows:

(a) In section 531. add the following new
subeectton :

"(c) The President shall eontlntia to
exercise the powers conferred on him tmder
chapter 3 of title I, relating to defense sup-
port, only through the Secretary of State and
his subordinates."

(b) In section 523, add the following new
subsection :

"(c) Under the direction of the President,
the Secretary of Slate shall:

"(1) coordinate the various forms of
assistance authorized by this act so that the
foreign policies of the United States may be
best served thereby; and

"(3) determine the value of the program
under chapur 1 of UUe I for any country."

(c) In section 534 (b), strike out the
second sentence.

(d) In section 526. strlka out tha first
aentcnc*.

(e) In section 637 (c). which relates to
employment of personnel, after "shall be
entitled" in paragraph (l). insert ". except
to the extent thst the President may specify
otherwise In cases In which the period of th*
employment or assignment exceeds 3 years,";
and before the period st the end of para-
graph (2), Insert ": Provided, however. Thst
th* President may by regulation make ez-
cepUons to the application of section 638 In
cases In which the period of the appointment
or assignment exceeds 3 years."

(f) In section 534, which relatea to reports,
after "504.". Insert "203. 400.'

(g) In secUon 535 (b). which relatea to
cooperation with nations and International
organizations, before "in furtherance of" In
the first sentence Insert "consistent with
and"; and before "nations" where It appears
for the first time In the first sentence Insert
"free."

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8935

(h) Amend section 537, which relates to
provisions on uses of funds, as follows:

(1) In the opening clause of subsection
(a), within the parentheses, strike out "and
section 124."

(2) In subsection (a), paragraph (1),
etrike out "1957" and substitute "1958."

(3» Amend the text of subsection (a),
paragraph (10). to rend "rental or lease out-
ride the continental limits of the United
States of offices, buildings, grounds, and liv-
ing quarters to house personnel; mainte-
nance, furnishings, necessary repairs. Im-
provements, and alterations to properties
( wned or rented by the United States Gov-
ernment abroad; and costs of fuel, water, and
ui nines lor such properties;."

(4) In subsection (a), paragraph (17),
strike out "or" preceding "(ill)"; and after
•another" Insert ". (iv) when he Is tem-
p(jrarily absent from his poet under orders,
or (VI when through no fault of the em-
ployee storage costs are Incurred on such fur-
niture and effects (Including sutomobiles)
In connection with suthorlzed travel."

lb) In subsection (c). strike out "$12,-
POO.OOO" and Insert "818.000.000"; and strike
out "in the fiscal year 1957."

(6) Add the following new subsection:
■le) Funds svallable under this set may
be used to pay cosU of training United States
citizen personnel employed or assigned pur-
fcuant to section 627 (c) (2) of this act
(through Interchange or otherwise) at any
State or local unit of Government, public or
private nonprofit institution, trsde. labor,
agricultural, or scientific association or or-
ganization, or commercial firm; and the pro-
V islons of Public Law 918. 84th Congress, may
be used to carry out the foregoing authority
notwithstanding that Interchange of per-
sfinnel may not be Involved or that the train-
ing may not take place at the institutions
specified in thst act. Such trslnlng shall not
be considered employment or holding of of-
fice under title 5, United SUtes Code, section
62. snd any payments or contributions in
connection therewith may, as deemed appro-
priate by the head of the United States Gov-
ernment agency authorizing such trslnlng,
be made by private or public sources and be
Bccepted by any trainee, or may be accepted
by and credited to the current applicable
appropriation of such agency: Proinded. how-
ever. That any such payments to an employee
In the nature of compensation shall be In lieu
of or in reduction of compensation received
from the Goverrment of the United States."

Sec. 11. Titls V, chapter 3, of the Mutual
Security Act of 1954, as amended, which re-
lates to repeal and miscellaneous provisions,
la further amended as follows:

( a ) In section 643. relating to saving pro-
visions, insert the following new sut>sectlons :

"(d) Punds appropriated pursuant to pro-
visions of this act repealed by the Mutual
Security Act of 1958 or the Mutual Security
Act of 1957 shall remain available for their
original purposes in accordance with the pro-
visions of law orginally appUcable thereto.
References In any act to provisions of this
act repealed or stricken out by the Mutual
Security Act of 1957 are hereby stricken out;
and references In any act to provisions of
this act redesignated by the Mutual Security
Act of 1957 are hereby amended to refer to
the new deslgnaUons."

(b) Amend section 644. which relatea to
amendments to other laws, as follows:

(1) Repeal subsections (a), (c). (d), (e),
(ft, (g), (h), and (i), which repeals shaU
not be deemed to affect amendments con-
tained In such subsections to acts other than
the Mutual Security Act of 1964, as amended;
and redesignate subsection "(b)" as subsec-
tion "(a)."

(2) Add the following new subsections:
■(b) Public Law 174. 79th Congress, as

amended, is hereby further amended by
striking out "31. 8' In the proviso at the end
<-f section 2 and inserting '33.33.'

"(c) Section 104 (h) of the Agricultural
Trade Development and Assistance Act of
1954. as amended (Public Law 480. 83d
Cong., 7 U. S. C. 1704) is amended by chang-
Ing the period at the end thereof to a com-
ma and adding: 'such special and particular
effort to include the setting aside of such
amounts from sale proceeds and loan repay-
ments under this title, not in excess of $1
million a year In any one country for a period
of not more than 6 years In advance, as may
be determined by the Secretary of State to
be required for the purposes of this sub-
section;'."

(c) In section 648 (b). relating to con-
struction, strike out "Atomic Energy Act of
1946, as amended (42 U. S. C. 1801)" and
substitute "Atomic Bnergy Act of 1954, as
amended (42 U. S. C. 2011)."

(d) Repeal section 547, which relates to
reduction of authorizations.

(e) In section 549. relating to special pro-
vision on availability of funds, strike out
"chapter 3 of title I." and strike out the
comma following "title III."

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I have a very brief statement I
should like to make In connection with
the motion that has been agreed to by
the Senate.

First I should like to Inform the Sen-
ate that it is our plan to hear the pres-
entation of the pending measure by the
very able and beloved chairman of the
Committee on Foreign Relations, the
senior Senator from Rhode Island [Mr.
Grikn]. Any other Senator who cares
to address himself to the pending
measure will have an opportunity to do
so this afternoon. I do not anticipate
that we will have any votes or that we
will have an evening session today.

Tomorrow morning the Senate will
meet at 9:30 as usual. Following the
morning hour, we may consider some of
the noncontroversial bills on the calen-
dar. They are the bills which I enu-
merated earlier in the day, and which
will appear In the Ricou).

I am hopeful that we shall be able
to stay late enough tomorrow and on
Friday and on Saturday to conclude ac-
tion on the mutual security authoriza-
tion bill this week. It was reported last
Thursday. We have given ample time
for the majority and minority to report
their respective views. It will have been
before the Senate on Wednesday, Tliurs-
day. Friday, and Saturday — 4 days —
and I therefore appeal to my colleagues
to cooperate with us during this month
of June and to be diligent tn attendance
and attentive to this extremely Impor-
tant measure.

Mr. President, if we are unable to con-
clude consideration of the measure this
week, of course it is needless to say that
I expect to have the Senate convene
early next week and remain late until
we get the authorization bill behind us.

Next week I am hopeful that we will
have some more appropriation bills to
consider. The appropriation bill for the
Department of the Interior should be
on the calendar.

I commend the distinguished Senator
from Rhode Island [Mr. Grekn] and his
entire committee, both the majority and
minority members, for the very thorough
Job they did in connection with the pend-
ing bill, and for the long hours they
spent in an attempt to report to the
Senate a measure which would meet with

the approval of a majority of the Mem-
bers of the Senate. They did a thorough
job and an effective job. I am hopeful
that the bill as recommended to us by
the experienced Senators who sit on
the great Committee on Foreign Rela-
tions may pass without substantial
amendments. I look forward to hearing
the Senator from Rhode Island.

Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, it is my
duty to present to the Senate the re-
port of the C(xnmittee on Foreign Rela-
tions in support of S. 2130. as amended,
the Mutual Security Act of 1957.

Although I speak of the presentation
of this bill as a duty, it is also a privi-
lege, because members of the Committee
on Foreign Relations have done such a
careful job on the proposals of the Presi-
dent. The bill as it is reported from
the Committee on Foreign Relations is
greatly improved over the version which
was submitted to the Saiate and intro-
duced by the Senator from Wisconsin
[Mr. Wiley] and myself, by request, on
May 22.

In view of recent suggestions that the
Congress has not acted with sufficient
alacrity on presidential proposals, I call
attention to the fact that the President's
message on the Mutual Security Act was
not received this year until May 21.
One day later, on May 22. S. 2130 was
introduced, embodying the President's
proposals, and on that very day the com-
mittee began its hearings. The com-
mittee has met long hours to receive
testimony in public and private session
and to mark up the bill. Tlie finished
bill was reported to the Senate on June
7, just 18 calendar days aftar tbePnsi-
dent's message was received. But if one
does not count weekends and % holiday
which Intervened ttie committee has re-
ported this bill only 11 working days
after its submission and introduction:

It occurs to me that this may be a
speed record for the consideration of an
important proposal submitted by the
President. Had there not been so many
suggestions that Congress has been
dawdling, I would let the matter drop
here. But in all fairness I must add
that although the President's message
was received on May 21, it was not until
June 3 that the committee began to re-
ceive from the executive branch the de-
tailed Justification for its proposals.
This has meant as a practical matter
that the ccxnmittee had only 5 working
days to master the details of the Presi-
dent's proposals. That would have Im-
posed an Impossible task had it not been
for the fact that many of the President's
proposals bore the imprint of the earlier
work done by the Special Ccxnmittee To
Study the Foreign Aid Program.

I do not mean to cast any reflection
whatsoever on the many executive
branch employees who worked long
hours to help the ccxnmittee in its con-
sideration of this bill. But I do suggest
that those elements in the administra-
tion and the press which are so free in
their criticism of Congress might bear
in mind that delay is not always solely
or even chiefiy attributable to Ccmgress.
Despite the committee's speed in re-
porting the bill, the proposal of the Pres-
ident for the authorizatioki of a mutual
security program of $3.8 billion for next

mm

li .-vr- '

I'm

■ ■■:%■!

vl©

Ji-''

,'§;

l'^---

.-$'

r:.^^r

iW

^-m'r-

.i^*

•>Mi-' --

5-"

«|.,

i 0^-'^- ■

;^.

iiiS

X

y^.

I:
I

■i'

11}

It

U
f

*|l

8936

CONGRESSIONAL ^CX)RD — SENATE

June 12

jear was given moet^ careful considera-
tion. The President's rec<xnmendatlon8
are entitled to the greatest respect.
However, I would be less than candid If I
did not say that I believe the work of
the committee has greatly Improved the
President's proposals and that the end
product will better serve the Interests of
the people of the United States.

I believe the legislation as approved by
the Committee on Foreign Relations de-
serves, in turn, the most careful and se-
rious consideration on the part of all
Members of the Senate. While I do not
preclude the possibility that the Senate
may make additional chuiges In the
pending bill which will further Improve
it, it does seem to me that doubts as to
particular amendments which may be of-
fered should be resolved in favor of the
committee's recommendations. It may
be bold to make such a suggestion. I do
so. however, from a conviction that
members of the committee during th©
past yeSfT have spent so much time and
energy in a total reexamination of the
concept of foreign aid that they have to
a man become outstanding experts on
this subject.

Senators will recall that last July the
Senate created a Special Committee To
Study the Foreign Aid Progam. The
Senate Instructed that special commit-
tee— on which I have served as chairman
since last January — to undertake ex-
haustive studies to determine the extent
to which foreign aid serves, does not
serve, or can be made to serve the na-
tional interest. I shall not take the time
now to review the extensive work of the
special committee. Suffice it to say that
the report of the special committee
served as a guide to the executive branch
in the preparation of its proposals on
foreign aid this year. That branch,
however, did not adopt all the recom-
mendations of the special committee for
what seemed to It to be good and suffl-
cent reasons. In some instances, the
Committee on Foreign Relations has ac-
cepted the administration's judgment,
and provisions have remained in the bill
which were contrary to the proposals of
the special committee. In other instan-
ces, however, the Committee on Foreign
Relations concluded that the recommen-
dations of the special committee should
have been followed by the administra-
tion. As a result, a number of important
changes have been made it the legisla-
tion as proposed by the execuUve branch-
I do not want to leave this brief dis-
cussion of the work of the special com-
mittee without paying high tribute to
each and every member of that group.
As my colleagues know, in addition to all
members of the Committee on Foreign
Relations, the special committee includ-
ed in its membership the distinguished
chairman of the Committee on Armed
Services (Mr. RusskllI; the distin-
guished senior Senator from Massachu-
setts I Mr. Saltonsiall] ; the outatonding
chairman of the Committee on Appro-
priations [Mr. Hatbkn ] ; and the able
senior Senator from New Hampshire
IMr. BuDGBl. These members added
great strength to the special committee.
They were understanding and conscien-
tious In their work. Many of their Ideas

and suggestions are to be found in the
final product.

I turn now to the Mutual Security Act
of 1957. to S. 2130 itself. Members wiU
recall that there were grave doubts ex-
pressed on the floor of the Senate last
year as to the desirability of continuing
this type of legislation. Foreign aid was
In serious trouble at that time. Many
Senator. I am sure, went along with the
measure last year only on the assurance
that there would t>e major revisions in
the legislation this year on the basis of
full study by the special committee and
studies by th» executive branch.

Mr. President, the bill now before the
Senate reflects the results of all those
studies. It is a legii,lative expression of
the beginning of a major revision of for-
eign aid. The impact of the change will
be felt this year and increasingly in the
years ahead.

What are some of the immediate
changes? In the first place, the amount
of the authorization is reduced. Last
year. Congress appropriated $3,766 bil-
lion for foreign aid. This year the Presi-
dent's budget originally called for an In-
crease to S4.4 billion. While the Senate's
special study of the program was in
progress, however, the President himself
reduced that total by $500 million. The
Committee on Foreign Relations in
weighing this legislation was convinced
that the figure could, without damage to
the national interest, be reduced by
another $227 million. It has. therefore,
recommended to the Senate a total flgure
for fiscal year 1958 or $3,637 billion. This
reduction is. in the opinion of the com-
mittee, intelligent economy. It is not a
meat-ax cut. The committee knew what
it was about because its members, as
members of the special committee, had
studied the foreign aid program from
every conceivable angle.

I am convinced that the reduction will
not impair the national Interest. In-
deed. I believe the reduction will work,
positively, to the benefit of the national
interest. It will compel a tighter ad-
ministration of the program. It will
compel a more careful evaluation of each
and every project of foreign aid which
may be undertaken.

For the same reasons. Mr. President. I
believe that there should not be any
further substantial reductions in the au-
thorizations contained in the measure.
Depending on future developments, ad-
ditional economies may be possible In
future years. They should be the resiilt.
however, of the same kind of careful
study which has preceded the committee
approval of this measure if they are to
serve the national interest. Let us have
economy based on facts and not on pre-
sumptions. That is the only way in which
the Senate can discharge Its dual re-
sponsibility of helping to safeguard not
only the nation's purse, but what Is even
more important, the nation Itself.

Economy is Important, but there Is
something of even greater Importance.
That is the long-range safety and free-
dom of the United States and the long-
range Interests of the people of the
United States. If I thought that the
freedom of this country or the welfare
of Its people would be served by a for-

eign aid proeram of $6 billion or even
$10 billion, I would not hesitate for one
moment to recommend such an increase
to the Senate and to vote for it myself.
It is because I believe on the basis of
our present knowledge that the overall
amount proposed in this bill, the amount
of $3.6 billion. Is an accurate expression
of the extent of the national need for
this program that I confidently bring
this measure, on behalf of the Commit-
tee on Foreign Relations, before the
Senate.

Let me say further that the Improve-
ments In the bin over previous foreign
aid legislation do not stop with economy.
The committee's changes In the bill have
served to clarify the purposes of foreign
aid. We have taken the first steps in
distinguishing t>etween those aspects of
foreign aid vital to national defense or to
political interests, and those aspects es-
sentially of a business nature and de-
signed to help ourselves by helping
others. I say, "the first steps." because
much will depend on how the admin-
istration interprets the changes which
have been written Into the legislation.
Congress will set the pattern In this leg-
islation. It Is for the executive branch
to follow through. I may say that while
I am chairman of the Foreign Relations
Committee. I will do my best to see that
the other branch does carry through.

What are the changes which have been
made in this connection? In the first
place, the committee has separated mili-
tary aid and the economic type support
necessary to malnUln It from the other
parts of the proposed legislation. Mili-
tary assistance and defense 8upx>ort
constitute the bulk of the grants of for-
eign aid. In the bill. $2.6 billion, or 68
percent of the total authorization, is re-
lated to defense. We authorize this mil-
itary-type aid not for 1 year, but for 2
years, with a reduction already provided
for next year. We have permitted this
2-year authorization at the urging of the
executive branch, which contended that
it will make for a far more efficient and
economical administration of military
aid and its connected economic support.
Furthermore, this change will make It
possible for mlhtary assistance next year
to be included in the regular budget of
the Department of Defense, which Is
where it belongs.

One of the Important conclusions
reached by the special committee was
that a larger portion of the funds an-
nually made available for foreign aid
should be on a loan basis. TTie admin-
istration agreed with the conclusion of
the special committee that assistance de-
voted to helping underdeveloped coun-
tries grow should be provided on a loan
basis. This increased emphasis on loans
instead of grants as a form of assistance
is reflected by differences between the
bin this year and the bin last year. Last
year 80 percent of so-called development
assistance was required to be in the
form of loans. The development assist-
ance flgure last year was $250 million.
This year, however, vlrtaally all funds
for development assistance are to be on
a loan basis and rirtually none on a
grant barts. In lieu of provision of some
grant funds for development assistance,

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

the committee has agreed with the ad-
ministration to centralize an economic
development assistance in a revolving
fund which will operate on a repayable
basis. It Is the committee's clear under-
.f landing that this means that economic
development aid Is to be placed on a
businesslike basis. The legislation re-
quires loans, as contrasted with the
strange admixture of loans and grants,
of wisdom and waste, which has char-
acterized these activities in recent years.

The committee expects this fund, which
is to start out with $540 million the first
year, to operate in close coordination
with the Export-Import Bank, the In-
ternational Bank, and various other
agencies concerned with overseas eco-
nomic undertakings, and with private
investment capital which flows abroad.
it will also be closely coordinated with
our general foreign policy.

Probably I should elaborate briefly on
the operation of the development fund.
As Members know, for many years the
Export-Import Bank and the Interna-
tional Bank have made loans to foreign
countries and foreign nationals for de-
velopment purposes. .These have been
bankable loans. But at the very same
time the administration, with some pres-
sure from the Congress, has also devel-
oped what it has called the soft loan.
Ihese soft loans have involved tenuous
commitments to repay, low rates of in-
terest, and long terms for repayment.
They have not been the type of loans
which breed self-respect In the borrower.
In fact, some of these loans have become
devices for giving money away in a form
that has involved only lipservlce to loan
requirements in past legislation. These
hzti loans will be dore away with.

It is the committee's iwrpose. in call-
ing for the establishment of the develop-
ment fund, to provide a source of credit
which would be available for operations
of a type not yet able to command bank
credit. The difference between the loan
fund and other forms of credit is illus-
trated by the situation of the honest,
able, sincere young man who goes to the
bank to borrow $1,000 to get himself
started in business. The yoimg man has
no assets except his confidence in him-
self, a willingness to work hard, and a
firm intention to repay every cent he bor-
rows.

In this situation, few banks would
loan the man enough money to get his
business started. But a young man with
that kind of promise, with confldence in
himself, deserves help. He may be able
to find some generous man in the com-
munity who is willing to take a chance
on the young man's future.

That is precisely the way the devel-
opment fund Is to operate. It will be
available for projects which cannot get
commercial credit. It will be used In
those underdeveloped nations where the
people and their governments know that
man can make progress if he works
hard and Is willing to pay his debts. The
fund is for the purpose of promoting
growth and independence and freedom.
It is a device by which the American
people can Invest In the future develop-
ment of people* dedicated to freedom.

It should not become a device for Inter-
national relief.

The President's proposals did not
originally provide for the kind of close
coordination of the fund with these
other aeUvities which the committee be-
lieves necessary. The committee there-
fore wrote Into the bill provision for an
advisory loan board, which will Incltide
representation from the principal inter-
ested departments and agencies, and
which will be under the chairmanship
of the Deputy Under Secretary of State
for Economic Affairs.

In my opinion, this addition Is one of
the most important provisions of the bllL
I believe the advisory board is essential
if we are to bring about an end to the
dangerous and costly confusion of in-
numberable official agencies competing
with each other and with private enter-
prise in assisting other nations abroad.
Not only has this practice been costly;
it has held us up to the amusement and
the ridicule. If not the contempt of
other nations.

As for other parts of this bill, the
committee has fully endorsed the United
States point 4 program, and raised the
authorization for this operation to the
figure of $151 million. Of all the for-
eign-aid measiu-es which this country
pursues, point 4 has been the most mod-
est In cost, the least pretentious in oper-
ation, and the most consistently success-
ful in results. I believe the program
should not be confused with more gran-
diose undertakings. I believe that the
simple person-to-person contact which
it promotes does a great deal of good,
and should have the full and unswerv-
ing support of the people of the United
States.

Finally, the committee has provided
funds for various forms of special assist-
ance, as requested by the adminlstratioa.
These funds amount to $250 milli<m.
These are funds for political and human-
itarian purposes. A considerable part of
them may be speni at the discretion of
the President, since needs and crises can-
not always be anticipated. It is my hope
that the President will be exceedingly
discreet in the expenditure of these
funds, and it would be most gratif yii% if
a substantial part of them might revert
to the Treasury at the end of the fiscal
year 1958. If that were the case, I per-
sonally would be aK»e receptive to the
executive branch estimates of needs in
the future.

Mr. President, I said earlier In my re-
marks that this bill represents a begin-
ning in major changes in foreign aid,
both In concept and In administration.
The Congress has built, so to speak, the
f ramewort: of this new house. It will be
the duty of the executive branch to finish
it aikl to furnish it in a fashion best
suited to the needs of the Nation.

The study of foreign aid which we
have made during the past year has con-
vinced me that a continuance of this pro-
gram Is necessary for the security and
welfare of the people of the United
States. It has also convinced me, as it
has, I am sure, other members of the
committee, that the key to its aeoeptanee
both at home and abroad bes In the
fashion In which its policies are devised

8937

b7 the executive

■Vlf.

-Mi

and administered
brandi.

The CoDgTeas caxmot run this program
on a day-to-day basis, although I must
say there is a great temptation to try to
do so, in view of some of the poor ad-
minisbrattve practices the committee has
imcovered. Our Qovemmmt has a Pres-
ident and an executive luanch for that
purpose. We cannot do their jobs, but
^^tien we do ours, we have a right to
insist that they also do theirs.

I believe that if 8. 2130 is passed as it
has come frc»n the committee, the Sen-
ate wm have done its share. It will have
done so in a mxipartlsan way. because
I am proud to report there has been no
trace of partisanship rither in the woiIe
of the special committee or in the work
of the Foreign Relations Committee. It
will have done its work in a responsible
fashion. It will have made a major con-
tribution to the foreign policy of the
United Stat^. which now has became in-
extricably interwoven with the safety
and welfare of the people of the workl.

I feel confident that the Senate and
the Hotise of Representatives wiH do
their parts, and that the President and
the administration will do theirs in fol-
lowing through.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Rhode Island yield?

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Tal-
MADGE in the chair). Does the Senator
from Rhode Island yield to the Senator
from California?

Mr. GREEN. I yield.

Mr. KNOWLAND. SpeaUng as the
minority leader of the Senate, and also
as a member of the Foreign Rdatlcms
Committee, I should like to take this
opportunity to compliment the distin-
guished Senator from Rhode Island for
his service as chairman ot that very im-
portant committee of the Senate. He
attended, as he always does, most dili-
gently to his duties there. He presided
ov^r the sessions, which, as he has quite
correctly stated, were not tinged with
partisanship in any sense of the word.
As is quite proper in our legislative com-
mittees, there were some differences of
opinion and there were some divided
votes. "Various Senators serving on the
committee had different ideas. But
when the bill was put into its final form,
it embraced various suggestions which
had come from the administration, and
many which had come from subcommit-
tees of the Senate, and others which had
developed from the discussions in the
committee.

I wish to state that in my opinion the
committee did an excellent job in pro-
tecting the position of the Congress as a
coordinate and coequal branch of the
Government. In the general consensus,
the bill Is a good one, and Is entitled to
receive the support of the Senate.

I wish to say to the Senator from
Rhode Island that I think the entire
Senate owes him a ddst of gratitude for
the long hours he has devoted to this
Important bill in getting It ready for can-
slderatkm by the Senate. As the Sen-
ator knows, It ia aoiy a part of the leg-
islattve process. In some years m the
past the House has originated the au-
thorization bllL The Senate has acted

■ji.-

ti

X

■i

1;

It '^

"••?«;- ■ « i

s-

i4-,fl>VA ^<t

#fc- .-" h-i

"^i'i

f:!*,.?^- ■■^-|

.«■"'■*

i^K L. '■^- -'. ^

0

*3

^%-< .rf-'-^

Itt

^^;*--; -r;

|:«

l>^!^.-4^^il

■r'-y

|:pi!
liji'i

rn;

n

lii

i'

I

it.

f

iJi

^f

I •-<

if,

II

f^l*i

8938

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Jum 12

on It after the House ha« acted. In thia
case the Senate ia moving first. The bill
will have to go to the other House of
Congress. It will then have to clear a
conference between the two Houses.
When that part of the legislative process
Is completed, then the House Appropria-
tions Committee will start consideration
of an appropriation bill dealing with the
specific funds to be appropriated. After
that committee has cleared the bill, the
House will act on it It will have to
come to the Senate and run the gantlet
of the Senate Appropriations Committee,
and finally of the Senate Itself. When
the Senate has acted, that bill will have
to go to conference.

So the bill before the Senate now in
effect will set the outside limits of the
funds which are to be provided, and I
think all Members of the Senate should
keep that fact in mind. However. I
want to say that both the minority and
majority members of the committee de-
voted long hours of service to bringing
the bill to this stage of the legislative
process, and I again commend the Sen-
ator from Rhode Island.

Mr. GREEN. Mr. President. I thank
the minority leader for his friendly and
generous words, which make worthwhile
the work the committee has done.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, wlU
the Senator yield?

Mr. GREEN. I yield.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I join with the
distinguished minority leader in con-
gratulating the chairman of the Foreign
Relations Committee for the outstanding
work he has performed in conducting
the hearings relative to the bill. Not
only has he done fine work in presiding
over the hearings connected with this
bill directly, but during the past year
he has been an excellent chairman in
conducting, during most of that period,
the Investigation of the foreign-aid pro-
gram called for by the Senate resolution
adopted last simimer.

As the chairman well knows, there are
differences of opinion as to how good
this particular bill is. To a large ex-
tent, those differences were worked out
in committee, but I want the Rxcoid to
show, as the Senator from California has
so ably stated, that the hearings had
been conducted and the decisions had
been arrived at on a nonpartisan basis.
The chairman of the committee allowed
everyone to have his say. The explana-
tion for every amendment offered was
courteously listened to. Every member
felt he had been given every considera-
tion.

Again I thank the chairman of the
committee for doing an outstanding Job,
which, of course. Is a usual character-
istic of the chairman of the committee.

Mr. GREEN. I thank the Senator
heartily for his agreeable words of ap-
proval, which mean a great deal to me.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, there is nothing I could add to what
I said when I brought the bill up by
motion, about the very fine, patriotic
service of the distinguished chahman of
the committee. I do wish to commend
him for pointing out to the Senate and
to the country that, while some of the
members of the executive department
were talking about a lag in Congress,

they were not able to submit their own
recommendations on such an important
measure as the one now pending before
the Senate, namely, the Mutual Security
Act of 1957. As I understood the dis-
tinguished chairman, it was not until
June 3, some 8 or 9 days ago, that the
witnesses were ready to appear and
testify and give their recommendations
on the bUl.

Mr. GREEN. That Is correct.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. It seems to
me that people who live in glass houses
should not throw stones, and an ad-
ministration that is lagging as much as
this one is in submitting recommenda-
tions in such an Important field as the
Mutual Security Act ought to be some-
what restrained in its observations about
the dispatch with which Congress
handles the matter.

I am hopeful my colleagues in the Sen-
ate will be prepared to discuss the bill
the remainder of this afternoon and
early in the morning when we assemble,
because I want to demonstrate, not only
to the Congress but to the Elxecutive. and
to the people, that while Congress is un-
justly branded, it is efficient and effect-
ive, and it acts in accordance with its
conscience and what it believes to be in
the national interest.

I thank the Senator for the great con-
tribution he has made in maintaining
this fine standard.

Mr. GREEN. I thank the Senator for
his kind comments, and I yield the floor.

Mr. COOPER. Mr. President, I have
enjoyed the very clear presentation of
the new mutual aid program by the
senior Senator from Rhode Island.

It occurred to me, as I listened to the
Senator who spoke as chairman of the
Foreign Relations Committee, that the
pending bill marks a major advance in
the development of the mutual security
program and certainly in the field of
economic assistance. I speak particu-
larly of the new Development Loan
Fund which the bill establishes. Dur-
ing the current debate over the budget
Members of Congress — and certainly
many people of the country, if I read my
mail correctly — have questioned the ef-
fectiveness of our economic assistance
program. Among other things, they
question whether funds are effectively
used and go mto projects and programs,
in the countries receiving aid. which are
of value. I think the Development Loan
Fund established by this bill will assure.
if the bill is finally approved, continuity
of aid, and consequently more effective
programs. It will provide an answer to
some of the questions raised against the
mutual security program.

The very fact that continuity of aid
is possible, where appropriate, to bene-
ficiary countries will enable them to se-
lect wealth-producing projects for the
use of our aid funds. This will be more
beneficial to them as well as to the
United States.

It will enable the United States to as-
sure that aid fxmds go into wealth-pro-
ducing projects, and will not be assigned
to less effective programs, simply because
countries aided could not be sure that
aid would be forthcoming when needed
to complete their larger and more val-
uable plans for development. Further,

I believe It will be psychologically bene*
flclal if countries can borrow rather
than secure needed aid through grants.
It will tend to promote good relations
between the United States and countries
receiving our help.

As the Senator was speaking. I glanced
at the list of countries that will be aided
by this bill. From a quick calculation.
I noted that 14 or 15 coimtries on the
list have become independent in the last
10 or 12 years. A great purpose of our
economic assistance is to aid and pro-
mote the economic advancement of these
countries.

In doing this, we assist them. also, to
secure their political Independence. If
these newly Independent countries main-
tain their political independence and
sovereignty, a great purpose of the for-
eign policy of the United States would
have been accomplished. I Join with
other Senators in congratulating the
Senator from Rhode Island and his com-
mittee on their fine work.

ARTHUR SEW SANG AND OTHERS

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 382. Senate bill 1566.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill <S. 1566)
for the relief of Arthur Sew Sang. Kee
Yin Sew Wong. Sew Ing Lin, Sew Ing
Quay, and Sew Ing You.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. The purpose
of the bill is to grant the status of per-
manent residence in the United States
to Arthur Sew Sang. Kee Yin Sew Wong,
Sew Ing Lin, Sew Ing Quay, and Sew Ing
You. The bill provides for the appro-
priate quota deductions and for the pay-
ment of the required visa fees.

The bill was favorably reported by the
Committee on the Judiciary. I hope it
will be passed by the Senate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.

The bill (S. 1566) was ordered to be
engrossed for a third reading, read the
third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc.. That, for the purpoMS
of the Iininlgr«tlon and Naturalization Act.
Arthur Sew Sang. Kee Tin Sew Wong. 8«w
Ing Lin. Sew Ing Quay, and Sew Ing Tou
ahaU be held and considered to have been
lawfully admitted to the United States for
permanent residence aa of the date of the
enactment of this act, upon the payment of
the required visa fees. Upon the gr&ntlng
of permanent realdence to such aliens, as
provided In this act. the Secretary of State
shall Instruct the proper quota-control offi-
cer to deduct five numbers from the appro-
priate quota for the first year that such
quota Is available.

ADMISSION INTO THE UNITED
STATES OF CERTAIN ALIEN
CHILDREN

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 383. House Joint Resolu-
tion 289.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8939

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the Joint resolu-
tion (H. J. Res. 289) to facilitate the
admission into the United States of
certain alien children.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, before action Is had on the Joint
resolution I should like to make a brief
statement.

The purpose of the Joint resolution
is to grant to four minor children adop-
ted or to be adopted by United States
citizens the status of nonquota immi-
grants, which is the status normally en-
joyed by the alien minor children of
citizens of the United States.

The Committee on the Judiciary has
carefully considered the measure, and
recommended its enactment. I hope the
Senate will act favorably.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the third reading of the
joint resolution.

The Joint resolution (H. J. Res. 289)
was ordered to a third reading, read the
third time, and passed.

SHEW SHEI LAN AND CHOW SHONO
YEP

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 384, Senate bill 1581.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
pr exceeded to consider the bill <S. 1581)
for the relief of Shew Shei Lan and Chow
Shong Yep. which had been reported
from the Committee on the Judiciary
with amendments in line 4. after the
word "Act," to strike out "Shew" and
insert "Sheu," so as to make the bill
read:

Be it enacted, etc.. That, notwithstanding
the provisions of sections 201 (a) and 302
( b I of the Immigration and Nationality Act,
Sheu Shel Lan and Chow Shong Yep shall
be deemed chargeable to the quota for the
Asia Pacific triangle.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the purpose of the bill, as amended,
is to enable Sheu Shei Lan and Chow
Shong Yep to enjoy the immigration
5iatus of persons bom within the Asia
Pacific triangle. The purpose of the
amendment is to correct the spelling of
one name.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the commit-
tee amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

The title was amended, so as to read:
'A bill for the rehef of Sheu Shel Lan
and Chow Shong Yep."

CECELIA VACCARO

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 385, H. R. 1451.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the blU (H. R.
1451) for the relief of Cecelia Vaccaro.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the purpose of the bill Is to enable
a former native-bom citizen of the
lAilted States to regain her United States
citizenship which was lost by voting in
a foreign election on April l, 1946.

I hope the bill will be favorably acted
upon.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
question is on the third reading of the
bill.

The bill (H. R. 1451) was ordered to
a third reading, read the third time, and
passed.

ELLEN G. MARINAS

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous c<msent that the
Senate proceed to the consideratt(»i of
Calendar No. 386. H. R. 1765.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill (H. R.
1765) for the reUef of Ellen G. Marinas.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the purpose of the bill is to deem
Ellen O. Marinas to be the minor aUen
child of her father, a citizen of the
United SUtes.

I hope the bill will be favorably acted
upon. It has been favorably recom-
meiMled by the Coomilttee on the Judi-
ciary.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the third reading of the
biU.

The bm (H. R. 1765) was ordered to
a third reading, read the third time, and
passed.

ELDA MONDILLO

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 387. H. R. 1837.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. 1837)
for the relief of Elda Mondlllo.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. Presi-
dent, the purpose of the bill is to deem
Elda Mondlllo to l>e the minor alien child
of her father, a citizen of the United
States.

The bill has been favorably reported
by the Conunlttee on the Judiciary. I
hope it will be acted upon by the Senate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the third reading of the
bill.

The Wll (H. R. 1837) was ordered to a
third reading, read the third time, and
passed.

MRS. THEODORE ROUSSEAU
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 388, H. R. 1359.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill (H. R.
1359) lor the relief of Mrs. Theodore

(Nicole Xantho) Rousseau, which had
been reported from ttie Committee on
the Judiciary with an amendment to
strike out all after the enacting clause
and insert:

That, in the admlnlatratloD of the Immi-
gration and Nationality Act, Mrs. Tbeod<M-e
(Nicole Xantho) Rousseau shall be deemed
to be within the purview of section 354 (3)
of the said act.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the purpose of the bill, as amended,
is to place the beneficiary within a cate-
gory of persons exempt from certain ex-
patriating provisions of U^e immigration
laws, to which exemption she would nor-
mally be entitled, were it not f ot the fact
that she was formerly a citizen of the
country in which her foreign residence
Is located. The bill has been amended in
accordance with the suggestion made by
the Department of State.

The Committee on the Judiciary fa-
vorably recommends the bill.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the coxnmittee
amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The amendment was ordered to be en-
grossed and the bill to be read a third
time.

The bill was read the third t.trnp and
passed.

ALESSANDRO RENDA

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask imanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 407, Senate bill 18.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill (S. 18)
for the relief of Alessandro Renda.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the purpose of the bill is to grant
the status of permanent residence in the
United States to Alessandro Renda. The
bill provides for an appropriate quota
deduction and for the payment of the
required visa fee. The bill also provides
for the posting of a bond as a guaranty
that the beneficiary will not become a
public charge.

The bill has been favorably recom-
mended by the Committee on the
Judiciary.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question Is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.

The bill (S. 18) was ordered to be en-
grossed for a third reading, read the
third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc.. That, for tiie ptupoees
of the Immigration and Nationality Act,
Alessandro Renda sbaU be held and consid-
ered to have been lawfully admitted to the
United States for permanent residence as of
the date of the enactment of this act, upon
Iiayment of the required visa fee. Upon the
granting of permanent residence to such
alien as provided for in this act, the Secre-
tary of State shaU Instruct the proper quota-
control officer to deduct one number from
the appropriate quota for the first year that
such quota Is available. A suitable or propw
bond or undertaking, approved by the At-
torney General, shall be given by or on behalf
of the said Alessandro Renda in the same
nuinner and subject to the same conditions
as boBds or undertakings given under sec-
tion 213 of such act.

Vff:^

■'ii

I"

'!^

Ml!

>MJf

i:

J

:i

.1.

S i

3 -

II

i .

J *
it'll

h

III

8940

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

KYU YAWP LEE AND HIS WIFE
HYXJNG SOOK LEE

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ft*>f unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 408. Senate bill 250.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill (S. 250)
for the relief of Kyu Yawp Lee and his
wife, Hyung Sook Lee.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the purpose of the bill is to grant
the status of permanent residence in
the United States to Kyu Yawp Lee and
his wife. Hyung Sook Lee. The bill pro-
vides for appropriate quota deductions
and for the payment of the required visa
fees.

I hope the bill will be approved by the
Senate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the engrossment and
third reading of the bill.

The bill (S. 250) was ordered to be
engrossed for a third reading, read the
third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc.. That, for the purpxjses
of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Kyu
Yawp Lee and Mrs. Hyung Sook Lee shall
be held and considered to have been law-
fully admitted to the United States for per-
manent residence as of the date of the en-
actment of this act. upon payment of the re-
quired visa fees Upon the granting of
permanent residence to such aliens as pro-
vided for In this act, the Secretary of State
■hall Instruct the proper quota-control offi-
cer to deduct the required numbers from the
approoriate quota or quotas for the flrst
year that such quota or quotas are avail-
able.

SUSANA M. UMANOS

Mr JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. T ask unanimous consent that the
Senate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 409, Senate bill 254.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?

There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill 'S. 254 >
for the relief of Susana M. Umanos.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the purpose of the bill is to grant
the status of permanent residence in the
United States to Susana M. Umanos.
The bill provides for an appropriate
quota deduction and for the payment of
the required visa fee.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.

The bill (S. 254 » was ordered to be
engrossed for a third reading, read the
third time, and passed, as follows:

Be tr enacted, etc.. That, for the purposes
of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Su-
sana M. Umanos shall be held and considered
to have been lawfully admitted to the United
States for permanent residence as of the date
of the enactment of this act. upon payment
of the required visa fee. Upon the granting
of permanent residence to such alien as pro-
vided for In this act, the Secretary of State
shall Instruct the proper quota-control officer
to deduct one number from the appropriate
quota for the first year that such quota Is
available.

CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN
MEASURES ON THE CALENDAR

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask imanlmous consent that it
l>e in order for the clerk to call for con-
sideration measures on the Senate Cal-
endar from Order No. 410 through Or-
der No. 433.

Mr. KNOWLAND, Mr. President, will
the Senator from Texas agree to elimi-
nate Calendar No. 415. Senate bill 931?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Yes. elimi-
nating Calendar No. 415. Senate bill 931.
I refer to all those Calendar items with
the exception of Calendar No. 415.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the request of the Senator
from Texas? The Chair hears none,
and it is so ordered.

FUMIKO SHIKANUKI

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (S. 255 » for the relief of Fumiko
Shikanuki.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that a
brief statement on the purpose of the
bill be printed at this point in the
Record.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

The purpose of the bill Is to enable the
fiancee of a United State* citizen veteran
of our Armed Forces to enter the United
States for the purpose of marrying her citi-
zen fiance and to thereafter reside in the
United States.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the engrossment and
third reading of the bill.

The bill <S. 255 > was ordered to be
engrossed for a third reading, read the
third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc.. That. In the admin-
istration of the Immigration and Nationality
Act. Fumiko Shikanuki. the fiancee of Rob-
ert George Cartee. a citizen of the United
States, shall be eligible for a visa as a non-
immigrant temporary visitor for a period of
3 months: Provided. That the administra-
tive ai'.thorlties find that the said Fumiko
Shikanuki la coming to the United States
with a bona fide intention of being married
to the said Robert George Cartee and that
she is found otherwise admissible under the
immigration laws. In the event the mar-
riage between the above-named persons does
not occur within 3 months after the entry
of the said Fumiko Shikanuki. she shall b«
required to depart from the United States
and upon failure to do so shall be deported
in accordance with the provisions of sections
242 and 243 of the Immigration and Nation-
ality .\ct. In the event that the marriage be-
tween the above-named persons shall occur
within 3 months after the entry of the said
Fumiko Shikanuki. the Attorney General is
authorized and directed to record the lawful
admisison for permanent residence of the
said Fumiko Shikanuki as of the date of the
payment by her of the required visa fee.

GAETANO MATTIOLI CICCHINI

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (S. 303) for the relief of Gaetano
Mattioli Clcchini.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that a
brief statement as to the purpose of the
bill be printed in the Record at this
pqint.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed In the
RscoKO, AS follows:

The purpoM of the bill Is to grant to the
minor child adopted by » citizen of the
United States the status of a nonquota Im-
migrant which Is the status normally en-
Joyed by alien minor children of United
States cltlxens.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.

The bill (S. 303) was ordered to be
engrossed for a third reading, read the
third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc.. That, for the purpoeet
of sections 101 (a) (37) (A) and 208 of
the Immigration and Nationality Act. the
minor child. Gaetano Mattioli Clcchini, shall
be held and considered to be the natural-
born alien child of Frances Harriet Clcchini,
a citizen of the United States.

KATARZYNA SIWIK

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (S. 252) for the relief of Katarzyna
Siwik. which had been reported from
the Committee on the Judiciary with an
amendment on page 2. line 3. after the
word "act." to insert a colon and "Pro-
tided further. That this exemption shall
apply only to a ground for exclusion of
which the Department of State or the
Department of Justice has knowledge
prior to the enactment of this act.", so
as to make the bill read :

Be it enacted, etc.. That, notwithstanding
the provision of section 212 (a) (8) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act. Katultyna
Stwlk may be granted a visa and be ad-
mitted to the United States for permanent
residence Lf she Is found to be otherwise
admissible under the provisions of that act,
vinder such conditions and controls which
the Attorney General, after consultation
with the Surgeon General of the United
States Public Health Service, Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, may
deem necessary to Impose: Provided, That
a suitable and proper bond or undertaking,
approved by the Attorney General, be de-
posited as preccrlbed by section 213 of said
act: Proiided further, Ttint this exemption
shall apply only to a ground for exclusion
of which the Department of State or the
Department of Justice has knowledge prior
to the enactment of this act.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that a
brief statement as to the purpose of the
bill be printed in the Record at this point.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows :

FUIPOSE OF THX BILL

The purpose of the bill, as amended. Is to
waive the excluding provision of existing law
relatmg to one who Is afflicted with tuber-
culosis in behalf of the mother of a United
States citizen veteran of our Armed Forcee.
The bill also provides that the beneficiary
will submit to any necessary medical treat-
ment for her tubercular condition and pro-
vides for the posting of a bt-nd as a guaranty
that the beneficiary will not become a public
charge.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques-
tion is on agreeing to the committee
amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

2957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8941

MIYAKO UEDA OeOOOD

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (S. 284) for the relief of Mlyako Ueda
Osgood, which had been reported from
the Committee on the Judiciary with an
amendment to strike out all after the
enacting clause and insert:

That in the administration of the Immi-
gration and Nfttlonallty Act. Mlyako Ueda
Osgood, widow of John David Oegood. a de-
ceased United State* citizen who served hon-
orably in the Armed Forces of the United
States, shall be deemed to be a nonquota
Immigrant.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that a
brief statement as to the purpose of the
bill be printed in the Ricoro at thla
point.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

The purpose of the bill, as amended, is to
grant the status of a nonquota Immigrant
to Mlyako Ueda Osgood which is the status
she would be entitled to were it not for the
death of her hiuband. She is the widow of
a United States cttixen who served honor-
ably In the Armed Forces of the United
States.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The

question is on agreeing to the committee
amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

MARIA MATILDE PICAUX)

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (S. 286) for the relief or Maria Ma-
tilde Picallo, which had been reported
from the Conunittee on the Judiciary
with an amendment in line 5, after the
word "be", to insert "issued a visa and
be ', so as to make the bill read:

Be it enacted, etc.. That, notwithstanding
the provisions of paragraph 9 of section 212
( a ) of the Immigration Und Nationality Act.
Maria Matllde Picallo may be issued a visa
and be admitted to the United States for
permanent residence if she is found to be
otherwise admissible under the provisions
of such act. This act shall apply only to
grouiKls for exclusion under such para-
graph known to the Secretary of State or the
Attorney General prior to the date of the
enactment of this act.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent tliat a
brief statement as to the purpose of the
bill be printed in the Rccoro at this
point.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

The purpose of the bill, as amended, is to
waive the excluding provision of existing law
relating to the commission of crimes involv-
ing moral turpitude In behalf of the mother
of a lawful permanent resident of the United
States. The bill has been amended In ac-
cordance with esUbllshed precedenU.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
question Is on agreeing to the committee
amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill waa ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

AMENDMENT OF INTERSTATE COM-
MERCE ACT. AS AMENDED

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (8. 939) to amend section 22 of the
Interstate Commerce Act, as amended,
which had been reported from the Com-
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce with an amendment to strike out
all after the enacting clause and insert:

That section 22 of the Interstate Com-
merce Act, as amended (49 U. S. C. 22), is
further amended by inserting after the sec-
tion designation the figure ( 1 ) and by adding
at the end thereof the following:

"(2) All quotations or tenders under para-
graph (1) of this section for the trans-
portation, storage, or handling of property or
the transportation of persons free or at re-
duced rates for the United States Govern-
ment, or any agency or department thereof.
Including qtwtations for retroactive appli-
cation whether negotiated or renegotiated
after the services have been performed, shall
be in writing or confirmed In writing and a
copy or copies thereof shall be submitted
to the Commission by the carrier or carriers
offering such tenders or quotations In the
manner specified by the Commission. Sub-
mittal of such quotations or tenders to the
Commission shall be made concurrently with
submittal to the United States Government,
or any agency or department thereof, for
whose account the quotations or tenders are
offered or for whom the proposed services
are to be rendered. Such quotations or
tenders shall be preserved by the Commis-
sion for public inspection. The provisions
of this paragraph shall not apply to any
quotation or tender which, as indicated by
the United States Government, or any
agency or department thereof, to any carrier
or carriers, involves information the dis-
closure of which would endanger the na-
tional security.**

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that a
brief statement as to the purpose of the
bill be printed in the Record at this
point.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Rkcosd, as follows:

The purpose of this bill is to amend sec-
tion 22 of the Interstate Conunerce Act (49
U. S. C. 22) under which the United SUtes
Government and State or municipal gov-
ernments are allowed free or reduced rates
from carriers subject to the Interstate Com-
merce Act for the carriage, storage, or han-
dling of property. In addition, the section
allows the United States Government trans-
portation of persons at free or reduced rates.

The terms of the bill, as Introduced,
would limit the granting of such free or re-
duced rates to time of war or national emer-
gency, as declared by Congress or the Pres-
ident. Further, the bill would provide that
any rates, fares, and charges, and rules, reg-
ulations, and practices made under section
22 "shall be conclusively presumed" to be
lawful and not subject to attack, except for
fraud or clerical mistake, after the date of
their acceptance or agreement by duly au-
thorized Government officials. Further, the
measure would provide that such arrange-
ments imder section 22 could be canceled
upon not less than 90 days' written notice
by any of the parties thereto. Finally,
S. 939 would prevent consideration of the re-
duced rates, fares, and charges as evidence
of lawfulness of other rates, fares, and
charges and would provide that enactment
of the bill woiQd have no effect on trans-
actions other than those carried out under
Its provisions.

The proposal incorporating the terms of
S. 939. Introduced at the request of the In-
terstate Conunerce Commission, is contained

In Interstate Commerce Conunission Legisla-
tive Recommendation No. S. page 160. 70th
Annual Report to the Congress. Public
hearings were held by the Surface Transpor-
tation Subcommittee, and all desiring to
testify were heard.

In view of the record made In the hearings,
the ComnUttee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce cannot approve S. 939 as originally
Introduced. The provisions of the bill for
limiting free or reduced rates on traffic for
United States, State, or munlcliwl govern-
ments to time of war or national emergency
does not seem to constitute necessary legis-
lation because the problems of these govern-
ments as shippers are markedly different
from those of conunerclal shippers subject
to the Interstate Commerce Act. Likewise,
the terms of the bill that would leave these
govoTunents practically without recourse
upon acceptance of a section 22 quotation are
certainly not in the public Interest. The
taxpayer, we believe, should not be accorded
a shorter period of limitation than the 2
years accorded commercial shippers.

The Committee therefore recommends that
in lieu of S. 939 a new paragraph be added to
section 22 of the Interstate Commerce Act
that would require carriers to submit to the
Interstate Commerce Commission copies of
section 22 quotations simultaneously with
their submittal to the agencies and depart-
ments of the United States Government.
The Commission would not have any regula-
tory authority over rates made under section
22, but would be required to make such
section 22 tenders or quotations available for
public examination. Carriers would not be
required to submit to the Commission ten-
ders or quotations under section 22 applica-
ble solely for traffic of State or municipal
governments. Nor would carriers be re-
quired to submit to ICC copies of such ten-
ders or quotations, dlscloetue of the contents
of which the Government agency Involved
Indicated would endanger national security.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the committee
amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

AMENDMENT OP UNIVERSAL MILI-
TARY TRAINING AND SERVICE
ACT

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (H. R. 6548) to amend the Universal
Military Training and Service Act, as
amended, as regards persons in the
medical, dental, and allied specialist
categories.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, the purpose of H. R. 6548 Is to
authorize the President until July I,
1959, to issue special calls for phjrsicians
and dentists and other allied specialists
who are otherwise liable for induction
imder the regular draft. Under existing
law the President has no authority to
induct persons from among the various
age groups on the basis of their profes-
sional or technical skill. The bill will
provide such special authority with re-
gard to physicians and dentists and other
allied specialists. It is expected that this
legislation will operate in a manner
similar to the doctor draft law under
which commissions will be offered to all
physicians and dentists who are quali-
fied to receive a commission.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
question is on the third reading of the
bilL

t *

I!

,1

Iti

8942

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8943

The bin (H. R. 654S) was ordered to
a third reading, read the third time, and
passed.

PERMISSION FOR RETIRED OFFICER

OF THE NAVY TO BE EMPLOYED

IN COMMAND STATUS AT PORT

LYAUTEY. MOROCCO

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (H. R. 7505) to permit a retired offl-
cer of the Navy to be employed in com-
mand status at Port Lyautey, Morocco.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the Rxcord at this point a
statement as to the purpose of the bin.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed ir the
Rsccxo. as follows:

Th0 purpose of this measure Is to pensit
Capt. Christian Harold Duborg to remain In
a commaiul status at Port Layutey. Monxxo.
after he has been placed on the retired list.

Capt. Christian Harold Duborg Is now in
command at United States Naval Activities.
Port Lyautey, Morocco. He Is required to be
retired from the Navy on June 30. 1957. after
having completed 30 years of service. Cap-
tain Duborg has been participating with the
Department of State and other elements of
the Department of Defense In negotiations
with the Moroccan and French Oovemmeats
on military base rights. It Is anticipated
that these negotiations will continue for
come time after the date on which Captain
Duborg will retire. His experience and
familiarity with the subjects of the base-
rlghts negotiation make desirable his con-
tinued retention in conunand there.

The PRESIDING OFFICER The
question is on the third reading and
passage of the bill.

The bill was ordered to a third read-
ing, read the third time, and passed.

AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIA-
TIONS TO CONSTRUCT OFFICTE
BUILDING FOR ATOMIC ENERGY
COMMISSION— BILL PASSED OVER
The bill (S. 1918> to amend Public Law
31. 84th Congress, to increase the au-
thonzation for appropriations to the
Atomic Energy Commission for the con-
struction of a modem ofBce building in
or near the District of Columbia to serve
as its principal office was announced as
next in order.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President. I
think we should have an explanation of
this bill.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I ask that
the bill be passed over. The amoimt in-
volved does not bring the bill within
the category of the others, and I ask
that action on this measure be defenre<l.
The PRESIDING OFFICER The
bill will be passed over.

CHRISOULA ANTONIOS CHEGARAS

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill fS. 904) for the relief of Chrisoula
Antonlos Chegaras.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that a
statement as to the purpose of the bill
be printed in the Ricord at this point.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RccoRo. as follows :

The purpose of the bill la to grant to the
child adopted by cltiiens of the United

8t«tM the statra of a nonquota tmmlcrant,
which la tto* atatiis normaUy ecjoyad by alien
minor children of United States citizens.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The

question Is on the engrossment and third
reading of the blL

The bill waa ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed, as follows :

fls it enacted, etc.. That, for the purposes
of sections lOI (s) (77) (A) and aos of the
Immigration and Nationality Act. Chrisoula
Antonlos Chegaras shall be held and con-
sidered to be the natural-bom minor alien
child of Antonlos Chegaras. a citizen of the
United SUtes.

ANGELA FERRINI

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (S. 336) for the relief of Angela
Perrinl, which had been reported from
the Commltte on the Judiciary with an
amendment to strike out all after the
enacting clause and insert:

That, notwithstanding tht provisions of
section 101 (b) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act. Angela Perrinl shall be held
and considered to b« within the purview
of secUon 101 (s) (37) (A) of the said act.

So as to make the bill read:

Be it enactea. etc.. That, notwithstanding
the provisions of section 101 (b) of the Im-
migration and NaUonallty Act. Angela Per-
rinl shall be held and considered to be with-
in the purview cf section 101 (a) (37) (A>
of the said act.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the Record at this point a
statement as to the purpose of the bill.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Rxcoro, as follows :

The purpose of the bill, as amended. Is to
enable Angela Perrlni. the daughter of a
United SUtes citizen, to enter the United
States as a nonquota Immigrant which Is the
status normally enjoyed by the alien minor
children of United States citizens The pur-
pose of the amendment Is to clarify the
language of the bllL

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the committee
amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

ELISABETH TROUT
The Senate proceeded to consider the
bUl (S. 418 > for the relief of Ehsabeth
Trout, which had been reported from the
Committee on the Judiciary with an
amendment in line 5. after the word
•"be." to insert "Issued a visa and be," so
as to make the bill read :

Be it enacted, etc.. That. nothwlthsUnding
the provisions of paragraph (9) of section
aia (a) of t*-^ ImmlgratlCMi and Nationality
Act. Kllsabcth Trout may be Issued a visa
and be admitted to th« United States for
permanent residence If she Is found to b«
otherwise admissible under the provisions of
such set; Provided. That this act shall apply
only to grounds for exclusion under such
paragraph known to the Secretary of State
or the Attorney General prior to the date of
the enactment of this act.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent tc have
printed in the Rxcord at this point a
statement concerning the purpose of the
bin.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RzcoRD, as follows:

The purpoee of the bill, as amended. Is to
waive the excluding provision of existing law
relating to oonvlcUons of crimes involving
moral turpitude In behalf of thii wife of a
United States citizen veteran of our Armed
Forces. The bill has been amended in ac-
cordance with established precedents.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question Is on agreeing to the committee
amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

WILHELMINE ALDRIDGE AND
OTHERS

The Senate proceeded to eonslder the
bin (8. 827) for the relief of WUhebnlne
Aldridge. and her minor children, Irene
S. Aldridge and Ingebert Kathe Al-
dridge. which had been reported from
the Committee on the Judiciary with an
amendment on page 1. line 5, after the
word "be", to insert "Isatied a ylsa and
be", ao as to make the bill read:

Be it enmeied. etc.. That, notwithstanding

the provisions of paragraph (9) oi sartlnD Ua
(a) of the InualgratloD and NaUonallty Act,
Wllhelmlne Aldridge may be Issued a visa
and be admitted to the United States for
permanent residence If she Is found to be
otherwise admisslbls under the provisions of
such set: Provided. That the provisions of
this section shaU apply only to grounds for
exclusion under such paragraph knowa to
the Secretary of Suu or the Attorney Gen-
eral prior to the date of enactment of this
act.

Sac. 2. For the purposes of sections 101
(a) (27) (A) and 205 of the Immigration
and Nationality Act. the minor children,
Irene S. Aldridge and Ingeborg Kathe Al-
dridge. shall be held and considered to bt the
natural-born alien children of John Al-
dridge. a citizen of the United Statea.

Mr JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent to have
printed In the Rxcord at this point a
brief statement concerning the purpose
of the biU.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed In the
RicoRD, as follows;

The purpoee of the bill, as amended. Is to
valve the excluding provision of existing
law relating to convictions of crimes Involv-
ing moral turpitude In behalf of tba wlfa of
a United States citizen. A further purpose
of the bUl Is to grant to the minor chUdren
adopted by a citizen of the United SUtea
the status of nonquota Immigrants which la
the status normally enjoyed by alien minor
children of United SUtas eitiaena. Tha biU
has been amended in accordance with es-
tablished precedenta.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
question Is on agreeing to the commit-
tee amendment.
The amendment was agreed ta
The bill was ordered to tie engrossed
for a third reading, read the third Ume.
and passed.

URSULA ROSA PAZDRO

The Senate proceeded to consider the
hill (8. 660) for the relief of Ursula Rosa
Pazdro. which had been reported from
the Committee on the Judiciary with an
amendment in line 5, after the word
• be", to insert "Issued a visa and be",
so as to make the bill read:

Be it enacted, etc.. That, not withstanding
the provisions of paragraph (9) of section
212 (a) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act, Ursula Rosa Pazdro may be lasued a
visa and be admitted to the United States
for permanent residence If she Is found to
be otherwise admissible under the provl-
si.ins of such act: Provided, That this act
shall apply only to grounds for exclusion
under Buch paragraph known to the Secre-
tary of State or the Attorney General prior
to the date of the enactment of this act.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I ask unani-
mous consent to have printed in the
Record at this point a brief explanation
SiS to the purpose of the bill.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

The purpose of the bill, as amended. Is to
waive the excluding provision of existing law
relating to a conviction of crimes Involving
moral turpitude In behalf of the wife of a
United States citizen member of our Armed
Porces. The bill has been amended In ac-
cordance with established precedents.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the committee
amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

JEFFREY CHARLES MEDWORTH

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (H. R. 1454) for the relief of Jef-
frey Charles Medworth, which had been
reported from the Committee on the Ju-
diciary with an amendment to strike out
all after the enacting clause and insert:

That, for the purposes of the Immigration
and Nationality Act. Jeffrey Charles Med-
worth. a British subject who was bom In
India, shall be deemed to have been born In
Great Britain.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask linanimous consent to have
printed in the Record at this point a
brief statement concerning the purpose
of the bin.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed In the
Record, as follows:

The purpose of the bill, as amended. Is to
deem Jeffrey Charles Medworth to have been
born In Great BrlUln. The bill has been
Hrnended In accordance with established
precedents.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The

question is on agreeing to the commit-
tee amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

ELEANOR M. HORTON

The Senate proceeded to consider the
biU (S. 520) for the relief of Eleanor M.
Horton, which had been reported from

the Committee on the Judiciary with
amendments in line 3, after the word
"provisions", to strike out "of para-
graphs (9) and (10)": in line 4, after
the letter "(a)", to insert "(9)", and in
line 5, after the word "be", to Insert "Is-
sued a visa and be"; so as to make the
blU read:

Be it enacted etc.. That, notwithstanding
the provisions of section 212 (a) (9) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, Eleanor
M. Horton may be Issued a visa and be ad-
mitted to the United States for permanent
residence If she is found to be otherwise ad-
missible under the provisions of such act:
Provided, That this act shall apply only to
grounds for exclusion imder such paragraphs
known to the Secretary of State or the At-
torney General prior to the date of the
enactment of this act.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the Record at this point a
brief statement concerning the purpose
of the bill. *^

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed In the
Record, as follows :

The purpose of the bUI, as amended is to
waive the excluding provision of existing
law relating to the conviction of crimes in-
volving moral turpitude in behalf of the
wife of a United States citizen member of our
Armed Porces. The bill has been amended
to delete reference to section 212 (a) (10)
which does not apply and has been amended
further in accordance with established
precedents.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the committee
amendments.

The amendments were agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

BiARIA BCANIATES

The Senate proceeded to consider the
bUl (S. 1083) for the reUef of Maria
Maniates, which had been reported from
the Committee on the Judiciary with
amendments in line 4, after the word
"act." to strike out "the minor chUd.";
in line 5, after the name "Maria," to
strike out "Maniates," and Insert "Mani-
ates", and in line 6, after the word "nat-
ural-bom", to insert "minor"; so as to
make the bill read:

Be it enacted, etc., That, for the purposes
of sections 101 (a) (27) (A) and 205 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, Maria
Maniates shall be held and considered to be
the natural-bom minor alien child of Mr.
and Mrs. Philip Maniates, citizens of the
United States.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the Record at this point a
brief statement as to the purpose of the
bUl.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

The purpose of the bill, as amended, Is to
grant to the chUd adopted by citizens of the
United States the status of a nonquota im-
migrant, which is the status normally en-
Joyed by alien minor chUdren of United
States citizens. The bill has been amended
to clarify the language. They presently re-
side in Winchester, Mass.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
question Is on agreeing to the committee
amendments.

The amendments were agreed to.

The bill wm ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.

RELIEF OP CERTAIN ALIENS

The Senate proceeded to consider the
Joint resolution (H. J. Res. 272) for the
relief of certain aliens.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the Record at this point a brief
statement concerning the purpose of the
Joint resolution.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

The purpose of the Joint resolution is to
grant the status of permanent residence in
the United States to 7 persons, and to cancel
deportation proceedings In the case of 2 per-
sons. The Joint resolution provides for the
payment of the required visa fees and for the
appropriate quota deductions, where neces-
sary. In two cases Included in the Joint res-
olution, provision Is made for the posting of
bonds as a guaranty that the beneficiaries
will not become public charges.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question on the third reading and pas-
sage of the Joint resolution.

The Joint resolution was ordered to a
third reading, read the third time, and
passed.

WAIVER OP CERTAIN PROVISIONS
OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NA-
TIONALITY ACT

The Senate proceeded to consider the
joint resolution (H. J. Res. 308) to waive
certain provisions of section 212 (a) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act in
behalf of certain aliens.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the Record at this point a
brief statement concerning the purpose
of the Joint resolution.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

The purpose of the Joint resolution is to
waive the excluding provision of existing
law relating to the commission of crimes
involving moral turpitude in behalf of four
aliens. In one case the Joint resolution also
waives the excluding provisions relating to
one who lias been deported and has received
a visa by fraud. In one of the cases, the
beneficiary is to be admitted to the United
States temporarily for the purpose of marry-
ing her United States citizen finance.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the third reading and
passage of the Joint resolution.

The joint resolution was ordered to a
third reading, read the third time, and

WAIVER OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS
OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NA-
TIONALITY ACT

The Senate proceeded to consider the
Joint resolution (H. J, Res. 274) to
waive the provision of section 212 (a).

hi!

111

M

; ' !■

! i

I'

Iff

8944

CONGRESSIONAL RECX)RD — SENATE

Jwn« is

(9) of the nnmigratloa and Natlanal-
Ity Act in behalf of certain aUens, which
had been reported from the Committee
on the Judiciary with amendments on
page 1. line 11, after the name "Oior-
dano." to insert "and." and on pace 2.
line 1. after the name "Spenaier." to
strike out the comma and "and Mrs.
Anna Hoczak Aumueller Cathey."

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the Rscoao at this point a
brief statement concerning the purpose
of the Joint resolution.

There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RscoRo, as follows:

The piorpose of the Joint rwolutton, «a
amended, ts to waive the excluding provl-
alon of existing law relating to the commls-
■lon of crimes Involving moral turpitude In
behalf of 18 persona who are spo\isea of
United States dtlxens or lawfully resident
•liens. The Joint resolution haa been
amended to delete the name of one alien
whose case was Included In the Joint resolu-
tion as It passed the House of RepresenU-
ttves.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the cOTunlt-
tee amendments.

The amendments were agreed to.

The amendments were ordered to be
engrossed and the Joint resolution to be
read a third time.

The Joint resolution was read the third
time and passed.

JOINT RESOLUnCN AND BILL

PASSED OVER
The Joint resolution (H. J. Res. 290)
for the relief of certain aliens was an-
nounced as next in order.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask that the Joint resolution be
passed over.

The PRESIDINO OPTICER. The
Joint resolution will be passed over.

The bill (S. 2194) to increase the
authorization for appropriations for the
Hospital Center and facilities in the
District of Columbia and for other pur-
poses was announced as next In order.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask that the bill be passed over.

The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The bill
will be passed over.

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT OP 1957
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill (S. 2130) to amend further
the Mutual Security Act of 1954, as
amended, and for other purposes.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I understand that the distinguished
senior Senator from Wisconsin [Mr.
WiLiY], the ranking minority member
of the Committee on Foreign Relations
and former chairman of that flne com-
mittee, is present In the Chamber and
ready to addr««s himself to the pending
bill.

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President. I rise to
support the chairman of the Foreign
Relations Committee [Mr. Gaiml who
has spoken on the Mutual Security Act
of 1957.

The report itself goes Into detaU and
shoT-s the various Items, so I shall not

attempt to analyie. or even support, the
Tarious items specifically.

I have sat in this body time and again
and listened to Irresponsible criticism
and put the label of "giveaway" on for-
eign aid. Time and again. I have seen
magazine and newspaper articles pick
up a few instances of mismanagement
and then blast the whole aid program
as a waste of taxpayers' money. I have
seen the results of this irresponsibility
in my own State and throughout the
country. In fact, I am seeing it now.
One of the candidates for the high ofDce
of United States Senator says he is com-
ing down to Washington and do away
with the whole foreign-aid program.

Let us see what the foreign-aid pro-
gram Is about. Let us go into the ques-
tion fr©m the standpoint of applying the
law of self-preservation to this beloved
country of ours.

Because so many people have used the
expr%sslon "giveaway" there are many
who wonder why we give away billions to
foreign countries, when we need so many
things at home, and when we could all
stand a tax cut I wish to answer that
question very briefly.

By and large, the people are not being
misled by this Nation. The people are
wiser than some give them credit for
being.

There are those who are being misled
by erroneous statements of those who
should know better, to the point where
more and more they are ready to Jeop-
ardize the security— and I use that word
advisedly— and the welfare of the Nation
for a mythical saving on this program.

Those who are more interested in the
sensational than the sane can take credit
for this development. They can also
prepare themselves for a fearful retri-
bution from the American people, if their
irresponsibihty and misinformation
should get this Nation into serious
trouble.

The Nation is headed for trouble^and
serious trouble — unless we get the facts
straight on the mutual assistance pro-
gram. What we need is a little less heat
and a great deal more light. Let us have
some understanding of what we are try-
ing to do with the aid program before
we start shooting at it from the hip. Let
us find oat in whose interest this pro-
gram really Is before we throw it out the
window. Let us ask ourselves some
searching questions. Is this program
really foreign aid. or Is It mostly Amer-
ican interest?

Those are the questions every citizen
has a right to ask when he pays his taxes.

Let us take the first charge, that we
are giving away billions of the taxpayers'
dollars. That is enough to give concern
to the American people and to the Con-
gress, and it should.

But what we do find if we look below
this sensational charge? We find, first,
that almost all the money appropriated
under the program is spent here in the
United States. These fimds are spent
for tractors, for conveying, for mining,
and for construction equipment, and for
other products of our industry. They
pay for aircraft, engines, and parts.
They are used for shipping charges paid
to American merchant marine com-
panies. All in all, it has been estimated

that 606.000 workm are employed in the
United States, directly or Indlrectiy. as
a result of mutual aid expenditures.

These ap|Mt)prlatioDs also lo to buy
wheat, com, cotton — yes, and diary prod-
ucts—for shipment abroad. At tbe iH-es-
ent time, this country exports $2 billion
worth of agricultural products. Of the
principal commodities, 60 or 70 percent
are exported under one Uud of aid pro-
gram or another.

What does all that add up to? If we
cut off these aid programs, we would
have to figure out new wasrs of support-
ing the aircraft Industry, the shipping
Industry, agriculture, and other economic
activities. We would have to do this
unless we were willing to see a serious
Industrial decline; unless we were will-
ing to see the surplus of wheat and corn
and other crops start mounting again.

Let me make It clear that I am not sug-
gesting that the mutual aid program Is
or ought to be a make-work project or a
device for disposing of agricultural
surpluses.

The point I am trying to make Is that
most of the billions of so-called give-
aways stay right here at home. They
make an impact upon our economy.
They provide Jobs. They add to our
economy. They add to the cconomlo
current of the Nation. They serve the
American economy, as well as provide aid
to friendly nations abroad. I say It is
better for us to have this program, which
can do some good in the world, instead of
seeing American factories stand idle and
to have food rotting In the warehouses.

Or perhaps the critics of this program
would rather dump the food into the
sea or bum it.

When products are sent abroad under
the program, what are they used for?
They go to feed the hungry. They clothe
the naked. They help other nations to
rehabilitate and develop themselves.
They help our friends. They help them
stay free. That Is what they did in
Westem Europe under the Marshall
plan. That is what they did In Korea
and in Formosa and In the Philippines,
and In Indochina. Is tliat what the
critics object to?

Would they rather have this country
try to maintain itself as an island of
plenty and freedom in a sea of human
misery and totalitarianism? How long
do they think we could hold out in that
kind of fools paradise?

I might say parenthetically, Mr. Presi-
dent, that today it was my privilege to
be the guest at a luncheon where there
were some 8 or 9 fine young men from
Mhinesota, and 1 from my own State of
Wisconsin. They are studying foreign
relations and foreign policies. They
asked some questions. One of them
said. "Senator, what Is the difference in
the world as between now and when you
came to Washington some 18 years ago?"

I had to tell him that when I came
to Washington it took 45 days to travel
around the world: now It can be done in
44 hours. When I came to Washington,
Wisconsin and MlnnesoU were Isolated
mentally »nd physically. Now there are
only a few mental isolationists left. We
are man vulnerable to attack over the
great circle route than Is New York City.

Then I dianisaed with these young
people the fact that all this was before

1957

CONGRESSIONAL KECORD — SEN ATE

8945

the bomb exploded at Rlroshlram, when
90,000 lives were nraffed out. Now the
H-bomb is many times more powerfuL
Now we are neighbor to every other na-
tion in the world.

As a oonsequeoee. it is imperatively
necessary that we a|>pnUse the facts and
do what is neoesaaiT to secure cur own
safety. It is in the interest oi our se-
curity that the mtitual security program
be put Into operation.

They asked aaay other questions.
The young mind is alert to the changed
world conditions in which we live. I
am glad to see it. What we are spending
is contained in a Imdget wbiteta, com-
pared to the nattonal Ineome, ts the
smallest such budget In years.

Then these young people aaked. "Sen-
ator, are we not self-sufficient ourselves,
and able to look after ourselves?"

I said. "Of course not. We do not have
on this continent the neeeasary vital ma-
terials with which to build the things
which are necessary."

I told them that that la one reason
why. under the Eisenhower program, we
have said to the Kremlin. "Keep out of
the Middle East." That is wliere 70 per-
cent of the known oil reeetfes are
located. If the Kremlin gets eootrol of
that oil and can clMkB off Borope, it will
have a passageway to Africa, where are
found the Idghly vital strategic materials
we must have.

Consequently. I had to Impress them
with the fact that we are not living unto
ourselves: that we could not. if we tried.
The world has changed. With that
change there has come a change in our
responsibilities. The mataal-securtty
program is one of those responsibilities.

Let me say to those who contend we
can live unto ourselves alone: wm we
be able to stand alone in a world in
which Jet plaxMS span the Atlantic in
a matter of hours, when Milwaukee and
Minneapolis are natural targets tor
guided missiles coming over the polar
route from Russia, and when those cities
are only 5 or 6 hours from the bombers
in Siberia?

Therefore we must do the things that
are necessary. We are spending from
thirty-five to forty billion dollars on our
military program. A part of the nni-
tual assistance is the military program.

I say to the critics of the program:
Do they object to the fact that it builds
a degree of military resistance to com-
munism? Would they rather we tried
to provide the resistance all by our-
selves? We could not do that.

That is what woold be lnvoh«d if we
tried to do it. In the first plaee, the
Sid programs h^ other non-Omrara-
hlst nations to maintain 200 divisions
under arms. Do critics know what It
would cost to enlarge our own Aimed
Forces by that number? The cost
would run many times the price of the
aid program. It costs somethiiw like
$3M0 a year to feed, clothe, and house
the average American soldier under
arms. It costs $105 a year to feed a
Txirkish sokBer. I have been told that
for the prtee of maintaining 1 American
dividon. it is possible to maintain 10
Tuildsh divisions. AH these are facts
wliich we most consider ta the slirunlcen
world in which we are neighbor to every
other nation.

What price do the critics put on the
bases in Bnnve. in the Middte East, and
in Asia, which are essential to oiu* mili-
tary operations In the event of war?
Do tbey tldnic the friendly eoontries
wfaleh Biake these bases available to us
will meet us half way if we fail to meet
them half way?

But more important than ttie dollars
and cents conriderations of foreign aid
Is the spiritual struggle in which the
world finds itself. We are locked in
battle for the loyalty and devotion of
men to freedcmi and to totalitarianism.
Mntual-ald programs f osto: an esprit de
eorpB aasoDg free peoides everywhere.
They streogtben the bonds of freedran.
They lielp to knit the eonmunity of free
nations closer together. We need friends
in this world. Just as other nations need
friends. We can expect others to be
friends and to be considerate of our
needs only as we are considerate of
theirs.

Let the ertties of this program turn
taiward in ttielr petty and narrow views
of tlds program. They are out of step
with the great majority of the American
people. What Is more, they have blind-
ers on their eyes and do not see what
the program has accomplished and will
acoompUsh. They twist and distort the
greatnem of heart, the nobility of a|iirit»
and the openness of ttie humanity of the
people of the Uhlted States.

Once the American people know the
whole facts, however; once they know
that theqe programs are not an extrava-
gant giveaway, but are a national neces-
sity, they win support the foreign-aid
IMOgram. "ntey will know it is a pro-
gram to keep America free. When the
people understand that, tbey will sup-
port the mutual-asiistanoe program.

They wiU support it. as the Senate wiU
•uppoft it. because it is in the interast
•f the United States of America, our
Matioo, and we in tlie Senate tiave th»
responsibility to make certain that we
take the steps wliicfa are necessary to
preserve our country In this atomic age.

It was not long ago. while the Com-
mittee on Foreign Relations was int«->
ragating the Secretary of State, that I
called attention to Oie fact that after
Pearl Haitor t!ie United States had 2
years in which to get ready to "pick up
the plecea." I asked tJie Secretary how
long we would have to get ready now.

He said. "It is only a matter of min-
utes. We have to be ready."

So. Mr. President, in considering what
is needed for oar self Hiefense, »«*d to
make us self -sufficient by iMUirfing gur.
selves so strong that no other nation
will attack us. the mutual-assistuico

program is a part and parcel of that de-
fense.

In the IntCTestB of freedom, humanity,

snd peace, I aban vote for the bin.

ADJOURNMENT TO 9:80 A. M.
TOMORROW

Ut. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, if
there are no ottier remuto to be ouide.
then, pursuant to the order previously
entered. I move that the Senate stand In
adjournment.

Mr. JOaNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I had hoped that some other Sena-
tors would be present to address them-
selves to this very important measure.
I dislike to have ttie Senate adjourn so
early.

Mr. KNOWLAND. There are some
important oonmlttee meetings to be held
this afternoon.

The PREsmnra onncER. tim

question Is on the motion of the Senator
from Calif cmia.

Tlie motkm was agreed to; and (at 3
tftSodk and 54 minutes p. m.) the Senate
adjourned, the adjoinnment being, un-
der the ordo- entered on June 10, 1957.
imtll tomorrow, Thursday, June 13, 1957,
at 9:30 o'dock a. m.

CONFIRMATION

Executive ncnnination confirmed by

the Senate Jime 12. 1957:

SMCvmaaa uta Sxcmam sc f-^'TfirBHTntr
Andrew Dowaty Oniek. ot Oallfonila»'' to

be m iwbw of the SaeorittM and EaBfaaa««

OomalMkm for the term mxolrtag Jona 8.

1902.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

TU PcopIe-to-Ps^lc FouiUtioa

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

or

HON. ALEXANDER WILEY

IN THE 8BIATI OF TH» UinTID 6TATB8

Wednesday, June 12. 19i7

Mr. WILET. Mr. President, I adc
unanimous consent that there he printed
In the CoNGBissioNAL RiocHU) a state-
cm 663

ment I have prepared regarding the out-
standing work of the People-to-Fe(V)iIe
Foundation, together with several ex-
hiUlB I desire to have printed along with
my statement.

Then being no objection, tiie state-
ment and exhiMts were ordered to be
printed in the Rxcoio, as fellows:
STAXBicDrr BT SxNAToa Wnxr

OUnXAMBIHa WOBK or THX HBOrLS-XO-
SOVm&TION

Z liad been pleased to discna this subject.
It will be reeaUsd. on April 29. •■ reflected
on page A31S1 of the daUy CoorouBHnoaAb
Bannen.

Iiater Z had made Tefez«noe to it on May 81.
as Indicated on pages A4210-A4212 of the
da&y Bhxwd.

Z aaa pleaeed to report new evideiiee ot
^tlcndid acwMBpllahmente of the people-to-
people program.

roar jf -TWO ou isTAMsnf o

) 13ten Z have hem In ^ondtt wUli aiany
cf the 42 eonuBlttee ~ '
une ta aB waDca of life— who are i
Ing two-way international oommateattaa la
every knows ana of human actlvltr-
Z ehoald like to mention now a few of their

m

m

m

u

iii

< I . :

^ 'II

11

<'5

!:ii

. I •
If

•r '

?i

fi'

i

I I

fi:

8946

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

WHAT TBB nrSTTBAWCI UIWUSIKT 18 DOOf a

"Ui. Praderlc W. Kcker, the dlatlngxilataed
prMldmt of the lietropoUtan LUe Insurmnce
Co.. reported that « letter and enclosuree on
tbe people-to-people program bad been eent
to 5,000 Insurance companies tbroughout our
country, and to certain organizations over-
seas.

Mr. Ecker wrote, In a letter of June 8 to me r
"The response to my letter of Marcb 4 has
been most gratifying. We have he«u'd. In the
most enthusiastic terms, from a great many
Insurance companies all over the country.
I feel sure that most of them have taken
some positive action along the lines we have
suggested in the leaflet. What We Can Do.
Also, stories have appeared In the Insurance
press throughout this country and. in some
cases, overseas telling about the people-to-
people program and about the activities of
the Insurance committee."

VASnO PUBLIC aJELATION 8 COMMrrm WOKK

Mr. Edward L. Llpecomb, of the National
Cotton Council of America, described the
broad-gaged activity of the public relations
committee, of which he Is chairman. Fnr
example, a four-page leaflet created by bis
committee Is being distributed through the
cooperation of the transportation Industries
committee In no fewer than 1 million copies.

"Within the nest few days." he writes.
"50.000 companion posters" are being printed.

A helpful four-page bulletin entitled "Peo-
ple-to-People News." produced by the pub-
lic relations committee. Is being sent to the
key Individuals engaged In this effort
throughout our land.

Lrrm wsrriNO owssxas
From the chairman of the letter writing
committee. Mrs. Anna Lord Straus, came word
that her group will t>e more than happy to
receive requests for overBeas correspond-
ents— requests which may come in to various
Congressional ofllces — for overseas corre-
spondents.

These requests from our constituents wlU
be acted upon by arranging for the Amer-
ican letter writers to be put In touch with
people of other countries.

GOOD woao noM kducation coMMrrm

From Miss Corma Mowrey. cochairman of
the people-to-people education committee,
came word: "We are grateful for your com-
ments to the Senate "

And then the encouraging word that "This
program has unlimited possibilities "

BOOK coMMrrmc sepokts
Prom Mr. George Brett, chairman of the
book committee of the People-to-Peopie
Foundation, came the good word. "When I
say worthy cause. I feel that the PPP is Just
that. It does seem to me that the p>eople of
the United States could, through this mag-
nlftcent idea of the President, effect a great
deal of good will throughout the world '
Various publishers, librarians, and other in-
dividuals in related fields are working with
Mr Brett.

MANT HOBBTISTS AT WOBX

From Mr. Harry L. Llndqulst, chairman of
the hobbles committee, came a leaflet de-
scribing how American stamp collectors, coin
collectors, people interested in antiques,
models, prints and etchings, outdoor sports,
photography, gardening, painting and sculp-
ture, toolwork, printing, needlework, nature
studies, ham radio, and many other fields,
are bes;innlng to take hold of the immense
opportunities available to them to contact
their opposite numbers abroad, through the
PPP

These, then, are but a few samples of how
these outstanding American leaders are forc-
ing ahead in welding constructive links with
people overseas.

UkTSBT roUNDATION BKOCRTrKK

T attach hereto two items which I believe
will further illustrate this program. The first

Is the brochure which has Just been printed
by the foundation. I append to It the press
release from Mr. Charles B. Wilson, as Issued
through the office of Mr. Bd Klrby at founda-
tion headquarters, in room 603 of the Car-
negie Hall Building. 881 Seventh Avenue,
New York City.

The second is an Illustration of what one
of the committees can do, and is doing. It
consists of the leaflet conveyed to me by
Mr. Ecker. chairman of the insurance com-
mittee, to which I made reference at the
outset.

MANT SXNATOaS IKTXaXaTXO

It Is my intention at a later date to com-
ment to the Senate on additional progress of
the foundation, and I am asking one of the
professional members of the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee staff as well, to extend fur-
ther cooperation with this grand program. I
know that my brother Senators on this com-
mittee and on other committees are proud,
as I am proud, of this grassroots good-will
effort.

STATDCZMT FBOM TIM PK)FL«-TO-P«OPL1

Foundation, I.nc, Room 003. CAaNBou
Hall. 881 7th AvKNtrs, New Tosk. N. T.,

MONDAT, JUNX 10. 1957

"People make the world go around, and
It's high time people all over the world get to
know each other — the sooner the better,"
said Charles E. Wilson, president of the
People-to-People Foundation. Inc , in re-
leasing an Information brochure today, tell-
ing how It operates.

The "people-to-people" Idea was conceived
last fall when President Elsenhower appealed
to a group of national leaders representing
all phases of American social, civic, eco-
nomic, and religious life to find not one
method, but thousands of methods, by which
people can gradually learn a little bit more
about each other and thus create a friend-
lier world environment In which govern-
ments may find solutions for peace.

The foundation was subsequently char-
tered as a privately op>erated and financed
corporation, nonpartisan and nonsectarlan.
designed to assist those agencies with pro-
grams and pei^ple already at work In the
international exchange field, and to stimu-
late additional two-way communication be-
tween the American people and their world
neighbors.

"Our American people want to know more
about the people and the world we live in.
To bring this about, 42 committees have
been established to arouse two-way commu-
nication in every known area of human ac-
tivity; 1.000 volunteer workers are now en-
gaged in developing programs which will
invite reciprocal action and counterpart
organizations in every country of the world."
Mr Wilson declared.

"The work of these 42 committees embraces
practically even know field of human In-
terest and hum in relations. We will start
wherever people's interests begin, whether
it t>e In biology or bird watching, farming,
4-H Clubs, fine arts, education, religion,
youth activities, music, or in 1 or more of
the 63 hobbies being actively pursued

"Our Job Is to help establish personal con-
nections between these people through their
known Interests. From such common de-
nominators of interests will come people-to-
people understanding about each others
ways of life. Jobs, church, children, and hopes
for the future." he said.

"The mass-communications industries are
also with us," Mr. Wilson added. "We are
receiving excellent support from the adver-
tisers, the press, motion pictures, radio, and
television. Each has its own way of trans-
mitting Ideas, and all are needed In this
massive communications effort to make
friends for America and to give other peoples
the opportunity to be seen and heard and
make friends with us." he said.

"We have enllst«d the technique of our
famous cartoonists as a unique means of
conveying Ideas, and we are inviting the car-
toonists in other countries to bring us their
meBsages, as well.

"Some 35 million forelgn-bom and first-
generation Americans are writing over 200
million letters a year to their relatives and
friends in their old countries.

"Additional hundreds of thousands of let-
ters are being written by pen-pals' all over
the world, arranged through schools, dubs,
and chiu-ches.

"This year we have 37.000 foreign students
In our midst, future prime ministers and
national leaders. Hundreds of communities
throughout the United States are enlarging
their hospitality programs accordingly.
Many cities have engaged In affiliations with
other cities in Europe, Japan, and the Pacific
region, exchanging teachers, pupils. olBcials.
music, and art.

"Our Armed Forces are cooperating with
steps to improve community relations In the
foreign lands where they are 11111 on duty
patrolling the peace of the world.

"The 2 million Americans who are travel-
ing abroad this year have been reminded
that they have a face-to-face opportunity to
make a friend or an enemy for the 160 mil-
lion of lu who stayed at home.

"We sincerely believe that people all over
the world are ready as they never have been
to respond to a people-to-people understand-
ing. They are weary of war and rumors of
war. And they want each other, as well as
their governments, to know It. They know
that never again can man resort to war as
a means of icttllng disputes. Neither can
they afford much longer the staggering debt
of new armaments to build up a Franken-
stein machine of defense which dare not be
unleased. lest civilization be cremated. I
am sure they feel as President Elsenhower
felt when he told us, 'Every bomb we can
manufacture, every plane, every ship, every
gun In the long run has no purpose other
than negative: To give us time to prevent
the other fellow from starting a war, since
they know we won't."

"I am certain." said Mr. Wilson, "we will
find people hsve more things which drsw
them together than those which drive them
apart. Fear of the atom bomb Is one thing
which links all men; so is the love of their
children. The only sure way to a peaceful
as well as to a more pleasant world in which
to live is through people-to-people under-
standing." Mr. Wilson concluded.

What You Should Know About thx Pbo-
plt-to-Pboph Piocsam — How It Op««atis,
What You Can Do

Officers: Dwlght D. Elsenhower, honorary
chairman: William J. Donovan, chairman;
Albert C. Jacobs, vice chairman; Charles E.
Wilson, president; Oeorge V. Denny. Jr.,
Richard R. Sal^mann, vice presidenU; Wil-
liam J. Vanden Heuvel, secretary; John L.
Weinberg, treasurer.

Directors: Dr. Louis H. Bauer, Al Capp,
William J. Donovan, Albert C. Jacobs, Judge
Juvenal Marchlslo, Mrs. William Barclay
Parsons. Frank Stanton, Charles E. Wilson.

WHAT IS THX rXOPLX-TO-FXOFLX PSOOBAMT

It is a program launched by President
Eisenhower at a White House conference In
September 1956. It is designed to promote
contacts and activities among individuals
around the world which will further inter-
national understanding and friendship.
Private In character, the program is distinct
from official Government activity. At the
White House conference about 50 leaders in
various aspects of our economic, social, and
cultural life who had t>een appointed chair-
men were asked to organize conunittees to
develop not one, but thousands of methods
of people-to-people contacts through every
avenue of commiuiicatlon. The President

1957

and the fleeretary of Stat*, after
ing the nstunU limttattoaa of tlie eSorti
of governments to maintain paaoe and to
deal with the bamrda cf the preeeut arma.
ments race, caned upon the oammlttaa
chairmen to help create a eHmate In which
governments can work mare cSeettrely to»
vard securing peace wtth Justice and hbertf
for all.

WHAT AKK TKZ COMMimSS ACTUALLT COIHO
TO DOT

E.'ich committee is autoooiaous aad
voluntary and is expected to initiate its own
program in its particular field. For example:
the letter writljig ooaunlttee Is working with
those organlaatlona esparienoed In or de-
sirous of sUmuiatlng peraon-to-peraon cor-
respondence between Individual Americana
and individuals abroad. A nwttTwisUtiee
committee, working with aoiDe U nrillloa
furelgn-born and flrat generation Amerl-
caus. is encouraging both letter writing and
two-way trsvel to promote Intemational
friendship and nndeiatandlng. The music,
fine aru, cartoonists, books, and writers com-
mittees wiU promote the same objectives
through both media and penon-to-peraon
exchangee The advertising organlaatlona,
l>usine8s organizations. biisliM— couneli for
internstional underetaBdiag. the aportB and
youth committees, the transportation ^en-
des and travelers eoamltfeeee will eaeoor-
age emphaala on these objecUvea la world-
wide conferences aad meetlngi. The wom-
en's groups committee Is uadertaklag a
study of community leaettons and re-
sources ooacemlDf the thoaaands of for-
eign visitors, both stodanta and leaden,
who come to this eoantry each year. The
committee on medicine aad health plans
Interchange at medical mcetlngi and ex-
change of medical information. Tbeas are
simply indicative of the variety and ecopa
of the actlvltlee now in operation or pi»w»Mwi
by the 41 committees whose membership
now includes nearly 1.000 dlstlnfulshed
leaders.

19 THX raoPLs-TO-raoPLX rteoaukM soicxTSiira

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SEN ATE

tvnatkmal Ptam Tooth l^rhanei (IFTX).
under which outstanding 4-H youag |PfTf>r
fram ovr country an aent to Uva for eome
Bkonths with farm famillee In other i»»>h«
which In torn aand sorae at their young
pea|>le to Um in farm hotnea tn this eoimtry.
In iaf6 «a young Amarteans apent 5 "wm^^b
la AsofMan and Hear Uat homae umler this
plan, and 77 from Soutn America. Asia. — m
Latin America Uv«d wtth ns about the same
length of time. The Kxpertment In Xnter-
oatlonal Llvtiig. the American Friends Serv-
loe Oommltte*. Rotary International, and the
American Association of University Wocnea
are but four of many private Aoterlcaa or-
ganizations which have plaieetea suceeat-
fully for many years la peopie-to-people «c-
tivltiee. The Institute of Intemational Bdn-
catlan oeaMu. tneladed in their publication
Open Doors, ahotsa for 1966^7 that there
are about St.000 foreign atodenta now In our
colleges and unlveraltlca. Wtth the te^-
nidana. epeclallats. Md leaders brought un-
der the International OooperaUon Admlnle-
tration and other Government prograaM, and
tiM foreign atodenta here In eeeondary
schoola. the total figure for foreignCTa tn all
tfaeee categorlee coming to tlie United Statee
annuaUy U approximately «0,000.

8dl7

No, It Is not. Paople-to-people actlvltlee
have been conducted by private organlaatlona
and also by Oovemmcnt lor numy years. The
loternatlonal Educational g»<'>»^rig^ Service
of our State Departaient will handle the
exchange of some 6,i000 persons this yeer
(1957) aiul anticipates that this total will
reach 8.500 next year. The Institute of In-
ternational Education, a private, nonprofit
agency which administetB exchange -of -per-
sons programs Involving approximately 5.000
students, teschers. and othea annually, has
been in operation since 1A10. It aarvee both
Government and private organlaatlona. The
National Education Aaaociatioa. through Ite
74 uruts, conducts international educatloaal
conf erencee, adaanleters an Overseas Teacher
Relief Fund, oonducu teacher tmvel toura
lu mors than SO oovuUrlee. partidpatee in
student exchange programs, publlahsa pam-
phlets, guides, manuals, teaching devloee
which go to all parts of the world, and enter-
tains mar* than 600 foreign vlsitora each
year. The American National Theater and
Academy (ANTA). through the Preaident'a
fund and in cooperation arlth the State De-
portment and USIA. sendi repreaantaUye ar-
tistic groups and individuals abroad to reflect
the cultural side ot American life to pimpha
of other nations, and arranges the appear-
ances of similar groups fixim abroad before
American audiences. Of couzae. churchaa
and other religious organlaatlona all have, aa
an Integral part of their own life, people-to-
people contacts around the world.

BOW THX PBOOBAIC DXVXLOI

During the past 10 years the Katlonal Agri-
cultural Extension Servloa has developed the
National 4-a Qub Miundation which baa
sponsored, organiaad and carried on the la-

imXMT'a CALL TO THX PKOPLS

When Prealdent Saanhower announced hia
peopte-to-peopte propam at a White Houae
conference last September, he was putting
an emphatic stamp of approval on theee
and similar activitlea. Moreover, for the
flrat Uaie In history, the bead al a p«at
State called on the people, aa private cltl-
aens, "to get together • • • to work oat not
one method but thousand tA methods by
which people can gradually team a Uttle bit
more of each other." This te eaaentially Mm
purpose at the people-to-people prograaa.

WHT THK Paon,K-T^rBUPLa VUVMUaTlURt

It became apparent at once that such a
vast program as that called for by the Presi-
dent would require equally sutatantial fi-
nancing. The Government, through Its var-
lotu agendea. was spending an eatlmated
$10 mmion OD people-to-people activities,
not including the Voice of America. Private
organixatlons. whose activities were almoet
wholly unrelated, were spending an esti-
mated t20 million. The need was clear for
a central agency to raise ftinds from private
sources and to provide machinery for ready
exchange of ideas, techniques and Inaplra-
tlcn. On February i. 1957. the People-to-
People Foundation. Inc.. was formally or-
ganized with the committee '•>'«''Tnen serv-
ing as trusteee. eight of whom were elected
to the board of directors.

aad Latin Amarloa— to team ftvra

aaanrtatloa wtth the people t>i— »i«,

aomethiag of tha ^rutfa about the attoatlona
<B tteae areaa. We want to alt down and
talk wtth our world nelgfabora, to listen to
whatever they have to teU ue. to attend their
aporta evcnto. their daaoee, tlialr achottfa and
ehardMa. and to meet with them on their
farma and la liMlr factortea. • • •

"Aad when we have eet our prograow in
"wttap. naty we not expect oomiterpart or-
ganisations to be estahliabed in other eoon-
trtee where people share our 'vision of a peace
made aeeure through aeople-to-peonle
eiatlonar"

WHAT ABOOr OOWTACTB 'WITH VSOFLB

TKx now coaranrt

The object of the program is to estabUah
qpderstandlng and friendship with people
wherever they may be. But we all recognize
that difficult problems exist wtth respect to
'««<*tog^^o8e i>eopIes now Itvtng tn poUce
states. President Eisenhower recognised
tills tn his talk last September Wlwn be
said:

"In short, what we must do Is to 'widen
every poealble chink to the Iron Curtate and
bring tlie family of Rtnsla, or of any other
ooimtry b^ted that firm Curtate, that la

laboring to better the lot of Its children

as humans do the world over — cloeer Into
our drde, to sliow how we do It, aitd then
to lit down between us to say, "Now, how
do we Improve the lot of both of us?' "

WHAT CAir BX ACOOMPLISHXD THXOUCH A
PBOnx-TO-PXOPLX mOGEAJCr

A-ealdant Flaanhower put it tiii# way:
"Every bomb we can manufacture, every
plane, every ahlp, every gun, to the long run

has no purpose other than negative: to give
us time to prevent the other fellow from
starting a war, since we know we won't.

"The billions we pour teto that ought to
be supported by a great American effort, a
positive, constructive effort that leads di-
rectly toward what we all want: a true and
iMting

wnx

aovwasTioa

Mo. Bach coaaaittee la Independent and
antonomoua and may work throu^ and
with many orgaalaatlons and Inatltationa.
Ifost of theee have long eatabllahed loyalttea
aad aouroae of revenue. The foundation will
aeek financial support for new and effective
oMthoda or expaiMUng and atrengthenlag
people-io-people oontacta around the world.
and for the teereaae and expanakm of actlvl-
tlee baeed on the aound prlndplea developed
over the years by the pioneers te the field.
The foundation wOl asaldnouriy avoid com-
petition with any establMied people-to-
people entetprlsee, government or private.

axx pxon.x-To-rBon.x vomrsATiova jv otbxb
oouNiam AimciPAXDf

Definitely. The people to-people program
la a t«N>-way prognua. Hie United States
has a grsat deal to learn fram other enlturee
and peoplea. Mx. Charlee X. Dt^laoa. preal-
dent of tha foundation, in a raeaot apaecfa
stated:

"I oaa eaviaioa. la the not toe diataat
futnre, groupa at ladivldaala rej
our 41 rommlttfaa goiag to the 4 major
of the world: Carope. the Near Xsat, the Pto

Statxxent Fboic Insxtxancz ComciTTKx,
PxxsmxNT EuuLM HOW El's Pbogkaic roa Pzo-
FLX-TO-Paorta PAannaaHip. i icsdisoh
AvBNox, Niw Toix, K, T., Maxch 7. 1957

Several thniiaand Insurance chief eaeou-
tlvea were urged yeeterday to Integrate their
ccHnpany efforts with Preeident Eisenhower's
people-to-people program for better te-
tematlonal relations.

In an i^ipeal to the Inanranee executives.
Ptederick W. Ecker. president of the Metro-
politan Life Insurance Co. and chairman of
the Insurance Committee of the People-to-
I^opla Partaenhip Program, propoaed a w«da
raage at ttpaOal activities wlileh the tnsnr-
aaoe cnenpanlea and their personnel could
undertake toward devalppment at better
overseas relations. The proposed under-
taking went to the officers of 4.225 accident
and health, casualty, fire and life Insurance
companies, stock and mutual, throogtiout
the eoantry.

"Hm purpoaa at the program la to enUat
the ft-ttwiMiiip-i^f fc-ii.|j and opialan-moldlag
capacmm at iadtvldual Amarleans tn order
that they aad tndtvklQala te other ooantrtaa
may beocnae mutually better acqnatnted,**
Ifr. Bcker aald. "The end te view la to help
to boikl the road to aa enduring peace.
This Is a Job te teternatlonal relations wtileh
can be dona by aU of ua."
John A. Oiemand. president at the laaur-
Omapany of Horth Aaserlca. Is vloe-
rbalnaan at the eomaUttee; Devereox C.
Joeepha, rhalrmaTi. New York life bauranea
Ool. la Utaamai; aad Cheater U Fisher. Jk-,
MstR^Mlttan Ufa baoraaee Oo.. te eecretary.
mm laauraaee eompaay eaeentlvea were
urged eontteuoualy to reeaipfaealae the atate-
it by Prealdent Baeahower. In laimAIng
thte program, to the eflbct Uutt *ttwre U no
proMen before tha Amerleaa peofde— indeed.

\ Hi
« J

OO/IQ

rnMr,PF<sQTnMAT PFrnun — <;fts:atf

.T'lirttt i '9

i n

/^/WirL1>X:CCTr\KT AT •n-r<^^>.n'rs.

ill

•'Hi

I'j ;!

I t

i i

1',

!,• -

f':i:
I • •

Nl

h •

I

S948

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 12

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8949

b«for« the workl — that ao colon everything
we do, u dOM the problem of preoerrlng the
peace and providing for otir own aecurlty."

The Prealdent waa alao quoted aa saying
that "If our American Ideology U eventually
to win out In the great struggle being waged
between the two opposing ways of life. It
muat have the active support of thousands
of Independent private groups and Institu-
tions and mllllona of Individual Americans
acting through peraon-to-peraon communi-
cation In foreign lands."

A long list of poaslble activities for the
Insxirance offices was proposed. Including:

Survey of company personnel for language
ta!ents and foreljgn acquaintances.

Use of company house organs for mee-
aagea.

Promotion of personal correspondence,
person to person, by company personnel, to
foreign contacts.

Greetings abroad on significant occasions.

Mailing Inserts In overseas correspondence.

Contact booklets for peraonnel, policy-
holders, and stockholders.

Peraonnel exchanges.

Encouragement of travel. Including poasl-
btllty of extra vacation time for purpose of
making foreign insurance contacta.

Hospitality programs, to welcome foreign
visitors In this country.

Establtahment of American bookshelves in
foreign Insurance offices, libraries, schools,
and hospitals.

Book and magadne distribution overseas.

Social contacts. Including son or daugh-
ter exchange-visits.

Insurance preea and Insurance meeting in-
terchanges. Routing of some foreign-trade
publications through the company offices.

Address by Hob. Ckapouin ReTcrcemb, of
West Virgmia, Before the Soithem
Conference of Yoasf Republkuis Fed-
eration

EXTENSION OF REAtARKS
or

HON. CHAPMAN REVERCOMB

or WXST VTXCINIA

IN THI SENATE OP THE UNTTED STATES

Wednesday. June 12, 1957

Mr. REVERCX)MB. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent to have printed
in the Congrzssionai. Record an address
I delivered t>efore the Southern Confer-
ence of Young Republicans Federation,
in Charleston, W. Va.. on April 13, 1957.

There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed In the Rjecord,
as follows:

It gives me real pleasure, indeed, to address
this regional conference of Toung Repub-
licans. The enthusiastic Interest your or-
ganization has taken in the political life of
the Nation U Inspiring indeed, and I com-
mend you for the splendid work you are
doing. You are making a great contribution
to the Republican Party and to the Nation's
progress.

Youth has a very important place tn the
political life of our country. No institution,
however noble its alms and objectives, can
lonj? survive or remain strong unless it at-
tracts new vitality. The surest way to kill
any Institution is to close Its doors to young
people. You who are assembled here today
represent the leadership of the Republican
Party of the future. You are wanted — you
are needed — for the Republican Party has a
place for every American, young or old. from
every walk of life, who believes In the basic
principles that brought about our partya cre-

ation, and which have guided It for more
than a century.

The Republican Party can have but one
objective If It is to BWYt its purpose. That
objective must be to provide good govern-
ment In the best Interest of all Americana
including primarily the maintenance of the
liberty of Its citizens and the security of
the Nation.

Any political party that Is to siu'vtve

for long must be motivated by two thlnga.

One, It must subscribe to a set of basic

principles that are vital to the welfare of

the country.

Two. it must be capable of meeting new
jsroblems as they arise.

Oiir country Is faced with new and serious
proolems. and we know that they must be
solved. This is no time to argue over
party labels. This Is no time to expend our
energies and diwlpate our strength In
intraparty dissension over trivial Issues.
We all subscribe to the sound basic prin-
ciples that have defined the Republican
Party from Its Inception, and as far as I am
concerned, these principles are as adequate
for meeting the problems of this day as
they were for solving the problems that con-
fronted the Nation 100 years ago.

Our first concern as a political party must
be to govern well, to meet new problems as
they emerge In this rapidly changing age.

Our second concern should be to maintain
a strong, united party dedicated to the
country's welfare.

Our third concern should be to interest
more Americans, particularly yuung people,
m those basic principles on which our
party was founded.

Let me say at this point that no political
party can justify lu existence unless It
proves capable of solving new problems aa
they arise. Eighteenth century thinking U
insufficient to cope with 20th century needs.
As each case Ls new, we must think anew
and act anew.

The Republican Party was established on
principles that provide the framework for
achieving the greatest good for the greatest
number of people, the old as well as the
young, the man who meets a payroll as well
as the man who works for a wage. Our con-
cern must be as much for the welfare of
those who are physically and mentally un-
able to care for themselves as ftir those who
captain our industries. And I contend that
there Is room within the framework of the
Republican Party f(Tr men and women of
every age. of every walk of life, who believe
In the basic principles which have guided our
party all through the years.

And It Is my conviction that within the
framework of these basic principles we can
find a solution to the problems of this
century. However, we must recognize these
problems and proceed to meet them head-
on with effective measures if we are to
preserve the kind of America that we would
like to leave to our posterity.

The big task facing the Republican Party
today, as I see It. U twofold.

First, it Is to work toward a condition of
peace so that our people may not have to
live under a cloud of atomic war. With
peace In a practical world goes the necea-
nity of strong defenses lest our desire for
peace fails, and we are put to the use of
arms for our security.

Second. It Is to foster the kind of eco-
nomic system that provides the greatest
good for the greatest number.

In the field of foreign relations, we must
recognize the fact that America cannot afford
to go It alone. We must recognize the fact
that alliances are as vital to our own security
as they are to the freedom and security of
other nations which subscribe to our way
of living.

In the face of the ever-present threat of
Communist enslavement, in the face of a
constant danger of attack by nuclear weap-
ons, isolationism Is as impractical In the
field of foreign relations as the horse and

buggy are In today's Industrial society. We
muat strive to live at peace with aU nations
but to seek refuge In the belief that we can
find security as an "laland fortresa" in this
age of H-bombs and guided mlasllea is folly
of the worst sort. We must go out to meet
this dangeroua exfMtnslon before It engulfs
our own shores. That is the aim of the
Eisenhower foreign policy. I believe that it
offers the greatest security for America and.
at the same time, provides the best approach
to world peace.

We must support a strong national de-
feiue. so vital to the security and well-being
of every American. It is true that almost
two-thirds of the Federal budget now goea
for defense purposes — but I say to you. In all
earnestness, that so long as our freedom and
secxuity are threatened from without by
those who would enslave all peoples, we
cannot — we must not — weaken our defenses.

Equally as important as a strong defense
Is the fostering of a sound economy here
at home.

In miiny parts of the world, even In non-
Communist countries, the theory that gov-
ernment should t>e the source of all plan-
ning and all control has gained great head-
way. Yet. when we contrast the remarkable
success of a free economic system in the
United States with the eomparaUve poverty
and dlosatlaf action In foreign naUona, It la
easy to see the superiority of our systsm of
government. Liberty has succeeded In de-
veloping original thinking, original meth-
ods, and new Ideas. It has succeeded In
giving wide distribution of property and In-
come to our people. It has brought about a
steady rise In the standard of living enjoyed
by all the people. We must conclude, there-
fore, that only the free can solve the prob-
lems of production.

Chirlng the past 4 years of the Elsenhower
administration the country has enjoyed Its
greatest Industrial expansion In history.
The output of goods and services haa set
one record after another. Employment has
reached an all -time high. Our people earn
higher wages than ever before — they are
better fed. better clothed, and better housed
than ever before. The Nation's industrial
capacity continues to expsmd at a healthy
rate, creating new Jobs for a rapidly growing
population. According to the latest report
from the Department of Labor, nearly
800.000 more people were employed in March
of this year than In March a year ago.

I consider It imp>eratlve. therefore, that ws
maintain a climate that Is favorable to eco-
nomic growth and expansion. For, let us
remember that It Is only by maintaining a
strong, healthy productive industrial sys-
tem that we can hope to improve the living
standard of all the people. Thla country
has advanced to a favored position among
the nations of the world because the Indi-
vidual has enjoyed the right to keep the
proceeds of his own efforts. To destroy that
Incentive is to Invite economic decadence.

At the same time, we must recognize the
Importance of sound fiscal policies. We
must seek to curtail Oovernment spending
wherever It can be achieved without weak-
ening our defenses or Impairing essential
public services vlui to the well-being of the
people.

Foreign spending for economic aid to
others can be curtailed. Not only are those
countries now on their financial feet but
they have risen to new heights of economic
soundness

We must think not only In terms of op-
erating under a balanced budget, we also
must look to retirement of the luitlonal
debt — and we must look to the earliest pos-
sible relief for the tax bxirden our people
are bearing.

In our desire to effect economies, how-
ever, we must exercise caution. The meat-
ax approach to budget cutting U neither
wise nor practical. I am for reducing the
budget, to be sure, but I do not favor post-
poning or eliminating those public-works

projects which add to the Nation's wealth,
which provided Jobs for our people, and
which are vital to the economic expansion
of the country. Improved highways, for
example, are a necessity. They cost a great
flPRl of money, but those who call for great
reductions In Federal spending would be the
U.Kt to say that we should Junk the new
Federal -highway program. On the con-
trary, this program ahould be accelerated as
much as possible if our highway transporta-
tion system Is to keep pace with the Nation's
Industrial growth. Likewise, conservation
of our soil and water, for which a great deal
of money is being spent. Is too Important to
the Nation to neglect.

I cite these as examples of Federal pro-
grams that should not be eliminated or
curtailed.

Living as we are. In a society that is highly
Industrialized. In which an overwhelming
majority of our people must look to Indus-
trial employment for a livelihood. It be-
comes a responsibility of the people, through
their government to care for those who are
unable to care for themselves. It Is a moral
obllgattun of government to provide the
minimum needs of the aged and the handi-
capped.

I believe the American people are con-
vinced that with the tremendous produc-
tivity of our free country, we can prevent
extreme hardship and poverty In the United
sutes. I favor liberalizing the Social Se-
curity Act to permit all permanently dis-
abled workers over 50 to receive benefits.
Huw much better. It seems to me, to have
these people qualify for disability pensions
tsiider social security than to compel them
t.j depend on public relief, as so many are
now required to do under the present rigid
provisions of the social security law affect-
ing disability beneflu.

Another problem peculiar to our highly
tndvistriallzcd civilization is the decrease in
Job opportunities for those workers between
the age of 40 and retirement. Many In-
duj>triei have shown a greater preference In
recent years for younger workers, making It
increasingly difficult for the older age worker
to obtain new employment after he reaches
tne age of 40 or 45. This, perhapa. Is not a
problem that can or should be solved by
legifilatlon. However, It is Imperative. I
feel, that the older age group receive greater
rnnglderatlon In Job opportunities if we are
to prevent a needleas waste In human re-
.v.i.rces and provide for this great body of
ciu^ens a feeling of reasonable security. We
must recognize this as one of the human
problems of the 20th century and seek lu
solution. The Government can and ahould
take the lead In encouraging more Job op-
p<jrt unities for the older age group on Gov-
ernment works and services, while private
Industry miut be prevailed upon to recog-
nize the growing seriousness of this prob-
lem and work toward Its solution.

Still another problem we must reoognizs is
that which faces small business In this age.
Despite the high level of prosperity the
country as a whole la enjoying, this segment
I'f the business community Is experiencing
hnrdshlps.

The smaller business enterprises, employ-
ing only a few workers, are as vlUl to the
Nation's economic well-being as the giant
corporations employing thousands. They
must be given encouragement to grow and
prosper. There Is no better way to assist
fmaii busineas. In my Judgment, than to
provide It with much-needed tax relief this
year. It Is my hope that general tax reduc-
tions for the individual can follow no later
than next year. That is a goal on which we
must set our sights.

I have tried to outline what I believe
should be the role of the Republican Party
now and In the fut\ire. Our big reaponsl-
billty la to meet and solve human problems,
to work toward a stable peace, and to main-
tain a strong economy here at home. And
to achieve those alms, we must enlist the

aid of every American who believes in the
basic principles of human liberty and a fres
economy.

Jokn Hanson, of UaryiuiA

EXTENSION OP REMARKS
or

HON. JOHN MARSHAU BUTLER

or MAXTLAlfD

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

Wednesday. June 12. 1957

Mr. BUTLER. Mr, President. I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the COMCBX88IONAL RscoRo an article
entitled "President for a Year." written
by Kyle Smith, as It appears in the July
Issue of American Mercury magazine.

Also, It Is requested that this article
be followed by a speech on the subject
of John Hanson, of Maryland, which I
delivered on March 22, 1957. before the
Maryland Society of New York.

There being no objection, the article
and address were ordered to be printed
in the Record, as follows:

PnXSOKtfT TOtL A YXAS

(By Kyle Smith)

His likeness stands in Statuary Hall in our
Nation's Capitol, yet few of the thousands of
annual visitors give It more than a passing
glance. He had a rendezvoiu with destiny
In shaping America's future, yet most history
books omit mention of his name.

Despite this neglect, those rare students of
history who delve into the annals of the
Continental Confederation period generally
agree that, were it not for the stubborn ideal-
ism of this man, Wisconsin might now be a
part of Massachusetts. New York could lay
claim to Kentucky and part of Ohio, and
Illinois. Michigan, and Indiana might be ter-
ritorial possessions of Connecticut. In fact
our entire westward expansion, step by giant
step in the form of free and independent
States, would have been Jeopardized.

The name of the man the history books
forgot is John Hanson.

Among his partisans are those who claim
he ahould be officially recognized as otir first
President. It can be argued that if we were
to reckon historical periods as does France,
for instance, he would be ranked as the first
Prealdent of our first Republic.

John Hanson was bom at the family estate
of Mulberry Grove, Charles County, Md., on
April 3, 1721. His fsmlly history bears a
touch of liigh romance due to the marriage
of Ills great-great-grandfather, a humble
London merchant, to the granddaughter of
the Vasa line of Scandinavian kings. Their
son, the first John Hanson of the line, was
kUled In the Battle of Lutaen during the
Thirty Years' War while vainly attempting
to shield his ootisln. King Oustavtis Adol-
phus. In recognition of his heroism Ills sons
were later given grants of land in the colony
of New Sweden In the New World.

He grew to manhood during the turbulent
years of Maryland's history when she was
being passed back and forth among Brltlah
royal claimants like a shuttlecock in an im-
perial badminton game. He also had a first-
hand chance to observe the conduct of ths
French and Indian Wars in which incom-
petent British military leaders were unable
to stem defeat wltlK>ut the assistance of
young George Washington and his colonial
recruits. John Hanson was one of the coun-
try's leaders who read the signs of the times
aright.

He served the State of Maryland oontln-
tiously in public office from 1756 — when he
was elected to the Maryland Assembly — tmtil
his death In 1783.

Immediately after the news of Bunker
HUl on June i6, 1775, he assumed leadership
in organizing two companies of riflemen.
Ail Maryianders. however, were by no means
eager to rlak their fortunes by plunging Into
war against Britain. The State was enjoy-
ing prosperity, had grown to fourth in popu-
lation, and Btiffered no pressing grievances
at the moment. But to Jolin Hanson the
road ahead was clearly defined. He dem-
onstrated ills firmness of purpose at a spe-
cial meeting of the Maryland Provincial Con-
vention held on the eve of the Revolution.

A resolution was under consideration
which, if adopted, would put Maryland in
the war forthwith. Opinions pro and con
were heatedly aired. The moment was criti-
cal. There was even talk of a compromise.

Suddenly a tall, vigorous, middle-aged
man rose to address the chair. His air of
quiet authority drew the attention of every
man in tlie chamber. It was Jotm Hanson.

"These resolutions ought to l>e passed,
and It is high time," was his terse comment.

He sat down, and, In a characteristic ges-
ture, folded his arms. After a moment of
dead silence someone made a motion that
the resolutions be adopted without delay.
This was done enthusiastically, unanimous-
ly. Maryland had entered the Revolution-
ary War.

Even at the beginning of the war, when
tlie odds against the untried Continental
Army seemed overwhelming, he iiad no doubt
as to the outcome.

"We wlU win the war with George Wash-
ington in the field if we do oxir share at
home." he wrote to a friend. "In the end
we will establish an Inseparable Union, and
ultimately It will become the greatest Nation
in the world."

Concurrently with the progress of the war
his own greatest battle, the western lands
fight, wss shaping up.

Ix)ve of the grand gesture by European
monarchs, and cartography that was more
fanciful than accurate, were factors that
threatened to disrupt the new Nation wlille
it was a-boming.

In 1609 James of England granted to Vir-
ginia a section of land "from Point Com-
fort aoo miles southward along the seacoast,
and aU the land throughout, from sea to sea,
west and northwest."

In 1662 Charles II gave the State of Con-
necticut grants for a large part of what is
now Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan.
Two years later he gave his brother James
land holdings in Ohio and Kentucky. When
James became king he gave this territory
to the State of New York.

In 1681 William and Mary gave to Massa-
chtisetts what is now southern Mlciiigan and
most of Wisconsin.

Other States had lesser claims, and eon-
fusion was worse confounded by the super-
imposed ciaima of private land companies
with loosely drawn charters.

In 1775 the colonies were largely governed
by customs tliat had g^rown into laws. The
(H^anization that existed between them
could hardly be called a Congress. In recog-
nition of the need for unity and power la
a more centralized government the Articles
of Confederation were drafted in 1778 and
submitted to the States. It took very nearly
4 years to bring airaut their ratification.

No provision had been made in the articles
for the disposition of the western lands. It
was taken for granted they would become
the property of the States having the best
claim to them. This was the familiar pat-
tern of the times. This was the premise on
which tbe delegates laid their plans.

All but John Hanson. In the free and in-
dependent tinion he envisioned for his coun-
try, such a {NTOcedure would be an anachro-
nism.

Hastily summoning the Maryland delega-
tion, he set forth his views and, as usual, got
their support. They advanced a resolution

5,,;

m

>%'■■

'M4

■-y

't!

' >

l'<

8950

CONGR£S.SIOiNAL RLCORD — SENATE

June 12

which exploded In the convention with
bombwheli force. It read:

That the United States In C\in){Tef8 as-
sembled &iiaU have the sole and exclusiva
power to ascert.un and flx the western
boundary of such States as claimed, to th«
Misslsn.ppl or South Sea (Gulf of Mexico i ,
and lay out the land bey>nd the bounUiiry so
jscertamed Into separdte a:id Independent
States frntn time t») time, aa the cirjum-
atancea of the people may require "

This re3t;lution was promptly burled. It
received only one vote In Its place a proviso
WAS added that no State be deprived of pr jp-
ertv f^)r tiie benefit of the United States.

This w*4 t.he signal f. r funous activity.
States, anrlcipatintf kjreat profits, set up land
t-fflces aiid prepared to sell off their jub-
aesslcixs.

In the midst of the turmoil s.-.t J ;hn Han-
son with folded arms, adiim.u.t d.,'Hi:ist any
compromise. The bac islands mi;^t becjme
the property of the Nation as a whole. Any
ether cnirse, he maintained, would be at-
tended by "greut mischiefs "

As he tjrcdlcted. the "mischiefs" ^'ame
about. The scramble for profits caused
strained relations between the States. Prob-
lems of admlr.istr.itlDn begun to pyramid.
Tempers flared, claims and counterclaims
flew

Finally Virginia revealed an a'.-.ltucle of
compromise. New York folU^wed and the
stalemate —as broken Victory for the M.\ry-
land resolution was In sight On M.ir'h 1,
1781. rati flea tl.:'n was r. mple»e The C-^n-
tlnental Congress was a thin::: of the past, and
the Continental CunfeUeraiijn came Into
being

Of this event Gilbert Gronvenrr pres'.rtent
of the Geo^aphtc Socletv wmt? m the Na-
tional Gei graphic maga/;ine of February
1927:

"To the Illustrious M.irylanders. John
Hanson particularly, belong the credit of
suggesting and urging a policy th.'.t chane;ed
the whole map of the United fctates and
the whole course of our national life

"Ohio. Michigan. Wisconsin, and Minne-
sota are 5-'.ates in ti".e Uniun tf)day because
of the practical sagacity of these men."

The first action of the Confederation was
to elect John Hanson president, on Novem-
ber 5. 1781.

The first communication Issuing from this
country to bear the constitutionally au-
thorized designation. "President of the
United States in Congress Assembled ' was a
letter sent by Hanson to Louis XVI of France
shortly after he took office.

Tlio term 'Do-nothing Congress" could
bacdij have been applied to this tirst legis-
lativ* body. In addition to routine matters
%li»f •ccompltshed the following

Xstabllshed the American consul.ir serv-
ice by exchange of consuls with France

Inaugurated a penal system fur the
States.

Authorized the first United St<;tes cen-
sus.

Granted a charter to the Bank of North
America, the first bank In our history under
national auspices.

Organized an Inspector's Department of
the Army with Baron von Steuben In
charge.

Adopted the great seal with Its n.otto.
•'In God We Trust."

Floated Its first International loan
Endorsed ratification of a treaty between
the United States and Holland.

Initiated the franking privilege for Con-
gressmen, and authorized free p'jstage for
men in military service.

This strenuous term of office, following
as It did upon his arduous war activities,
proved to be too great a tax on John Han-
sons health, and he became 111. He urged
the Confederation to appoint a successor,
but this they refused to do. After an ab-
sence of a few weeks he returned and served
the remainder of his 1-year term.

Shortly after his retirement from of!».ce he
was again stricken, this ume fatally. He
died Niivmber 23, 1733. at his home In
Frederick Cwuutv. He was burled at Ox^n
Hills MJ

A fitting epitaph might be the W" rds of
Justice O \V H Ime.s. whu la referring t.i
him In his speech uu heroes and idealists,
&;iid

■ Meti who t!"' er hr-.'ird . .f him will be mov-
ing lo the nit'Asuie of his ihou-rht '

J. MN H.^NStJN, OF M»RVI. \ND

(Addrefs by Senator John MA5i:HAiL BtTTtii.

Founders' Day dinner, the Maryland So-
ciety (if Nev York M.irch _'2 1957)

Mr Chairman, distinguished guests, ladles
and gtntlemen. before proceeding wi'h m.y
prepared rem.ark.s. m.r, I take thi.s opp< -t\j-
nlty to thank you. Mr Chairman, in paricu-
lar. ai;d the mcniber-^hip if tne M.u-yiar.d
Scciety of New York, generally. f:>r llie lo\e!y
ire.it.Tient accorded my wife and me during
our brief st.ny with yru

Your chai.'man was most gracl.ui'. leaving
to me tlve choice of a subject upon which to
speak, so long as it was not p»>litlcal.

Kn iwing of no people who take gre.iter
ple-uiure and pride in I'le hie and deeds ( f
our f.junciers than we of the Frte State of
Mary;\nd. I ha-, e selected as my s'jb^ei t
John Han.'^nn. of f.Iulberry Gro-.e. one of two
greut men whose statues honor Maryland in
oUiuary Hall In the Capitol at W.t!-;hlngtori;
the other being Charles Carroll, of Carroll-
ton, a Signer of the Declaration of Inde-
pendence

I ha\e chosen to spe^k of J> hn Haiuon.
who. as I will point out later, was relerred
t 1 as the President of the United Slates in
Congress asoembled for two rea.s<.)ns First.
he was .ne of the ailtime great m.en of Amer-
ica, and. second, his fame, m my opinion,
has never equaled his magnincent contribu-
tion to the s«)lid r..undatlcn of our State and
Natun. John Hanson, of Mui berry Grove,
w.is a descendant of John Hanson who was a
second cousin to the King Au;;u5tavus
Adoipnus of Sweden, both of whom fell at
Li.uen in 16H2. The Hanson, who fell at
Lutzcn beside his king had four sons who.
alter tlie death of their father, became the
wards of Christiana, daughter of Augustavus
Au'.lphus. who succeeded to the throne of
owfuen. It IS quite apparent that those four
wards of the queen were not overly endowed
with Worldly possessions, as we find tliem 10
years later — when the oldest was but lb and
the youngest. 12— siiipp.ng off with John
Printz, the newly appointed Governor of New
Sweden, for adventure in the New World.

Four years earlier, the first Scandinavian
colony in the Nfw World had been estab-
lished when, in the middle of March 1638,
two small ships under the command of a
Dutch captain named Peter Minult and bear-
ing Immigrants from Sweden and Finland—
the latter having been long a part of
Sweden— made safe harb<3r in Delaware Bay.
proceeded up tiie Delaware River to the
Brandywme and there made port at what is
now Wilmington

This colony existed under Swedish rule for
13 years when by force of arms It came under
Swedish rule and later under British rule
until the day of Independence. During this
whole period New Sweden reUined its
Scandinavian characteristics and racial basis,
and from it went stalwart men and women
into the nearby settlements of Pennsylvania.
New Jer<:ey and Maryland, the four Hanson
brothers being among those who moved over
the Elk River trail into Maryland.

The youngest of the four, John Hanson,
was the grandfather of John Hanson of Mul-
berry Grove. He went first to Kent Island
and then to St Marys, the capital of the
Calverts. He did not long stay In St.
Marys, for as early as 1856 we find him In
Charles County, the newly developing sec-
tion of the State of Maryland, centering

around Port Tobacco where Protestant set-
tlers were clearing land and building homes.

Within a few years he was well c ;.tab;i.«hrd
and was sp<ikpii of as C". 1. John Hanron.
He had 7 children, the youngest of whom
was t^.nnuiel -whti had 6 daughters and 4
»< ;.s < t whom th^ famous John Han.'on of
the Continent. il Conprers w.ac the fourth,
born in 171,'i at Mulberry drove, the family
est. lie overlooking port Tobacco Cre« k in
Ciiarles C')unty

John Han.son of Mulberry Grove spent his
early manhood in an atmosphere of revolu-
tion The American re.i.l.riion h.is ma-iy
breeding? grounds. Mas.sachusetis was the
first Viricii.i.i, Pi nn.- ylvanla. New York, and
Maryland were others. V.'lien patriot met
patriot brave and wue words were spoken.
At no place were t.'iere nv.re meelings of this
character than In Maryland; at no place m
M.iryland than In the little prniip of homes
centering on Port Tobacco Creek In the
southern part of Charles County. Such men
as the Stonrs. the Jenifers Hanson :. Craiks.
B'owns. Small w.« ds. Howard.s. Brlso«,cr,[
Ihomase?, Mifchell.s, and C outers lived there.
The plac w.s ir.deed the cr;:Rrra(8 of the
American coU nles, for there were :.he ferry
cr. .s.«;in;s of i::e p. -i mac u«ed by men of
afl.ilrs from both the North and t^e S.nith,
George Washington was a friend and neigh-
bor of them all Indeed so clcse and en-
dearing w;»s the relation.ihtp that tl was to
Dr Cralk and Dr Brown that Martha
Washington, the wu> of the first President,
turned ir; hi.s la.st lllne..^.

Living In this atmosphere. It was but nat-
ural that young Han.son tOf)k to politics.
He was elected term after term to t ie Mnry-
Isnd Hou.se of Delegstos. He w.as there when
the .slwre of the tax England r .urht t<> l^w
on the Colonies for the French snl Indl-.n
War was dcb;,t.d The stamp tax. the Bo.'^-
ton Tea Psrty. and other l.ssues n quick
buicesslon were to result In war Revolu-
tion was brewing In the midst of all of this
John Hanson of Mulberry Grove tcok a re-
markable .step He moved with h:s family
to Frederick. Md

This was in 1773 on the very eve of the
Revolution, and he was then 58 yea -s of p.^f.
Why the move was made remains a mystery.
But the West was then beckoning and per-
haps Hanson saw a better opportunity to
serve his State at this western outpost
Charles Count v- he may well hive rea-
soned—still had the Stones, the Jenifers
and others

He remained a member of th' house of
delegates from Charles County u itll 1773
when, upon his removal to Frederlclt. he was
elected a member to that body from hU new
county He became Immediately n man of
great Influence He had much pol tlcal ex-
perience, he was a man of mature .ears; he
had many friends throughout the State. In
addition, he was a man of considerable
wealth. Overnight Frederick County had
found a man who had no peer In the prov-
ince, who was loved snd respected by all,
whom the State could give to th( coming
Union of States.

Events were moving fast A meelng over
which John Hanson presided at Frederick
courthouse In June 1774, adopted i resolu-
tion declaring that the cause of the Massa-
chusetts colony w.as the cause of a 1. pledg-
ing the cooperation of Frederick Cojnty and
urging the State of Maryland to Join the
other Colonies to advance this common en-
deavor. Thereafter delegates. he.*ded by
Hanson, were sent to Annapolis to attend a
general congress. ThU general congress,
which later became known as the conven-
tion, sent delegates to a general congress of
the Colonies to be held at Philadelphia.

The British moved out of Bostm; Paul
Revere made his famous ride; Amei lean pa-
triots fell at Lexington and Concord. It was
necessary, indeed imperative, that Frederick
County have some form of government if it
were to render eflectlve and timel} help to

ior>7

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8951

B new nation In the making. A committee
of observation was formed, of which John
Han.v)n was a member and the guiding spirit.
Hnn.son had been tolerant of debate, patient
of delay, but now was the time of action.
lie hurried back from Annapolis to Frederick
I . univ. raised two companies of troops to
po to Bostim. They were the first armed
I..rcc ever to cross Mason and Dixon's Line
to Join up with the Green Mountain and the
White Mountain boys In the cause of free-
dom under the banner of his young friend
:.:id neighbor of Charles County days, George
Wa.'hlngton.

Han.« in was a man of fertile mind. He did
not overlook even the slightest detail. As
the guiding spirit of the committee for ob-
senati' n, he established patrols of minute-
men throughout western Maryland which
resulted In the exjKisure of the Dunmore
conspiracy which, had It succeeded, would
hare brought the Indian tribes Into the war
ngair.>t the Colonies. During these trying
days John Hanson, between trips from An-
iuip<jlis to Frederick, was building a gun-
lu(K factory and barracks at Frederick.

He never became so Immersed in these
subsidiary activities as to be out of touch
with the debate then going on in the con-
vention at Annaf)olls touching upon the
{.uestion of how far Maryland would support
t:ip re.'olutlons of the Continental Congress.
r h.avlng earlier Instructed her Delegates not
t ) sponsor a final break with England until
s.. .'-ijeclfically advised. Not until June 1776
were these Instructions altered. John Han-
son. u{x>n that occasion, closed the debate
with the.^e words: "These resolution ought
to be pasfecd, and it Is high time."

And pass they did, making it p)08Slble for
Mirylands men In the General Congress of
liie Colonies to vote for Independence.

Ihe Conpress, which on July 4, 1776, voted
f r independence, could not really be consid-
ered to be a Congress. Its Delegates bad no
Buthority but to debate and advise — each
Colony retaining unto itself to act as It
pleased, notwithstanding the action of the
CongreEs. It was but a coalition of brave
men with a common purpose. The need for
a more perfect government was apparent to
all. but such was not to be. At least, not
I r another 5 years, because John Hanson
at that time took a stand on principle which
he had to win If the peoples of the new Na-
tion then In the making were to live in peace
and harmony together.

Hanson's stand was In opposition to the
land claims of Virginia, New York. Pennsyl-
vania, and Connecticut. Their claims arose
out of the undefined and, therefore, indefi-
nite distance to which they believed their
land extended westward.

To fully understand the war of polltica
which underlay the war of Independence, one
must make a brief review of the land claims
which had grown up in Colonial America.
For Instance, when Peter Minult landed at
Wilmington, in 1638, he Immediately nego-
tiated with the Indians for the purchase of
land The deed of conveyance for the land
described the nortliern, eastern, and south-

ern boundaries of the land with some par-
ticularity, but the western boundary of the
land conveyed was described as extending
westward for an "undefined or Indefinite
distance."' This same language had been
used in many of the grants from the King
and In others; and It, therefore, seemed that
the States of Virginia, Pennsylvania, New
York, and Connecticut had valid claims.

This immediately put John Hanson in a
very dlfticult and embarrassing position. He
was a close friend of Gen. George Washing-
ton, and was devoted to the cause of liberty,
yet he was obliged, for the sake of principle,
to lear" the political opposition which seemed,
at that time, to make union Impossible. He
was to hear It said many times that he was
hindering the prosecjtion of the war for
independence.

Twelve of the 13 Colonies had voted to
ratify the Articles of Confederation. It was
Maryland alone who stood out and refused to
ratify. It was John Hanson who Introduced
the Maryland resolution as an amendment
to the Articles of Confederation In this lan-
guage:

"That the United States In Congress as-
sembled shall have the sole and exclusive
right and power to ascertain and fix the
western boundary of such States as claimed
to the Mississippi, or south sea, and lay out
the land beyond the boundary so ascer-
tained into separate and Independent States
from time to time as the number and cir-
cumstances of the people may require."

This resolution was buried and the other
12 colonies pressed their fight for the ratlfi-
cr tlon of the Articles of Confederation which
contained a clause that no State should be
deprived of any territory for the benefit of
the new Union.

As time passed, the pressure on Hanson
grew, but he stood firm. He re{isoned that
in the end his plan to let the Nation grow by
federalizing the western lands must prevail.
Otherwise, he said those who objected to
colonialism, while fighting it from abroad,
would be Imbedding It In the American sys-
tem. The opponents of the Maryland reso-
lution accused Hanson and the men of
Maryland of blocking union and hindering
the war effort. They likewise said that we
were using our geographical location to
block traffic between the North and the
South which, of necessity, must flow through
our State If the war were to be prosecuted
with effect. Hanson countered by saying:
"Suppose Virginia sold her western lands
and thereby raised enough money so It would
not be necessary for her people to pay taxes,
would not Marylanders then desert Maryland
and move to Virginia in order to avoid paying
the taxes laid upon them by the colony of
Maryland?" He also reasoned that If the
frontier was to be owned by only a few of
the several States of the new Union, would
all of the States join together to fight to
defend It? He further asked whether the
land-rich colonies were ready to be taxed
acre for acre with the others for the prosecu-
tion of the war. Otherwise, he urged, they
should surrender their claim to such lands.

SENATE

Thursday, Ji ne 13, 1957

The Senate met at 9:30 o'clock a. m.

The Chaplain, Rev. Frederick Brown

Harris, D. D.. offered the foUowing

prayer:

Our Father, Ck)d, with the gates of the
morning, open to us. we pray, the portals
of a wayside shrine of Thy sustaining
fiiace, for these are times that try our
«)uls, and the margin of our Inner
strength seems often perilously low. We

are standing in the need of courage and
fortitude and stability. With the light
that never fails upon the way our feet
must take, send us forth forgiven,
cleansed, and strengthened with might.
As we turn to waiting tasks, may the
love of friends, the confidence of those
who trust us, the spur of conscience, the
vision of our best which lures us, be the
high white stars to lead us on o'er moor
and fen and crag and torrent, till the
night is done and the gates of the morn-
ing open into the light of eternal day.
We ask It in the Redeemer's name.
Amen,

As the dispute wore on, the chance of com-
promise with England grew more remote:
and the Idea of perpetual union grew
stronger in the minds of all Americans.
Hanson's idea of a Nation which would grow
In area and numbers, adding new States to
the 13 along the seaboard as the population
and situation warranted, was beginning to
be understood by his fellows in the Conti-
nental Congress. The State of New York
was first to give in and cede Its western
lands. Hanson's far-seeing plan for a great
America had won approval. The Articles of
Confederation were ratified, and a Nation
had been born. Hanson had made a monu-
mental contribution to his new country.

John Hanson was elected to the Conti-
nental Congress in December 1779. For him,
the transition from the local to the na-
tional scene was not too sharp because, as
I have pointed out. debate had been had
In the Maryland Legislature of which Hanson
was a leading member on most. If not all.
of the Issues then before the Congress. But
It Is not to be assumed that his duties were
to be made easy. The western lands ques-
tion had mada Maryland's position difficult
and trying. Hanson must do double duty.
His State must do more than was asked of
It In the prosecution of the war If its posi-
tion on the lands Issue was not to be mis-
understood.

Hanson was more than 66 years of age —
one of the oldest Members of the Congress.
But 3 short years before, his son, Peter Han-
son, a lieutenant of the Maryland line, had
fallen mortally wounded at Fort Washing-
ton. Notwithstanding, the many handicaps
under which he labored, his services were
of such high order that he was reelected to
the Congress for a second term In February
1781 — ^taking his seat on February 22 — a
birthday then not celebrated and perhaps
not even noticed.

On November 5, 1781, John Hanson was
unanimously elected president of the Con-
tinental Congress. He was the first to ever
be elected to that position for a definite
and stated term and hence has many times
been referred to as the first Pr«Bident of the
United States — his title being "President
of the United States in Congress Assem-
bled."

While we of Maryland most willingly ac-
C€!pt this most glorious appellation for our
very distinguished and revered forebear,
substantial basis for the claim that he was
the first President Is not to be found lu
the history of oiu- State or Nation. But,
John Hanson was, nonetheless, one of the
great men of his time, one of the great
men of our history, one of the founders of
our State and Nation. He was almost solely
responsible for the fight which made the
United States a country which, from the
very beginning could live in peace and har-
mony with Itself and his foresight and cour-
age have never been surpassed by any Mary-
lander from his day forward.

Thank you.

DESIGNATION OF ACTING PRESI-
DENT PRO TEMPORE

The legislative clerk read the follow-
ing letter:

Untitd States Senate,
Pkesident pro tempore,
Washington. D. C, June 13. 1957.
To the Senate:

Being temporarily absent from the Senate.
I appoint Hon. Albert Gore, a Senator from
the State of Tennessee, to perform the duties
of the Chair during my absence.

Carl Hatden,
President pro tempore.

:-.M-

*- pi ■

. I

If

8952

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

Mr. GORE thereupon took the chair
as Acting President pro tempore.

THE JOURNAL

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the Journal
of the proceedings of Wednesday. June
12. 1957. was approved, and its reading
was dispensed with.

MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT

Messages in writing from the Presi-
dent of the United States submitting
nominations were communicated to the
Senate by Mr. Tribbe. one of his secre-
taries.

COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING
SENATE SESSION

On request of Mr. Johnson of Texas,
and by unanimous consent, the follow-
ing committees were authorized to meet
during the session of the Senate today:

The Committee on the District of Co-
lumbia; and •

The Committee on Finance.

On request of Mr. Humphrey, and by
unanimous consent, the Committee on
Foreign Relations was authorized to sit
during the session of the Senate today.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

Mr. JOHNSON of Texa.s. Mr. Presi-
dent. I move that the Senate proceed to
the consideration of executive business.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to the consideration
of executive business.

EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore laid before the Senate messages
from the President of the United States
submitting sundry nominations, which
were referred to the Committee on
Armed Services.

I For nominations this day received.
see the end of Senate proceedings.)

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. If there be no reports of commit-
tees, the clerk will state the nominations
on the Executive Calendar.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

The Chief Clerk read the nomination
of Loftus E. Becker to be legal adviser
of the Department of State.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. Without objection, the nomina-
tion is confirmed.

DIPLOMATIC AND FOREIGN SER\TCE

The Chief Clerk read the nomination
of James M. Langley to be Ambassador
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of
the United States of America to Pakis-
tan.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. Without objection, nomination is
confirmed.

The Chief Clerk proceeded to read
sundry nominations of F^^re^gn Serv-
ice officers.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask that the nominations of For-
eign Service officers be confirmed en bloc.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

THE FEDERAL MARITIME BOARD

The Chief Clerk read the nomination
of Ben H. Guill to be a member of the
Federal Maritime Board.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. Without objection, the nomina-
tion is confirmed.

COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY

The Chief Clerk proceeded to read
sundry nominations in the Coast and
Geodetic Survey.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I a.sk that the nominations in the
Coast and Geodetic Survey be confirmed
en bicc.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore Witliout objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I ask unani-
mous consent that the President be im-
mediately notified of all nominations
confirm'^d today.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. Without objection, the President
will be notified forthwith.

LEGISLATIVE SESSION

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I move that
the Senate resume the consideration of
legislative business.

The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate resumed the consideration of leg-
islative business.

LEGISLATI\'E RECORD

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr Presi-
dent, this has been a very productive
week. The Senate— by hard work and
perseverance — has disposed of four ap-
propriation bills.

We now have before U8 the mutual
security authorization bill. It is my
hope that we can dispose of it before the
end of the week — possibly by late Satur-
day.

I believe my colleagues are entitled to
some warm congratulations — not merely
because of the volume of the work, but
l)ecause of Its quality.

The figures thus far disclose that the
Senate is meeting the demand of our
people for economy in Government — and
meeting it IntelligenUy and prudently,
without taking "meat-ax" swings.

We have acted upon eight regular ap-
propriation bills. They are the Treas-
ury-Post OflBce bill; the State- Justice-
Judiciary bill; the Commerce Depart-
ment bill; general Government bill; the
District of Columbia bill; the Agriculture
bill; Independent oflQces bill, and the
Labor-HEW bill.

President Eisenhower, In his budget
submitted in January, requested $18.-
420.419.321 for these measures. The
total Senate allowance has been $17,033.-
4fl9.142. That represents a reduction of
$1,386,950,179. or 7.5 percent below the
budget estimates.

The Senate figure Is also $32 391,570.
or 2 percent below the House flgjre.

The bill now pending before us is some
$800 million less in authorizaticn than
the President requested In his budget.
As I recall, his original request for for-
eign aid was $4,400,000,000. The bill be-
fore us would authorize in the neighbor-
hood of $3,600,000,000. So if the bill as
reported by the committee siiall be
passed, the budget request will be re-
duced by some additional $800 million,
making a total reduction of more than
$2,200,000,000.

Mr. President, this is a good 5 tart on
the question of the budget. The jrreatest
part of it still lies before us — the foreipn
aid bill, the public works bill, und the
Defense Department appropnat.on bill.
I have no crystal ball, and I am not
willing to make any predictions as to
whether we can maintain th? same
economy rate But the work v.-e have
done represents more than a fourth of
the budget. And a 7.5 percent reduc-
tion is a Kood omen.

These cuts have been made without
slashing essential services. I thought it
was particularly revealing, for example.
that we managed to grant increases in
a number of the amounts requested by
the Budget Bureau for health n^search.

In cancer research, the increase
amounted to $11,500,000.

In mental health research, it amounted
to $4,200,000.

In heart research, It amounted to
$5,300,000.

In arthritis research, it amounted to
$5,600,000.

In neurolocy and blindness research.
It amounted to $5,100,000.

This is useful money— the kind that
helps people ward off pain and death.
I personally regret that the .state of the
world is such that we cannot devc te more
of our money, energy and resources to
such projects.

Mr. President, there are still six ap-
propriation bills that should be passed
by June 30. We have a great deal of
work before us.

Fewer than 15 working days remain In
this month. But if we continue- at our
present rate, we may be able to dispose
of most of the appropriation bills be-
fore the deadhne. and dispose of them
efficiently and in good order.

COMMITTEE SERVICE

On motion of Mr. Knowland. and by
unanimous consent, it was

OrdeTed. That Mr Martin of Penn.syUa-
nla be, and he is hereby, asslened 1 1 service
(in the CVnimlttee on Post Offljc i nd Civil
Service.

LIMITATION OF DEBATE DURING
MORNING HOUR

Mr. JOHNSON of Texaa. Mi Presi-
dent, under the rule there will be the
u.'^ual morning hour for the irtroduc-
tion nf bills and the transaction 3f other
routine busine.'^s. I ask unanimous con-
sent that statements made In connec-
tion with the business of the morning
hour be limited to 3 minutes.

The ACTING PRESIDENT p'O tem-
pore. Without objection. It is so ordered.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8953

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS.
ETC.

The ACTTNO PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore laid before the Senate the fonow-
inu letters, which were referred as in-
dicated:

TFMi>n£AJtT AoMUsiov Ikto the DNim>

gXATFS or CEKTAUf AUIN DErECTORS

A letter from the Commissioner, Immi-
grat'.oii and Naturalization Service, Depart-
ment of Justice, transmitting, pursuant to
law, copies of orders entered granting tem-
porary admission Into the United States of
certain alien defectors (with accompanying
papers); to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Tempoeait Aomissiom Iirro the UNrrEO
States of Ceetain Auens

A letter from the Commissioner. Immlgra-
tloti and NatnraUzatlon Servioe. Department
of Jusuce. transmitting, pursuant to law,
c ipie.s of orders entered granting temporary

udiuls£lL«n Into the United States of certain
r.'.lens (with accompanying papers); to the
C^'mnilttee on the Judiciary.

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS

Petitions, etc.. were laid before the
Fenate, or presented, and referred as in-
dicated:

By the ACTING PHESIDENT pro tem-
pore:
A Joint resolution of the Legislature of the
Ft ate of California; to the Committee on
Interior and Insular Affairs:

**8enste Joint Resolution 28
'Joint resolution memorializing Congress to
enact H R 5538. relative to the withdrawal
of public lands for defense purposes

"NVhereas the Increasing amount of Fed-
eral public lands which are being withdrawn
frr m settlement, location, sale, or entry, for
the use of the Departonent of Defense or re-
served for such use. Is having serious adverse
e:recLB Ui thQ£e areas of the SUte In which
a Large percentage of the total area is under
Federal ownership-, and

■ Whereas such withdrawals and rcserra-
tlons Involve Unds In which there are cur-
rer.Ur being developed rich depiostts of many
itrateglc mlnenala, vital to our defense, which
will be lost to the Nation if the lands are
\MUidrawQ or reserved for the use of the De-
partment of Defense: and

"Whereas such withdrawals and reserva-
tl'^ns have further adverse effects on the
sreaa within which they are located by cut-
Un^ off access roads, by taking more lands
off the tax rolls of the oountles in which they
are liwated, and by tncreaslng unemployment
aue lo the cessaUon of mining activities on
surb lands; and

"Whereas there is now pending before the
C -ingress of the United SUtes H. R.
5 SIB. which would provide that fxirther
withdrawals, reeervatVons, or restrictions of
more than iJOOO acres of public lands of the
United SUtes for use by the Department of
Defense must first be approved by act of
C I'.Rrcss; and

Whereas the enactment of this measure
wauld assist in alleviating the serious prob-
Irr^is being caused by such withdrawals and
re!»«Tvntlons; Now. therefore, be it

■R''.«o/i>ed by the Senate and the Assembly
->' the state of CaUfornUi (iointly) .TtUit the
leql.sla! ore of this SUte reepectToIly memo-
ri«;iBcs the Congress of the United Statea to
ei' -rt H R 6538; and be It furtiter

' lir.solved. That the secretary of the een-
ft'e be hereby directed to transmit copies of
?hls rwolutlon to the President and Vice
PT^ldent of the United States, to the Speaker
r>f the Hoase of Representatives, and to each
.^tniitur and Representative from California
ill ihe Congress of the United States."

A resohjtlon adopted by the national Asso-
ciation of Credit Meo, at Miami Beach. FUl.
favoring a reductton of governmental expen-
ditures; to the ComuUttee on Aj^troprtationa.

A letter, in the nature of a petition, from
the Mining and Metalltirglcal Society of
America, New York. N. Y., signed by WlUiam
F. Boericke, secretary, encloelng a reBolutlon
adopted by that society, relating to tax re-
ductions; to the Committee on Finance.

A resolution adopted by the Board of Su-
pervisors of La Salle County. HI., relating to
the Status of Forces Treaty and the trial of
Army Sp3c. William S. Glrard by a Japanese
court; to the Committee on Foreign Rela-
tions.

A resolution adopted at the 13th annual
convenUon of the American Defenders of
Bataan and Oorregidor, Inc.. Albany. N. Y,
relating to a study of the health conditions
of former prisoners of war; to the Committee
on the Judiciary.

RESOLUTION OP ASSOCIATED IN-
DUSTRIES OP OSHKOSH (WIS.) ON
BEHALP OF TAX REDUCTION BILL

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President. I have re-
ceived today from M. S. Daily, executive
rice president of the Associated Indus-
tries of Oshltosh, Wis., a resolution fa-
voring enactment of a bill now pending
before the House Ways and Means Com-
mittee— H. R, 6452, as introduced by
Representative AHTom N. Siolak, of
Connecticut.

The resolution relates to the overall
problems of America's economy. In-
cluding conserving funds, debt reduction,
and also an issue which I personally have
been pleased to stress very often, namely,
supplying adequate incentive to private
enterprise to expand.

I ask unanimous consent that the reso-
lution be printed at this point in the
Rkcokd.

There being no objection, the resolu-
tion was ordered to be printed in the
Reooro, as follows:

Resolution in Support of H. R. 6452

Whereas the steeply progressive Indlvld-
nal income tax rates which are clearly dis-
erimlnatary. unfair, and unreasonaole tend
to destroy Individual Initiative to produce,
accumulate, and invest; and

Whereas the corporate tax rates severely
restrict the normal flow of funds into capital
investment, so necessary for producing jobs
for the citisens who are ent^lng o\ir labor
force each year; and

Whereas the constantly increasing trend
of Fedo-al spending threatens to absorb the
Increased revenues which are produced each
year from economic growth; and

Whereas a serious threat exists to our free
en'crpriBO system, our standard of living,
and the stability of otrr employment, unless
Federal spending is by the exercise of econo-
mies by Congress and the administration,
and Federal revenues reduced through tax
reduction: Nov, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Congress of the United
States undertake immediate steps to guard
against such an economic situation, by en-
acting Into law a realistic tax reduction pro-
gram as provided through H. R. 6462. intro-
duced ACarch 28, 1A&7, by the Hooorabls
Antoni J. Sadlak. of Connecticut, and a
member of the Ways and Means Commit-
tee; and that Associated IiMltistrieB of Oah-
kosh, T"**- . endorses the resolution sub-
mitted by the Honorable AinoNi J. 6a !».!»;
furthermore

That Federal expenditures be reduced,
that revenues derived from economic growth
be used first for tax reduction, and that
economy in Government be furthered by the

adoption and enforoement of the Hoover
CommlSBion reoommendatlons; and It is toe-
Ueved

That the steady growth of the economy
and the population Justify such reductions,
and at the same time permit the balancing
of the budget, with reduction In the na-
tional debt; furthermore

That this resolntion. properly inscribed, be
forwarded to the Congressional delegation
and to the Governor of the SUte.

Signed this 11th day of June 1957.
John L. Vette. Jr.,
President. Associated Industriea

of Oshkosh, tne.

REPORTS OP COMMITTEES
The following reports of committees
were submitted:

By Mr. HENNINGS. from the Committee on
Rules and Administration, without amend-
ment :

S. Con. Res. 28. Concurrent resolution to
jirint a compUaticn of materials relating to
the development of the water resources of the
(Columbia River and its tribuUrles (Rent No.
433);

S. Con. Res. 31. Concurrent resolution fa-
■j'ortng the fuinument of the program recom-
mended by the National Historical Publica-
tions Commission for the publication of cer-
tain documents (Rept. No. 434);

S. Res. 141. Resolution extending to Janu-
ary 31, 1958. the authority of the Special
Committee To Study the Foreign Aid Pro-
gram (Rept. No. 435); and

S. Res. 147. Resolution to continue on the
payroll for a further period the clerical and
ether assistants of the late Senator Joseph R.
McCarthy, of Wisconsin.

By Mr. McCLELLAN, from the Committee
en Oovernment Operations, without amend-
ment:

H. R. 4945. An act to provide for the con-
veyance of certain real property in West Palm
Beach, Fla., to the Port of Palm Beach Dis-
trict (Rept. No. 436).

BILLS AND JOINT RESOLimON
INTRODUCED

Bills and a joint resolution were in-
troduced, read the first time, and, by
unanimous consent, the second time, and
referred as follows:

By Mr. MARTIN of Pennsylvania:
6.2278. A bUl to make Flag Day a legal
public hol'day; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.

(During the delivery of the speech of
Mr. Skith of New Jersey:)

Mr. NEELY. lii. President, will the
Senator from New Jersey yield?

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield to
the Senator from West Virginia.

Mr. NEELY. Mr. President, on behalf
of myself, the Senator from Maryland
IMr. Beall], and the Senator from New
York [Mr. jAvrrs3, T Introduce, for ap-
propriate reference, a bill to exempt
from taxation certain property of the
B'nai B'rith Henry Monsky Foundation,
in ttie District of Columbia.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. The bill will be received and ap-
propriately referred.

The bill (S. 2279) to exempt from tax-
ation certain property of the B'nal B'rith
Henry Monsky Foundation, In the Dis-
trict of Columbia, Introduced by Mr.
Neklt (for himself, Mr. Beall, and Mr.
Javits), was received, read twice by its
title, and referred to the Committee on
the District of Columbia.

I !

ii

8954

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

Mr. NEELY. Mr. President, on behalf
of myself, and the Senator from Oregon
I Mr Morse ' , I introduce, for appropriate
reference, a bill to establish uniform
qualifications for Jurors in the Federal
courts.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. The bill will be received and ap-
propriately referred.

The bill iS. 2280' to establish uniform
qualifications for jurors in the Federal
courts, introduced by Mr. Neely i for
himself and Mr. Morse > , was received,
read twice by its title, and referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr Pre.sl-
dent, I am so happy to see the Senator
from We^t Virginia ! Mr Nekly : on thf*
floor today, and I was more than slad
to yield to him that he might introduce
bills.

By Mr IVES
S 2281 A bill for the relief of .Mbert N.
Towner: U) the Committee uii the Judiciary.
By Mr ALLOTT
S 2282 A bill for the relief of Alfred
Hafermaas, to th« Committee on the Ju-
diciary.

By Mr McCLELLAN i by request i •
S 2283 A bill to further amend the Fed-
eral Property and Admlni.stra'ue Service.?
Act or 1949. as amended, and for other pur-
poses, to the Committee on Government Op-
erations

(See the remarks of Mr. McClei.i.an when
he In'rxluced the above bill, which appe>ir
under a separate heaUini< i

By Mr COTTON (for himself and
Mr Bridges i :
S 2284 A bill to amend the Rur.il Ele,--
tnflcatlon Act of 1936. so aa to char.ge the
Interest rate applicable to loans and to pm-
vide for the payment by b<jrrowers of a fee
to assist in paying the administrative ci>8ts
Incident to loans, to the Committee on Ag-
riculture and Forestry

By Mr WILLIAMS-
S 2285 A bill for the relief of Chin;? Wol
Nyo Ko. to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr FULBRIGHT
8 2286 A bill to assist State proiframs for
•mall busmeso, and for other purposes: to
the Committee on Banking and Currency.
By Mr CASE of S<iuth Dakota-
S 2287 A bll! to amend section 1 of the
Rct of April 16. 1934. as amended bv the a.'t
of June 4. 19:J6 (49 Stat 1458\. entitled -An
act authorizing the Secretary of the In-
terior to arranife with States or Territories
for the education, medical attentU'n, relief
of distress, and s'X-ial welfare of Indians, and
for other pr.rposes": to the Committee ui\
Interior and Insular Affairs.
By Mr NEELY
S J Res 102. Joint resolution to provUle
for the designation of a certain parcel of
land in Washington, District of Columbia,
as John J Pershing Memorial Park: to the
Committee on the District of C<jlumbia.

REPORTS BY EXECUTIVE AGENCIES.
RELATING TO PROJECTS FOR
CONSERVATION AND DE\'ELOP-
MENT OP LAND AND WATER RE-
SOURCES

Mr MURRAY. Mr President, on be-
half of myself, and the distinijuished
chairman of the Committee on Public
Works, the Senator from New Mexico
I Mr. Chavzz I , I submit a resolution. We
are joined as cosponsors by our di.stin-
guished colleagues, tlie senior Senator

from Oklahoma IMr. KerrI. the junior
Senator from New Mexico (Mr Ander-
son], the junior Senator from Colorado
IMr Carroll!, the junior Senator from
South Dakota IMr. Case I. the senior
Senator from Nevada ' Mr Malone', the
junior Senator from Michii^an i Mr. Mc-
NAM.AH.Ai. the junior Senator from Ore-
i:on IMr. Neuberger!. the junior Sen-
ator from Wyoming IMr. OMahoneyI.
the junior Senator from Idaho i Mr.
Chvrch', and the .senior Senator from
Oreijon IMr. Morse .

This re.solution pre'^cribe.s the pro-
cedures for and contents of reports to the
Senate by the executive anencies with
re.spect to proposed projects for conser-
vation and development of land and
water resources.

It IS the intention of the chairman of
the Committees on Interior and Iiusular
Affairs and Public Works, the Senator
from New Mexico Mr Chavez! and my-
self, to secure the comments of the
executive av,'encies. and then to hold a
public hearinu on the resolution. It is
our hope that durlnu thiS session we will
have endorsement of the Senate in
establishing improvements in authoriza-
tion procedures. The purpose of the im-
provements is to confirm the exercise of
the Conyres.'^ional responsibility that ex-
ists under the Constitution, and to as-
sure full conservation, development, and
utilization of the land and water re-
sources of the Nation.

This resolution i.s submitted in order
to achieve two important purposes. The
first purpose is to a.ssure continued exer-
cise by the Conuress of Us con.«titutional
powers to encourage the comprehensive
conservation, development, and utiliza-
tion of the land and water resources of
the Nation. There is a tendency for the
ConKre.-^s to lose, in part, its respon.^i-
bility for determining the program.
This tendency develops in the absence of
explicit Congressional statement of its
requirements. Under those circum-
stances, executive definition and limita-
tion of the program have restricted the
proposed projects that are before the
Congress for authorization.

In the 84th Congress, the Senate took
note of this situation and adopted Sen-
ate Resolution 281. That resolution is a
first step to counteract the potential loss
of Congre.ssional control. Senate Reso-
lution 281. 84th Congress, called on the
Committee on Interior and Insular Af-
fairs and the Committee on Public
Works jointly to recommend policies
and criteria for the authorization of
land and water resource projects.

The resolution submitted today Is In
response to that direction of the 84th
Congress. Today's resolution specifies
the basis on which the benefits of pro-
posed projects can be evaluated, and on
which fair and equitable allocations of
costs can be made. This will provide
full information regarding proposed
projects, and it will enable the Congress
to specify the terms and conditions, par-
ticularly with respect to repayments and
local contribution. It will provide the
basis for fixing rates for .sale of electric
power generated at Federal projects.

Heretofore, full information on the.se
Important matters has not bet n avail-
able to the Congress. As a result, proj-
ect authorizations have sometimes left
the way open for executive a:tlon at
variance with Congressional intent.

One example of this is the Missouri
River basin project. Testimony in the
hearings liefore the Interior and Public
Works Committees demonstrated that in
the absence of explicit dlrectio:i from
the Congress, that great project is ad-
ministered under executive regulations
unsanctioned by the Congress. The peo-
ple of the seven States of the baun are
deeply concerned by this situation.
Their economy and way of li:e are
vitally affected by the imcertai.i and
changing policies regarding operation of
the main-stem re.servoirs and the mar-
keting of electric energy.

This and similar situations le<l the
Comptroller General to recommenc that
policies and criteria for land and water
re.source projects should be esiabl.shed
by the Coni'ress The Bureau cf the
Budget, the Federal Power Commission,
and the Secretary of the Army made
similar recommendations. The resolu-
tion I have offered today for myself and
my colleagues will provide the bas s for
such criteria and policies.

It should be noted that the resol ition
deals with procedures of the Senate and
Its committees. It does not deal with
or seek in any way to regulate the proper
functions of the executive branch.

The second purpose of our resolution
is to assure that proposed projects will
provide for full conservation, develop-
ment, and utilization. The Nation's land
and water re.sources must not be dis-
sipated by inadequate conservation or
partial development. This is a present
danger It results from inadequate eco-
nomic analysis and evaluation.

These inadequate procedures were in-
stituted by a directive of the Bureau of
the Budget in 1952. That directive is
designated as Bureau of the Budget Cir-
cular A-47. It, and its various amend-,
ments. made radical changes in long-
established policies. These changes in
planning procedures and policies that
the Budget Bureau set up in 1952 exclude
many worthwhile and needed conserva-
tion projects. Furthermore, they re-
sult in increasing the financial burden
on the States and local entities such as
irritiation districts, municipal water dis-
tricts, and the local people generally.
The Budget Bureau procedures seek also
to increase the financial burden of u.sers
of inland waterways. Thase policy
changes have not been sanctioned by the
Co n:;r ess.

It is not our purpose to tell the execu-
tive branch how to conduct its work In
planning projects. It is not our purpose
to influence the executive branch in any
recommendations to the Congress rela-
tive to land and water projects. Our
resolution does not in any degree have
that purpose or effect.

What our resolution does do Is to as-
sure that full Information is provided to
the Congress on these important prob-
lems. With such information the Con-

1957

CONGRESSIONAL REOXID — SENATE

8955

press can make decisions as to the policy
matters, and the Congress can then pre-
scribe the purposes of the projects. This
« ill be done through the regular and es-
tablished methods of project authoriza-
tion.

When the Senate eonsWered this mat-
ter In the 84th Congress, It directed the
Interior and Public Works Committees to
study the procedures for authorizing
projects so as to provide fuU information
on potential utilizations, costs, alloca-
tions, payout, and benefits. This study
has been made by tbe staffs of the two
committees. Other committees of the
Senate and the Hoase were consulted.
The agencies of the executire branch
collaborated. State and local govem-
rr.ental agencies were consulted. A wide
representation of nongovernmental
groups and organizations participated
in the studies. A summary of tbe results
of this work have been circulated in four
committee prints.

I mention these studies to make It
clear that the present resolution is Imsed
en a thorough analysis of the problems
by all of the interests concerned. It is
tiie concensus that the proposed Im-
piovements in authorization procedure
wJl supply the needed Information and
w.il expedite the work of the commit-
tees. The Improvements will also pro-
\ide for resolving the uncertainties in
lulocations and electric power rate mak-
ni:' at FH?der \1 projects^

I ask that the resolution be referred to
the Committees on Interior and Insular
Affairs and Public Works. Jointly.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pnre. The resolution will be received
and referred, as requested by the Sena-
tor from AContana.

The ref^olution (S, Res. 148) , submitted
by Mr. Muskat (for himself and other
Senators) , was referred to the Commlt-
te«>s on Interior and Insular Affairs and
Public Works, jointly, as follows:

Whereaa tbe •ease of the Senate, stated in
SeuHie Resolution SBl, 84th CongreM. Is
t;;.tt the Congress will continue to exercise
lu cousututiooai powers to encourage the
c^n.prehensivs conservation, development,
i>.''d utULzatton of Uie land and water re-
h .urces of tbe Nation, and tbat reports to the
C 'jgrers In Bupport of authorization of such
prnjpcts should (a) include evaluations made
It. acrordar.ce with criteria prescribed by the
C n<Tres.s. and (b) fully disclose the results
cf Ftiitiirs and analyses of the potential
vivi.T^tlons. costs, allocations, payout, and
br::ff.t!«. both dfrect and Indirect: and

Whrrens pursuant to said Senate Resolu-
t! 'fi 281. the Oommtttee on Interior and In-
s'llnr AffBtrs and the Ck)inmttt*e on Public
Wffks Jointly hav« reported to the Senate
that. In order to evaluate projects proposed
'or authorisation, certain Information is
needed la addition to that regularly sub-
muied by the executive branch In support of
Jirnpoeed projects, such Infonnstlon being
related to selection of plans of development.
c«i6t.s. beneflts, reimbursements or contribu-
tica* required oT k>cai interests; and

Whereas such infosmation is needed also
f.r cun.sideratlon by the Senate in oonnec-
tlon with legislation to establish policies and
f ritar ia regarding aliocatkxis of project costs,
had for evaluations of project benefits, which
I>^'lrips and criteria the Comptroller General
of the United Sutea. the Bureau of the

Budget, and ttac Secretary of the Army have
recommended sbotild be established by the
Congreos: and

Whereas the program for conservation, de-
Tslopmeat. and uUlicatUm of the land and
water resources of the Nation is impaired by
delay In the delivery to the Congress of re-
ports on projects proposed Tor authorization :
Now. therefore, be it

Jtesoived, That it Is the sense of the Senate
that procedures for evaluation of land and
water resource projects should be improved,
and that the agencies of the executive branch
of the Government responsible for the
preparation of reports relative to the au-
thorization of land and water resource proj-
ects be, and are hereby, requested to furnish,
in connection with such reports, the follow-
ing information in addition to the data now
presented in support of project authoriza-
tions:

Information relative to alternative plans
for the water resource projects that may
reasonably be considered physically feasible
of construction consistently with the ad-
vice of the Department of the Army, or the
Department of the Interior, or the Depart-
ment of Agriculture. With respect to each
potential project, in addition to a descrip-
tion of the project, tbe infarmation should
include, but not be linUted to —

< 1 ) Estimated costs of oonstructlon, opera-
tion, maintenance, and replacetnent, to-
gether with a plain and succinct statement
of the basis upon which all such estimates
are made.

(2) Beneflt-cost ratio calculated from
direct tangible beneflts and costs.

(3) Description and, to the extent possible,
compuUtlon of Indirect and Intangible net
beneflu including but not limited to (a)
protection of life and property; (b) improve-
ment of transportation; (c) conservation of
water. soU. and forest resources; (d) wikl-
lUe conservation; <e) recreation; <f) abate-
ment of pollution, including salinity; {g)
control of sedimentation; <h) maintenance
and enhancement of the agricultural,
commercial, and indxistrial economy of the
area allected.

(4) Physical feasibility and costs of pro-
viding capacity in the project works for cur-
rent needs and future uses that may reason-
ably be anticipated to develop during the
useful life of such project works.

<5i Allocations of costs, to be calculated
(a) by at least 3 methods, namely, the sep-
arable costs remaining benefits ntethod. the
priority of use method, and the ino-ementai
cost method: and <b) on at least 2 time pe-
riods for amortisation, namely, 50 years or
the \iseful life of the facilities, whichever is
tbe lesser, and 100 years or the useful life
of tlM facUiUes, whichever is the lesser.

(6) Description of the extent to which the
Federal. State, and local governmental agen-
cies, and nongovernmental entities have evi-
deooed interest In participating in the con-
struction or operation and maintenance of
the potential project, or in obtaining its
benefits, including, in the case of electric
energy, information relative to the preference
status of governmental agencies, munieipaU-
tles, and cooperatives; and the manrver In
which it Is proposed to accomplish coordina-
tion and cooperation, and the estimated
Federal costs of such participation.

(7) Estimated schedules of repayments of
reimbursable costs that would be within the
estimated financial resources of the poten-
tial use area, such schedules to show also the
deferred repayment of the portion of the
costs allocated to uses that may be antici-
pated to develop In the future.

( 8 ) Probable effects of the potential project
on State and local govemments. includtng,
but not limited to (a) the costs o€ local gov-

ernment services; and <b) tbe enhancement
or reduction of tax revenues, together witli
the amount of potential tax revenue that
would be foregone by Federal development lix
lieu of non-Federal development of the
project. The estimated amounts of tax rev-
enue enhancement and tax reventie foregone
as a result of the project should be shown
in calculations of project benefits and costs.

(9) In support of proposed increases in
tlie authorizations of appropriations for con-
tinuation of the construction of basinwide
projects, proposed schedules of investiga-
tions and construction should be suppUed,
including descriptions of the units to be
undertaken, and deviations in schedules of
construction suppUed in support of prior
authorizations.

Sac. 2. That reports on surveys aad inves-
tigatlcns or project reports relative to the
authorization of land and water resource
projects should be delivered to the Congress
not later than 6 calendar months after the
date on which reports are circiUated to the
Federal agencies and to the affected States
pursuant to section 1 of the act of December
22. IM4 (56 Stet. 887). The agencies of the
executive branch responsible for preparation
of such project repcuts be, and are hereby, re-
quested to deliver to the Congress such re-
ports not later than 6 months after they hav«
been submitted for comments to tiie gov-
ernors of the affected States.

Sbc 8. niat authorizations of water re-
source projects should specify the method by
which the allocation of costs shall be de-
termined.

AMENDMENT OF FEDERAL PROP-
ERTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE
SKRVICEB ACT OP 1949

Mr. McCLELLAN. Mr. President. I
introduce, for appropriate reference, a
bin which is being introduced at the re-
quest of the Administrator of General
Services, who states that this proposal
Is a part of the legislative program of
the General Services Administration for
1957.

The bill proposes to establish an Ad-
ministrative Operations Fund, on a per-
manent basis, to accord with action
taken by the Congress in the Independ-
ent Agencies Appropriations Act of 1956,
on recommendations of the Committee
on Appropriations. According to the Ad-
ministrator, the creation of this fund has
facilitated review of appropriation esti-
mates and is in consonance with Con-
gressional policy as expressed in the
Budget and Accounting E*rocedures Act
of 1950.

I ask unanimous consent that the let-
ter addressed to the President of the
Senate by the Administrator of General
Services on June 6, 1957, outlining the
need for this proposed legislation, be in-
corporated in the Record as a part of my
remarks.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. The bin will be received and ap-
propriately referred; and, without ob-
jection, the letter win be printed in the
Rkcord.

The bill (S. 2283) to further amend
the Federal Property and Administra-
tive Services Act of 1949, as amended,
and far other purposes, introduced by
Mr. McCiXLLAH. by request, was reoeived,
read twi<je by Its title, and referred to the
Committee on Government Operatioas.

8956

COXGRf SSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

10:

rONHR F<s<sTnM ATP vrriQ r\ ccxt a nrn

OA&f*

I

iijl.

I* •

ll '

8956

CONGRISSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

The letter presented by Mr McClellan
is as follows:

Oenekal SravTCES Administration.

Wiuhington. D C , June 6. 1957
Hon RiCHAKo M. Nixon.

President of the Senate,
Washington. D C

Mt Dkab Mr. Prisidknt There Is forwardert
herewith draft of legislation "To fvirther
amend the Federal Property and Administra-
tive Services Act of 1949. aa amended, and
for other purpwses."

This proposal la a part of the le^slatlve
program <if the General Services Administra-
tion for 1957

This proposed legislation would amend the
Federal Property and Administrative Services
Act of 1949 1 63 Sta: 377 ». by adding a new
section to title I which would establish an
Administrative Operations Fund on a per-
manent basis

An administrative operations fund was
Included in the act of June 2'2, 1956. making
appropriations for sundry Independent exec-
utive bureaus, boards. commissl<ins. corpora-
tions, agencies, and offices, for the tiscal year
ending June 30. 1957. and for other purposes.
The provisions of this act permitted the es-
tablishment of a single disbursing account to
which amounts Included In each program
appropriation for staff costs are transferred
for purposes of budgetary control and
e.\pendlture

EStperlence has shown that this fund has
facilitated review of appropriation estimates
•Ince budget estimates for each program In-
clude the amount of staff costs. This pro-
posal Is in consonance with Congressional
policy as expres-sed In the Budget and Ac-
counting Procedures Act of 1950 (64 Stat.
632)

During the ftscal year 1957 GSA's opera-
tions under this fund have disclosed the
need for minor adjustments between sources
of funds to keep financing In line with small
fluctuations In program workloads This
has been accomplished within the total an-
nual limitation.

The proven advantages of the Adminis-
trative Operations Fund confirm the feasi-
bility of continuing this fund on a perma-
nent basi.s. Operating under the provisions
of this fund has simplified GSAs Internal
budget control and accounting bv elimi-
nating the necessity for keeping several sets
of budgetary accounts under the old system.
Legislative authorization ot this fund will
give greatev assurance of permanence, and
not make this fund subject to a point of
order annually when appropriation language
Is under consideration.

The enactment of this proposed legisla-
tion would not increase the expenditure of
Federal funds.

The General Services Administration urges
prompt and favorable consideration ot this
draft bill.

The Bureau of the Budget has advised that
It interposes no objection to the submission
of this bin to the Congress.
Sincerely yours.

Franklin O Plouti:.

AdminutTatoT.

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT OP 1957—
AMENDMENTS

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, on be-
half of myself, and the Senator from
Wyoming (Mr. OMahoniyI I submit
amendments. Intended to be proposed
by ua. Jointly, to the Mutual Security
Act of 1957. I ask that the amendments
be printed, so they will be available to
the Senate tomorrow. The amend-
ments will restrict the development loan

authorized for next year to $500 million.
and will delete from the bill the pro-
posed authority to borrow $1,500,000,000
through 1960.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore The amendments will be received,
printed, and lie on the table.

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR
COOPERATION BETWEEN THE
UNITED STATES AND PORTUGAL
CONCERNING CIVIL USES OF
ATOMIC ENERGY

Mr. PASTORE. Mr President. I aslc
unanimou.s consent to have printed in
the Record an amendment to the agree-
ment for cooperation with the Govern-
ment of Portugal, together with accom-
panying correspondence. This agree-
ment was signed on June 7. and was
received at the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy on June 11. It is a stand-
ard research agreement which provides
for the lea.se of up to 6 lcilogram.s of con-
tained U-235 in uranium, enriched up to
a maximum of 20 percent U-235.

There being no objection, the amend-
ment to the agreement was ordered to
be printed in the Record, as follows;

United Statm
Atomic I^nfrgy Commission
WoJihirigtnn. D C . June 11 . 1957.
Hon Cari T DfRH\M

Chairrtxan, Jinnt Committee on Atomic
Energy^ Congresi of the United
State.i
Dt.ar Mr. DrRH\M Pursuant to section
123c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, there
are submitted with this letter:

1 An amendment signed In Washington,
June 7. 1957. to the Agreement for Ctwpera-
tlon Between the Government of the United
States of America and the Government of
Portugal Conrernir^g the Civil Uses of Atomic
Energy dated July 21. 1955;

2 A letter dated May 14. 1957. from the
Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission
to the President recommending approval of
the amendment, and

3 A letter dated May 22. 1957 from the
President to the Chairman of the Atomic
Energy CommLssion approving the amend-
ment, authorizing its execution, and con-
taining his determination that It will pro-
mote and will not constitute an unreason-
able risk to the common defense and security.

Articles I and III of the amendment In-
clude new provisions designed to clarify the
responsibilities assumed by the parties to
the agreement with respect to liability for
any Information or data, special nuclear
material or fuel elements cransferred pur-
suant to the agreement.

Article II of the amendment would permit
the tran.sler of limited amounts of special
nuclear materials. Including U-235. U-233.
and Plutonium tor defined research projects
related to the peaceful uses of atomic
energy.

The amendment will enter Into force when
the two Governments have exchanged writ-
ten notifications that their respective statu-
tory and constitutional requirements have
been fulfilled (art IVi.
Sincerely yours.

Lrwis L. STRAnss.

Chairman,

Mat 14. 19S7.
The PxtaiDrNT.

The White House.
Dtar Mr. Presidewt- The Atomic Energy
CommlMion recommends that you approve

the encloaed amendment to the Agreement
for Cooperation Between the Government of
the United States of America and the Gov-
ernment of Portugal Concerning Civil Uses
of Atomic Energy, dated July 21. 1955. and
authorize Its execution.

Articles I and III of the amendment in-
clude new provisions designed to clarify
resp<inslbllltles assumed by the parties to
the agreement with respect to liability for
any causes arising out of the handling or
use of Information or data, special nuclear
material or fuel elements transferred pur-
suant to the agreement.

Article II of the amendment would permit
the transfer of limited amounts of special
nuclear materials, Including U 235, U 233.
and Plutonium, for defined research proj-
ects related to the peaceful uses of atomic
enerijy.

Following your approval and subject to
the authorization requested, the proposed
amendment will be executed by the appro-
priate authorities of the Governments of
Portugal and the United States In com-
pliance with section 123c of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954. the amendment will then
be placed before the Joint CommUlee on
Atomic Energy

Respectfully yours,

Lewis L Straus."*,

Chairman.
I certify this to be a true and correct copy.
Leo.naro B Philiips.
DiVMion of International Affairs.

The White House

Washington. May 22, 1957.
The Honorable Lewis L Strauss.

Chai'-man. Atomic Energy Commission,
Wastiington D C.

Dear Mr Chairman Under date of May 14,
1957, you Informed me that the Atomic
Energy Commission recommended that I ap-
prove a proposed amendment to the Agree-
ment for C»x)i>er8tlon Between the Govern-
ment of the United States of America and
the Government of Portugal Concerning ClvU
Uses of Atomic Energy, dated July 21, 1955.
and authorize Its execution.

Articles I and III of the amendment Include
new provisions designed to clarify respon-
sibilities assumed by the parties to the Agree-
ment with respect to liability for any causes
arising out of the handling or use of informa-
tion or data, special nuclear msterlal or fuel
elements transferred pursuant to the Agree-
ment.

Article II of the amendment would permit
the transfer of limited amounts of special
nuclear materials. Including U-235. U-233
and Plutonium, for defined research projects
related to the peaceful uses of atomic energy.

Pursuant to the provisions of Section 123
of the Atomic ETnergy Act of 1954 and upon
the recommendation of the Atomic Energy
Commission. I hereby ( I ) Determine that the
performance of the proposed amendment to
the agreement will promote and will not con-
stitute an unreasonable risk to the common
defense and security of the United States;
and (2) approve the proposed amendment to
the Agreement for Cooperation Concerning
ClvU Uses of Atomic Energy Between the
Government of the United States of America
and the Government of Portugal enclosed
with your letter of May 14. 1957; and (3)
authorize the execution of the proposed
amendment for the Government of the
United States by appropriate authorities of
the United States Atomic Energy Commlssloa
and the Department of State.
Sincerely.

Dwioirr D. Eiscimown.

I certify this to be a true and correct copf.
Leonard B. Phillips.
DiHsion of International Affatrt. AEC.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8957

Amendment to AoRExuDrr roi Coopcration

I5ETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF TH« UNITID

^^TATEs or America and the Oovkrnment

or Portugal CoNCXKHUfo Civil Uses or

Atomic Enerot

The Government of the United States
r f America and the Government of Portugal,
desiring to amend the Agreement for Co-
operation Between the Government of the
United States of America and the Govern-
ment of Portugal Concerning ClvU Uses of
At.imlc Energy, signed on July 21. 1955, here-
inafter referred to as the "agreement for
cj'pfration," have agreed as follows:

ARTICLE I

Article I of the agreement for coopera-
tion 1."! amended to read as follows:

■A Subject to the limitation of article V.
the parties hereto will exchange Informa-
nt;, m the following fields:

• 1 Design, construction, and operation of
ri-sr.irrh reactors and their use as research.
de^eIopment. and engineering tools and in
ii.ecllcil therapy.

•2 Health and safety problems related to
the operation and use of research reactors.

■3 The use of radioactive Isotopes In
physical p.nd biological research, medical
therapy aijrlculture, and Industry.

• n Tlie application or use of any Infor-
ms'i in or data of any kind whatsoever, In-
cUidinkT design drawings and specifications.
exchanged under this agreement shall be
the responsibility of the party which re-
ceives and uses such Information or data,
and It Is understood that the other co-
operating party does not warrant the ac-
curacy, completeness, or suitability of such
tnr rmatlon or data for any particular use
or application."

ARTICLE 11

The following new article Is added directly
nfer article III of the agreement for coop>er-
atlon;

"ARTICLE in (A)

"Materials of Interest In connection with
rietined research projects related to the
pet-.ceful uses of atomic energy undertaken
by the Government of Portugal. Including
source materials, special nuclear materials,
byproduct materials, other radioisotopes, and
st«ble iMjiojies, will be sold or otherwise
triir.sferred to the Government of Portugal
bv the Commission for research purposes In
such quantities and under such t^rms and
conditions as may t>e agreed when such ma-
terials .ire not available commercially. In no
case, however, shall the quantity of special
nuclear materials under the Jurisdiction of
the Government of Portugal by reason of
transfer under this article, be. at any one
time. In excess of 100 grama of contained
U-?35. 10 grams of plutonlum. and 10 grams
of U-233 •■

ARTICLE III

1 Article VI. paragraph A. of the agree-
nuiU for cooperation Is amended by deleting
^he nhrase 'uranium enriched In the isotope
V 2.35 leased from the Commission " and sub-
stituiing In lieu thereof the phrase ■'special
nucleur materials received from the Com-
mi.s.sion."

2 The following new paragraph Is added
to article VI of the agreement for coopera-
tion:

"D Some atomic energy materials which
t!,e Government of Portugal may request the
(ommlsslon to provide In accordance with
'ills arrangement are harmful to persons and
property unless handled and used carefuUy.
After delivery of such materials to the Gov-
ernment of Portugal, the Government of
Portugal shall bear all responsibility. Insofar
as the Government of the United BUtes U
( ncerned. for the safe handling and use of
"uch materials. With respect to any special
i.uciear materials or fuel elemeuU which the

Commission may, pursuant to this agree-
ment, lease to the Government of Portugal
or to any private individual or private or-
ganization under iU Jurisdiction, the Gov-
ernment of Portugal shall Indemnify and
save harmless the Government of the United
States against any and all llabUlty (Includ-
ing third party liability) for any cause what-
soever arising out of the production or fabri-
cation, the ownership, the lease, and the pos-
session and use of such special nuclear ma-
terials or fuel elemenu after delivery by the
Commission to the Government of Portugal
or to any authorized private individual or
private organization under its Jurisdiction."

ARTICLE IV

This amendment shall enter Into force on
the date on which each Government shall
receive from the other Government written
notification that it has complied with all
statutory and constitutional requirements
for the entry into force of such amendment
and shall remain In force for the period of
the agreement for cooperation.

Emenda ao Acordo de Coopera<;ao Entre o

GOVERNO DOS ESTADOS UNISOS da AMtRICA
E O GOVERNO DE PORTUGAL SOBXE OS USOS

Civis DA Enebgia Nuclear

O Governo dos Estados Unldos da America
e o Governo de Portugal.

Desejando alterar o Acordo de Cooperag&o
entre o Governo dos Estados Unldos da
America e o Governo de Portugal sobre os
Usos Clvls da E'nergla Nuclear, asslnado em
21 de Julho de 1956. referldo neste docu-
mento como acordo de coopera^ao,

Acordaram no seguinte:

artigo I

O artigo I do acordo de coopera^&o i
alterado para se ler como segue:

"A. Tendo em conta as restrlg6es men-
clonadas no artigo V, deverao as partes con-
tratantes trocar Informa^oes sobre as seguln-
les materlas:

"1. Desenho. construcio e operacao de re-
actores experimentais e seu uso como In-
Etrumentos de InvestlgaQiio clentiflca de
engenharla e de terapfeutlca.

"2. Problemas de saude e de seguranca
rclaclonados com o funclonamento e uso de
reactores experimentais.

"3. Uso de IsotopoB radloactlvos em es-
tudos de fislca e de blologia, terapeutlca,
agriculture, e Industria.

"B. A aplica^ao ou o uso de dados ou In-
formacoes, qualquer que seja a sua natureza.
Inclusive os pianos de desenhos e especl-
flcacdes trocados em vlrtude deste acordo.
i&T-se-k sob a responsabllldade da parte que
OS receber e usar, flcando entendldo que a
outra parte nao garante que tals dados
sejam exactos. completos, ou adequados para
determluado uso ou apUcagao."

ARTIGO n

OpOs o artigo III do acordo de coopera^ao
acrescentar-se-a o novo artigo seguinte:

ARTIOO in (A)

"Materials de Interesse rclaclonados com
projectos definldos de Investigacao clentiflca
que dlgam respelto a usos clvls de energia
nuclear, empreendldos pelo Governo Portu-
gues. Inclusive materials prim&rlos. materi-
als nucleares especlais. produtos secund&rlos,
outros radlolsOtopos e os ls6top>oe est^vels,
ser&o vendldos ou, em outras clrcumst&nclas,
ser&o cedldos para fins de estudo ao Governo
de Portugal pela Comlss&o, nas qiuintldades
e segundo os termos e condlqOes que se acor-
darem, quando n&o seJa posslvel obter oa
referldoi materials pelas via* comerclals or-
dlnArlas. Em caso nenbum, por^m. a quan-
tldade de materials nucleares especlais sob
a Jurladl^&o do Oovemo de Portugal, por
motlvo de transferincla que se efectue de
acordo com este artigo, poder& ser em qual-

quer momento superior a 100 gramas d«
conteudo U-235, 10 gramas de plut<Snlo e 10
gramas de U-233."

AR'HGO nz

1. t alterado o artigo VI, par&grafo A, do
acorda de coopera^&o ellmlnando a fraso
"ur&nlo enriquecldo no IsOtopo U-236 cedido
pela Comlssao" e substltuindo em seu lugar
a frase "materials nucleares especlais rece-
bidos da Comlss&o."

2. Ao artigo VI do acordo de coopera^&o
acrescentar-se-& o novo par&grafo seguinte:

"D. Alguns materials geradores de energia
nuclear, que o Governo de Portugal poesa
sollcltar que Ihe seJam fornftcldos pela Co-
mlss&o. de acordo com este conv6nlo b&o
prejudlclals as pessoas e a propriedade se
nao forem manejadoe e usados culdadosa-
mente. Depois da entrega desses materials
ao Governo de Portugal, este Governo as-
sumlrA toda a responsabllldade, em relagao
ao Governo dos Estados Unldos, para mane-
Jar e usar com segtiranga esses materials.
Com respelto a qualsquer materials nucleares
especlais ou elementos combustiveis que a
Comlssao, em vlrtude deste acordo. posea
ceded ao Governo Portugues ou a qualquer
Individuo ou organizacao particular sob a
sua Jurisdi?ao. o Groverno de Portugal Indem-
nlzar& e eximir4 o Governo dos Estados
Unldos de toda a obrigacao e de toda a
responsabllldade (inclusive reclamacOes de
tercelros). qualquer que seJa o motlvo que
poesa surgir da produ^ao ou frabricacao.
propriedade, cessao e da retencao e uso de
tals materials nucleares especlais ou elemen-
tos combustiveis depois da entrega felta pela
Comlssao ao Governo de Portugal ou a qual-
quer pessoa ou organlzacao particular auto-
rizada sob a sua Jurlsdlgao."

ARTTGO IV

Esta emanda entar& em vigor na data em
que cada Governo receber do outro Governo
notlflcaijao por escrlto de que cumpriu com
todos OS requisitos legais e constltucionals
para a entrada em vigor da aludlda emenda
e permanecera em vigor pelo periodo de
dura^ao do acordo de cooperacao.

In witness whereof, the undersigned, duly
authorized, have signed this amendment.

Done at Washington, in duplicate, in the
English and Portuguese languages, this 7th
day of June 1957.

Em testemunho do que, as nartes contra-
tantes, devidamente autorizadas, assinaram
esta Emanda.

Felto em Washington, em dupllcado. e nas
Ilnguas Inglesa e Portuguesa, aos sete dias
do mfes de Junho de 1957.

Por the Government of the United States
of America:

Pelo Governo dos Estados Unidos da Amer-
ica:

C. Burke Elbrick.

Department of State.
Lewis L. Strauss,
Chairman, United States
Atomic Energy Commission.
For the Government of Portugal:
Pelo Governo de Portugal:

L. ESTEVES Fernandes.
Ambassador of Portugal.
I certify that this Is a true and correct
copy.

Leonard B. Phillips.
Division of International Affairs, AEC.

ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSIONER
THOMAS E. MURRAY

Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, today
the Free World is engaged in a life or
death struggle with the Kremlin, as each
seeks superiority in nuclear weapons.
The competition is equally keen in the
development of nuclear energy for
peaceful purposes.

•I 1 S'J -

' 'I

I' i

I!

']

'. i

V

6958

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

Our first concern, then, as a nation
Is to have in our Atomic Energy Com-
mission men who by their character.
abihty. and experience have demonstrat-
ed the quahties of leadership which will
enable us to win in the contest.

Such a man is Thomas E. Murray,
whose current term will expire on June
30 next. It is the authority and pre-
losjative of the President of the United
States to renew the service of this abie
man.

Those of us who have been closely as-
sociated with Mr. Murray are keenly
aware of hi.^ ability and his conti-ibu-
tion to our common effort in a very diffi-
cult field.

We are proud of the fact that we have
called to the attention of the President
of the United States our feelings in the
matter. Otherwise we would be remis.s
in our obligation as Senators in affairs
which so deeply concern our national
security.

Apropos of the pending appointment.
there appears in the Electrical World,
in its issue of June 10. 1957. an article
which I hi?hly r:commend to the atten-
tion of the Members of the Senate For
that reason. I ask that the iuticie be
made a part of my remarks and be
printed at this point in the body of tho
Record.

There being no objection, the artic'e
was ordered to be printed in the Record.
aj follov s ;

Will Murray Win AEC Re.appcintme.vt?
(By V Craig Rlchter)

COMMISSIONERS HOPES FOR RETAINING PO'^T
bisk: IKE, THOT'CH NONr-OMMITTAL. MAY
J-AVOa SECOND TERM DESPITE ST30NG OPPOSI-
TION ETIOM STRAUSS

Wa.'ihlntrtcn experts h.ive been ronvincei
for somp time now that there was not a
chance tn the world th.it President Eu«en-
hnwer would re:ippr.int to the Atomic En-
ervry Comm.'ssUm Thomas E Miirr.iy, Demo-
crat, who.s* term expires June 30

B.n.slCHlly. thi.s 5;ter.-is f;-i m the heated op-
position of AEC Chairman Lev.-!s E Strtni^s.
who Is Elloenhower's closest advl.ser on atomic
matters — plus thc^ manner tn which Eisen-
hower pave a brusque but noncommittal
reply to a question on the subject at a news
conference.

Now Murray and til.s supporters .ire cam-
pHli^nini? for reappointment. They believe
Eisenhower might eventually decide In Rlur-
r.iys f.ivor.

OFTEN A LONE DISSENTER

Murrav and Strau.^s have been at each
other's throats on a number ff lssi;es "Hie
other two AEC Commissioners. Dr WllKird
F Hbby and Harold S Vance, have not be-
come publicly involved In the squabbles, but
Invan.ibly they have lined up with Struu.^s
wherever the chips were down Thus Mur-
rpy fre<iuent;y has been the lone dissenter
on AEr

Now the Murray forces contend if Etsen-
h'lwer can be reached by the proper perple.
hf mi^lit override Strauss. They believe,
l.i fact, an indioition of utility indu.stry
support for Murray would swing the scales
In his favor

Mv.rays friends point to the advantages
to th; administration that would stem
from his reappointment It would contrib-
ute toward placatlntt congressional Demo-
c.;ats, thev say. and stop the Demo<-rat!c
t.hreut t<-) scuttle the administration's att^mic
power reactor program including the lla-
bilify Insurance bill

On the other hand, failure to reapponit
Murray promises to pr'xluce a re.\l donny-

brook In Congress to the detriment of Uie
atomic-power program. Certainly congres-
sional E)€mocrats *ould look with suspicion
oil an AEC minus Murray — tlie one Coni-
mis.<;loner who has never hesitated to clash
with Strauss' puUcles when he felt they »ere
wrong.

BROrCHT t'NWELrOME PUBLICITY

1N?".rray. who believes strongly that Gov-
ernment-Industry dealings must be In the
open for all to see. has had his worst rows
with Strauss over .^EC secrecy He gave
aid and comfort to Strauss' foes In the
Dixon-Yates and Power Reactor Develop-
ment Co cases s<-> Strauss policies In both
cr..5es h.ive br'>.!k;ht publlci'.v th.u the in-
dustry and AEC would have preferred to
A. old.

With regard to reactor acceleration. Mur-
ray s position h.i» been consistent. He has
argued all alon^ for Federal financial and
tech'ioiogical assii^tance — that the early costs
of atomic power Axe fa.riy staggonng with-
out any guaranty of quick In^provement.
n-:i that ttm? is rif tl'.f e?sriiL-e. not f ' r
domestic re.isons but for international po-
llrtr'n! prf,sti<^e reasons,

Rcpresent.itlve James Van Zandt (Repub-
lican, Pt nnsylvanial said as much In In-
troducing his re«ctor acceleration bill re-
cently Murray has said It for a years.

M>..-..y d-^sr. : want th3 Ccvernment in
business any more th.m the stanchest Re-
puoacan di ^s But he believes it is .shnrt-
."lo'itcd ot industry to oppose the Govern-
ment in undertaking extremely c istly gam-
bles in building large-scale prototype pmwer
reaoto's primarily as an Instrument of in-
ternatlon.il pollcv. He arg\ie8 that stopping
the Government tixUy d«)es not ii'.j,ure th.it
there wont be Federal cimn^.errial at.mU':
pow^rplants at some future date under
another aOm'nlsrrafiop

The rf^appolntntpnt would soI\e many
pr iblcms for the President The Republi-
cans would have trouble finding another
R >m.-in CithoHc Democrat with Murray's
qur.llf.r-tior.s.

DEFENDS POWER INDfSTRT

He knows the power industry (and h.-is
never hesitated to defend it in principle i
.irsr, through his father who built many
p )wpr .>;t.iti..ns a:.d later through running
li.e family elecincrtl maiaifai lunng busi-
ness. As a mechanical engineer, Murray
h ■..=; over 2uO electrical and welding putenu
to his name

His standing in Congress Is gf)od. This
w.w; demonstrated when he backed Eisen-
howers position With regard to the Inter-
national Atomic Energy Agency, Although
■J-e Senate hiis not yet ratified the treaty.
there was noticeable lessening of ImpiTtant
GOP opposition to It after Murray spoke.
H.s reaptxiintment Would help smooth the
wiv m C,)t:gress for resolving the Ungled
web of futu.-e atomlr power reactor p«;)Ucy
and atomic liability Insurance,

Mr, MANSFIELD Mr, President, v, ill
the Senator from Rhode Island yield to
ir.e:>

Mr. PASTORE I yield,

Mr. MANSFIELD I desire to a.ssoci-
ate myself with the Senator from Rhode
Island in the remarks he has just made.

A!l of us know that Commissioner
Thomas E. Murray, of the Atomic En-
ergy Commission, is fiUing a term which
will expire on June 30 of this year. Mr.
Murray has been known as the great dis-
.senter, on occasion. Personally. I think
it would be a ?ood Idea if a good dis-
senter were maintained on the Commis-
sion, and especially a man of the integri-
ty, the ability, and the capability of Com-
mi.ssioner Murray, who is one of the
cour.try'j out.standini,' citizens, and who

Is a real asset to the Atomic Energy Com-
mission.

I sincerely hope the President will re-
appoint Comml?5.';loner Murray. I also
hope the President will form his jud"-
ment of Commissioner Murray on the
basis of what he has accomplished and
the fine and devoted service he has
rendered to the country over the past
several year.'^. I realize, ol course, that
the question of Mr. Murray's reappoint-
ment is the President's preroKative and
responsibility. I venture to express the
hope that he will exeici.se hi.s own good
judymcnt in this matter and recognize
the ureat contribution, the outstandin;?
inte>?rity. and the tremendous asset Mr.
Murray is to the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion.

Mr PASTORE. I thank the Senator
from Montana,

Mr. President, if we properly evaluate
the tremtndo'js dfvelopnieiit and suc-
cess and procuress we ha"c achieved in
the field of developing nuclear and
thermonuclear weapons, we properly
a.s.sess the great value ol this great Amer-
ican. Thoma.s E. Murray, us a member of
the Atomic Energy Commission.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, the
Washington Daily News for Monday,
June 10. published a load editorial en-
titled "AEC Needs Mu'-'Ty."

Those of us who know Tliomas E.
Murray's record on the Atomic Energy
Commission wholeheartedly agree. I
sincerely hope tl:at tho.se who make the
final decision will have the goixl sense
to recommend and reappoint Commis-
sioner Murray to the AEC.

I a'-k unanimous con.'^rnt that the
editon.il be printed In the RtcoRD.

There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows :

AEC Needs Mt'RRAT

Thomas E Murray's first term as a mem-
ber of the United States Atomic Energy
Commission, now nearlng Us end. has
proved him to be a fine public servant

He Is a practical man. dedicated to free
enterprise, with a long and s'.iccessful career
behind him. Commissioner Murray Is al.vi
a philosopher, an articulate defender of
what he believes Is right And events have
often shown him to be right.

His views have at times clashed with
th we of I^wls I, Strauss. AEC's Chairman.
His occasional dl.ssenta have been vital In
the final hxmg of some of the policies of
the great ugeiu-y upon which the security
of our country aid that of the Free World
so largely depends.

Recent congressional hearings on radioac-
tive fallout from at^imlc and hydrogen weap-
ons have shown vividly the wide differences
of opinion among trained actentlsts on the
dangers Involved.

These point up the necessity of Insuring
that the AEC. above all other Government
agencies, shall never become a mere rubber
stamp, blindly approving the views of one
man or one group of men.

The whole atomic enterprise Is so young.
so complicated, so vastly Important that
only out of a clash of opinions can AEC
select the proper course toward its twin
objectives: first, the military security of our
country, and, second, the application of this
mysterious force to the advancement of
mankind.

Mr. Murray, a devout man. la % strong
Bupf)orter of the President's atoms-for-peace
pr .gram which could lead to the csUibUth-
ineiit of God s peace.

10

O t

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8959

Chairman Strauss doubtless will have
f-reat influence In President Elsenhower's
(ifiislon on whether to reappoint Mr.
Murray.

K big man in his own right, Mr. Straus*
vi.is himself an occasional dissenter In
e.trller days of this atomic agency. He will
inrrea-se in stature when he shuns tho6«
v,iio put unanimity above all else, and rec-
umnicnds the reappointment of Mr. Murray.

The country, the Elsenhower atoms-for-
peace program, and the AEC need men like
lorn Murray.

TRIBUTE TO SENATOR DOUGLAS

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, our
colleague the senior Senator from Illi-
nois I Mr. Douglas] has been performing
a remarkably thorough job in document-
inu' his support of effective civil-rights
It^islation. This feat is a tribute to the
j-fiiator and to his capable staff.

On June 12. the Pulitzer prize-winning
rii respondent of the New York Times,
Mr James Reston, recognized this out-
.--•anriing work by the Senator from Illi-
rois in a column written by Mr. Reston
lor his paper.

Retardless of viewpoint, all of us In
the Senate respect ability and thorough-
i:f>ss Furthermore. I myself share the
viewpoint of the Senator from Illinois
on his civil-rights position. Therefore,
Mr. President. I ask unanimous consent
to have printed In the body of the Rec-
OKD the tribute paid to our colleague
liom Illinois [Mr. DouclasI by Mr.
James Reston. of the staff of the New
York Times, which is one of the great
r,pw.<;papers of our country and of the
v, orld.

There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
Hs follows:
DorcLAs Takes on South— A View That the

J-E.v.ATOR Is Emehcing as Chief Champion

OF Civil Rights Bit l

(By James Reston)
Washington, June 11 — Senator Paxil H.
DofcLAs, Democrat, of Illinois. Is emerging
it.s the mo.n cfTectlve advocate of the E.sen-
^'>wer administration's clvll-rlghts bill In
the Senate.

The white-thatched professor from the
Middle West Is contending with another
I"Merful orator in the Democratic Party,
Senator Sam J, Ervin, Jr,. of North Carolina,
f'r domination of what promises to be the
most hcnrnonlous debate of the session.

Every few dnys now. Senator Dottolas ap-
pe irs on the floor armed with heavy cata-
1 gs of facts, to prove that the Negro In the
South is being deprived of his right to vote
in Federal elections.

Here Is Just a sample of his statlstloal
nrmory from yesterday's Installment:

In Alabama, only 10 3 percent of Negroes
ever 21 years old In the 1950 census were
renstered to vote.

l!i Blount County, Ala., "There are 429
r"tcntlal Negro voters, but not a single
Nf^ro has voter registration."

In Bullock County, there are 6.425 poten-
tial Necrro voters, but only 6 Negroes are
registered.

In Clay County, there are 1.010 potential
Nei'ro Voters, as of 1950. but not one of them
is registered.

In De Kalb County, there are 443 potential
Nfgro voters, but none Is registered.

In Jackson County, there are 1,242 poten-
tial Negro voters, but none Is registered.

In U)wnde8 County, there are 6.512 poten-
i-'l Negro voters, but not a single Negro la
reguiered.

In Marshall County, there are 605 poten-
tial Negro voters; not a single Negro Is reg-
istered.

In Morgan County, there are 4,641 poten-
tial Negro voters; not a single Negro is reg-
istered.

In Tallapoosa County there are 5,083 po-
tential Negro voters; not a single Negro Is
registered.

In Wilcox County there are 8.218 potential
Negro voters; not a single Negro Is registered.

AND ON TO other STATES

On he goes from Alabama to Arkansas and
Georgia, reeling off figures compiled by the
research office of the Southern Regional
Council.

"For the State of Arkansas as a whole." he
said, "according to the 1950 census, there are
410,342 nonwhltes of 21 years and over, but
In the whole State only 67.851 Negroes were
registered, or 16.5 percent of those who would
be expected to be eligible.

"In Georgia, the total number of potential
Negro voters In 1950, 18 years of age and
over, wa« 633,679. • • • In 1956, the num-
ber of Negroes was 163.389. or only 25.6 per-
cent of those who are potential voters."

The Senator for Illinois fills the pages of
the Congressional Record with comparable
figures lor the other States in the South;
only 25.3 percent of those registered In South
Carolina; 20 percent In Virginia, and In Mls-
6iE.^ippl. only a fraction over 3 percent.

Aealnst this torrent of figures. Senator
Douglas presents his argument In favor of
the administration's bill. It would protect
the Negro's right to vote through the use of
a Federal court Injunction, and authorize
the judges In the Federal courts to bring
contempt proceedings against anyone who
violates the Injunction.

This has been characterized by Senator
Eevin as an "Insulting and Insupportable
Indictment of a whole people • • • as
drastic and Indefensible a legislative pro-
posal as was ever submitted to any legis-
lative body In this country."

Accordingly. Senator Ervin and his sup-
porters have succeeded in getting the Senate
Judiciary Committee to amend the bill so
that anyone charped with defying a Federal
court Injunction In a civil rights case would
have a Jury trial.

DOUGLAS REPLIES

Let's see what this means. Senator Doug-
las tells the Senate.

"This amendment In practice," he declares,
"will nullify the protection of the right to
vote which the civil-rights bill Is designed
to protect. • • • In the State of Arkansas,
In the parish of Orleans, which Includes
the city of New Orleans, and in the States
of Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas, a
person must be eligible to vote in order to
be competent to serve as a grand or petit
Juror in the State or parish. • • • Thus,
the jury-trial amendment, when coupled
with existing denial of the right to vote to
thousands of Negroes, merely sets up I this)
cycle:

"First. Negroes are denied the right to
vote.

"Second. A clvll-rlghts bill, we hope. Is
passed by Congress to protect and defend
that right.

"Third. An amendment is, however, added
to provide jury trials for those who have
prevented Negroes from voting.

"Fourth. By law, Negroes are excluded
from jury lists because these lists are com-
posed, by law In five States and by practice
In many others, of those who are on the
voting lists.

"Fifth. Therefore, the juries often would
be composed predominantly of those whom
the defendant has given the privilege of
voting and largely excludes those or those
groups who have been denied the right to
vote.

"Sixth. These jury members In turn
would find It very difficult to exercise their
fair judgment in clvll-rlghts cases.

"They will be making decisions In many
cases where there exists an atmosphere of
tension, coercion, threats, and Intimidation.
If they support a Federal judge's order pro-
tecting the voting rights of Negroes, they
know they will be exposed to economic pres-
sure and possibly to physical violence. This
would be true, in particular, of those jurors
who might be willing on grounds alone of
justice to support the order of a Federal
Judge."

None of this, however, persuades Senator
Ervin and his southern colleagues. For every
fact presented by the Senator from lUlnols.
the Senator from North Carolina has a string
of citations on the basic right of trial by
jury.

He brushes aside Senator Douglas' asser-
tion that trial by jury in such injunction
contempt cases is a new, unique, and radical
departure from the precedents of our law,
and proclaims with great eloquence that
government by Injunction is abhorrent to
those who love our constitutional and legal
systems.

Thus the debate Is joined, and there are
no two more learned nor worthy antagonists
in the Senate to lead it.

COST AND DAMAGE ESTIMATES ON
THE DISASTER CONDITIONS IN
THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. YARBOROUGH. Mr. President,
I ask unanimous consent to have printed
in the body of the Record a letter I have
received from Mr. Welcome Wilson, Ad-
ministrator of region 5 of the Federal
Civil Defense Administration. The let-
ter is detailed, and I shall not read all
of it. It is necessarily an incomplete
report of damage suffered by Texans in
the recent disastrous series of floods.
Included are estimates from PCDA, the
Corps of Engineers, the United States
Bureau of Public Roads, the Small Busi-
ness Administration, the American Red
Cross, and agencies of the State of Texas.
Included also are estimates of the cost
of temporary repairs to public facilities.

It is an appaUing picture of damage
and disaster, much of which could have
been prevented by construction of proper
flood control facilities. More than half
this damage could have been prevented
by flood control facilities already au-
thorized but still unconstructed.

The moral is plain: Flood control
construction pays for itself in some
areas in 1 year.

We have had in the State a total dam-
age of over $150 million. The tabula-
tion shows temporary repairs to the
extent of $930,000, to public buildings
and structures alone.

The loss in livestock is itemized by
counties and by number.

The tabulation also shews that with
respect to crops and livestock alone we
have suffered damage by more than $27
million.

There is also shown the number of
people killed and injured; as well as the
number of homes destroyed and dam-
aged. Those losses are all enumerated.
More than 9,000 families and more than
36,224 people have been affected. A
number in excess of 8,000 have received
mass care. Thousands have been in-
jured.

I shall not go Into detail but I ask that
the report in its entirety be printed in
the Record at this point.

r.'

m

.1,
it'i

*Mi

'Hill

•*»

8%0

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

There being no objection, the report
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

Fu>nL\L Cnm. Detcnsx Admikist»attok.

Dkmtoi* RnuoitAL Omc«.
i)c7ito«. Tex , June S, 19i7.
Hon Ralph T4KBo«oncH.
Senate Ofjice Building.

Washington, D C.
Dkak SntATOR Yarborough We have as-
sembled preliminary co«t estimates together
with damage estimatea developed by State
and Federal agencies as a result of the recent
and ctirreut disaster conditions In the State
of Texas. These estimates are divided Into
the follcwlnt; categurles ili estimates of cost
oi temporary repair to public facilities eii^jl-
bl8 under Public Law 875, (2» aKricultural
damages. i3) summary reptirt by the Uiuttcl
Spates Bureau of Public Roads: |4l Small
Biislness Administration. (5i Corps uf E2:i^l-
iieers summary, (6) Americua Red Croas,

I
T am listing below estimates by counties
of cost of temporary repair to public facilities
eiiijlble f )r reimbursement under Public Law
ti75. 81st C<ingress. which have been .surveyed
t.) date These estimates cani.ut be i- :l^;d-
ered complete for the followlnt? reasons

1 All applications requesting assistance
have not been received at thU time.

2 Our regional Inspectnns on damit?p con-
ditions not directly pertaining to prut^ctlon
c r life or heaith hazards have not been ac-
compllEhed.

3 Contlniilr.sj heavy r^lr.s causing addi-
tional d.image make It lmf>o«slb!e to make
requested se<"r.d lr..spei-f:> lis.

For convenience nf sf idy, public facilities
estimates have been dlvldetl as follows

1 Health and sap.it.ii: in (ln<'ludes vector
control, m.vs.'* lmmur.l/ntl(jn. deron'amina-
tton of private w.-^ti-r w-'ila. repair of public
w Iter aiid sewer s\ stems aiid dehrLi clear-
ance!

2 Road.'< and bridges (Includes c-unty-
( '.vi;ed and maintained roads and brUl.-es and
city street.'' and bridges Roads nnd bridges
in the Federal Aid System of course are not
eligible fin- assistance under Pvibllc Law 875).

J P:-event;'.e cnstructlon iinrludes pre-
ventive construction on levees and river em-
banltmerits to prevent further danisge tj
publl.- and prtvnte pri f>ertv>

4 Schools and public buildings:

r.Ai:.:-y

Itraithl Rim-U

Pr. le<^

tl. f .-. ti
kiruL-tluQ

1

M-tHXlljl

> .1

J" . ^ t r

Veil

(11.333 'tLTS. 103.74

1 .'iir

1 ru,,rm

l.^L^I*

1' iriM-l

1 ilfKinn

Xtm

ijn

1. A J

ucmjo

«2i.mo.oo

. *-■•>.■««

( Iltn-

1 ■•uri"..'irli«'

33. Ma OS

—

mm 10

1 "ili.iS

1 'It U.-!ld

1 •'••»?

llsniiltiin ..

-•-

County

Crop '.smaifc

I,lv.-st,irk ,1

ilTUie

ArTi«9 .Am-Hint

A ntlcrwin . . . -

Au;;i'liii.i ...

A'l-'.ti

M*niliT» —

II,., _

H,. 4111-11. .......

H ••'•I'le

li 'WW...

JI-ui.lS

li-own

Hurteson

Hui-mt

(■ iMwi-i!

( lihoiin

< iini'mu

flier'k.--'

( ojeniaii

>liin

i|i'r;»«lo

inianc'ie

■• ».■

r\''U

tt|.>

rorkett. . ....

llii.Ut

I lofilt-y

Kl«n

i..< —

ir' Bend

-••"If one.

ollail

otiz ile.s

!• u ^itn

'<•!{«

«). UU)

hi. \A*i

I" n

li. MH\

I 'Km

7. 7V)

\ At)

2.^, iMi !

i.'v

mi

1. OKI

1...

M

4.

mMi

i-i.

iim

1,

J,I)HI

a*)
Mm

4".

'Hill
mil
«)

I .i|,nl.».II|i«?

li l^lll^l>n

I ' «r'|i"'inUl

I'irl.:i

li ir'-i^

Il.':i.lrrsi>ii

Hill

1!k»!

lioi'kms

Haii.sloa

ll'in-

Irj>n

J Ilk

J u-K 111

J"'!!*

K irii»»

K lufrriin

KeniUil

2. 'tm
2, Hi)

I. urn

111 're

s. f r

h'. inJii

3ti, iUKi

I5.HX1

r\<"»i

i,lXXI

VK>

,N1. '»»'

i,:»*i

l,ni»)

IU.U)»

i\rnt

*1. 'WKl

i.iiit)

2,(KKt

4. in*

2, lUU

1:3, IXX)

MO

l.iii. imi

IJ" 'H)<>

*, 137

1. ili ■*»>

i *'. K»1i

IS .%*<

3", ->i

lllll. llHi

1 mill

1. v»\ m»i

■'*'' . • "
V- iw'ii

10. 'KM I
l>, JIAJ
1"

75i«lfl
414. Him

i:\ '<!
.1. i«>i
I. i»m

s<tj. ,<j<

M>l\ '««i

Vil,i«»l

litH . iDII'

41M. n»
ji. mo
i.i. mill

4_ i»M

:v imi

I *i. i»H

IV. '•»>>

.|«ill. <X«)
Jim. lini

;-. '11^

2, *»'

l'«i. iX)ll

4.:. .nil

2,111, mm

ZW. nni

240, J>*i

3i.O, 'inii

il

10. IK <J

31 •»i(\

Kn on)

ITViiOC
lJi,UiiO

1. <!:

' L'likniiwu.

• Im'iirtiv »•"! i;vr> 7>a.»tnr<ia.
' I-ii«i from Nv( i-iuili'.

• 'A il.llilr invi.

• l'.i^.ari' Jam.m' :.,) y.'^OC ir---^.

Vnnit'«r
bea<l

l

1-'.
»)
7S
lUu
I)
A)
II

II
I

II
U

0

«)

II

IS'l

II

ti

5i»i

41'

J"

II

II

V

111
u

l.mo

44^1
1.1

11

:«ii I
1.^1 !

U<i

4.-111

1)

II

Amount

10, mill

II i.V)

Olht-r I

C'lyiiniy

k.n rv

I

%IWII
0

vn
1 ^w

0
aoft

0
tt

41 3S0

0

1. Jim

n

0

n
U

II

' ll-i'.

0

0
znno

1, IXK)
0

3.000

23. 2Sn

I) !

t'.nao i
1. M> I

7. IXK)
0 I
0

7 SN) I

K'nt I

111. mjo

\ .wi

I.VO«)ii

0

u

fl

riTo

I, IWH'

• 101^ Olio

• 130, 1)1)0

L.t -wul<;

Uiracm

l^

\m»i

limenoDe .

Mr [.^-ciuui

\f ;.' .,j; "

M -^ '"."'.'."

Matairorda. ...III"""II

\< iu"

Mo'iV-ii-':'- ...........

Vli-M.rfocni-ry.. ......

Mor'iH

iNi»<inr l"<-fie« . .. .

.\»v.ir:ij .

.S'evtoQ

%>?•■»>•■« .. .......

Priln IMato. _IIIII.1II1II

HahoU

Pu^k'r.._

V--i<A ...^

r-ik

Kvliw

Tlii'.i'an .... .._

Kt-HWIO , ,

l.-l.rUxJ* I.Il

K .^k

~>«h<ne .

-'niith I".IIII™

SomerwU

Twrant

T»>lor

Torn Often-

Trtmiy

TvliT

r{»}uir

T'pt'WI

V\n Zandt--.. ._..

V irtoria

M 1 k.r

w 'I!'" .""""""!

W »«h'i»-t->n

W hiirti n „I„

V* (li«i;i*>u .

Wi«

W-Nl

> ' iin«

Zavitla

T t.tl, 1 J ^I'u:.;., 3

County

1I(i.kI ..
1 1 uusiun .

I UD

I 'im

linn^^lone .
M ill wurhi .
Ml UiiiLUi.
M:liim
1 Ai I'lnUi..
1 wk-T

^..IT-TM"!! ..

1 irnuit

\'> i4li.M:ijuik.

and I and !

M:-.:r i t>r..l4;, s
l.iili I ,

I

1. «» 10. T^ no

Jii. /JJ ki

I'l, 'III! in

jn >i-?3 i«

I Nl. lU) UO

Il.\:i4 iW

t. i-di 17
I', «'. ' .*•.'

1. ?K fr
6.i<vi w.;

1. v-i> l«'

tin- "on ami

•trill ti^n [iiitilic

1 1 ulklines

S3, 'Vji
I. .wn

r. 7.-7

9 M4

1. ••'■l

My
Kv:;

2S 4»

JIK4II

:< ii-'

j

'

(

1

\rnng I i9iH ;.

Tol.J 2J7,:W J837.P?' «I '3.819.17 I ». 4«3 10

Heiilth and sanlt.itlon

P. lads and bridges

I'ritectUe constr\irtlon _.

t>ch»x)ls and public buildings

$237 795 00

637 020 fll

2n fll9 17

2U 493 lU

Orand total.
Round off...

... 937 927 M

... 930 000 00

u

F ill.wlrig Is a llr'l-'.g of agrtculturi 1 dam-
ages by counties ctimplled by the Agricul-
tural Extension Service, Texas A and M. Col-
lege, from questionnaires sent to county
agriculture agenu 1 hese are es.tmatea
fr ;in the agent with advlcs from local
p<MpIe

< roll ilamsire

.* T. i

\in<i';nt

I.lTrsUK'k (laniitre

jno

4, Kill

imx)

l.it*J

|i>i. '»<><

I. JHI

M.i*»i

4 4.'ii'

lUi, i««.

Xll

20 nm

.1 vm

|i«' I

3, i>ii

III ;vi 1
I,'"'" I

:. 100 I
:, n I

,'UI|I
R. till I

1: M)

I'-l

1 yr

I. OOP

riti
30 iirti

li! i^«i

in nil
I <i

4. III!

mi
hn)

3, mi

u

rr mi

l.t i»»

I i)<
lu I'm
1.' "I
10 rrr\
.«< 'Ill
Ml. laai

I. '••!

3,ni»)
1:5

♦4;.

r

'•/. III!

(k'. ilai

\H' (Tr<

I >•• '••

U V4I

1. ''< . **

! "I i«W

.' « ■ i

H. lAII

,V,' It I

»«i ni«>
Aj ia>i

111. M,

1. ¥C int

i ' ' ««

l\ (»«)
liai. <<i

;v' iii»'

r> >■<<

1'. nil lid

ii>i. iiiii

.1. III!

'4- (Tl'

HVI (111

Xi Kil

^ III)

ri' I.
:i.', '<!

I •>. f»«)

■JI-. 'H

?• "r»'

.' nr

J ■•

1. ?nn, nil

.V i«|i

'I' ii«i

!»»• i««i
7<i '»«

an (<<«i

.'«i, I M

IMT. nnn

40,(111

iimlrr

\mi iiiit

L.'U

.

1

!' <

J". iA«i ;

II

ol

1

0

TV

1 <fX)

U

S. in 10

.Vi

a. 7J0

1.1

14 i>4ii

.1—

3, irt)

II

11

ci'.cr

•|ju.auj

" I

u

II

,0(11
A
fl

'I. M7, 744 I >&,U^446

II

•'

1.1

3, UlAJ

n

0

'4 * 1

iVOOO

fl

0

I'-i

ZSlW

1 ■'

IKUU

!■«'

i"i»)

:*)"

4.'*)"

0

0

n

n

jii>

7.tni

r;

rjo

r

11 '

srii

z.\n) 1

11

II

4

4'li

I J

nil

11

0

('

0

1,

:j .i.1'

II

M

0

Un 1

HI. Ill

.^' 1

J. ill

-11

IJ ion

.VI

.^ nm 1

'' 1

I. wi

1.

(1

Vi 1

• TO

S..' 1

:i' :'<!

ami

ail. 1)00

i.>

i.'.«i

s

vw

0

0

'Bi<,m»

41' !.(•■

II.UXu I &M''li

I

;«>i,uuu

• Psmup r

• luini-ys wnt 3i,i)0«1).

Ni^ -Tnml m-wiey loss, B7.2Se.Ml.

lor

'01

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8961

nx

The estimates presented by the United
States Bureau of Public Roads have been
Incorporated In the public facilities damages
li.cttd under I However, these figures do
not Include the second and most recent flood
conditions To date, the Bureau of Public
Ko'ads e^tlmate8 that they have spent £2,500
for salsrirs, orertlme, and tmvel of engineers.
There is no Indication at this time what,
1! an v. requests will be made to the Bureau
if Public Roads for assistance and debris
cieariincp, tcniixjrary repair, and restoration
t f roa^i and bridges eligible under the Fed-
tr.il road program.

rv

Of the 29 counties tliat have been de-
fl:ired dl.saster counties by the Small Busi-
ness Administration for the reason of flood
hnd <»r ti.rnadoes. nppllcutlons have been re-
ceived from the following 7 counties:

('otinty

•ul*r i>;

llf-ltt'lll«

.^mmnit

«■

H<vl

Tirn::; _ __

IHIU*

1i>ni 1 ireen

■1 .-l..!

4

:i

4
I
I

J14, '.Vl

iir.,!, Vi\
l:»vMai

h (III

li.':.!!!TI

l.i'nw.lon*

MclAJiii.Ln

4>> lilll
I.'KI
:i 7.VI

• cviiiiiUan

jui>, y^

In addition to the loan of several spe-
clallite, the Corps of Engineers has approxl-
n^.,'»tely $70,000 uhlch they are using In con-
nection with making aerial surveys, post
flwod surveys and estimates, and operating
flood-cuntrijl reservoirs on an emergency
basl.s They are requesting 125,000 for mar-
ine emergency levee repairs on the Ea»t
pork and Middle Trinity River Basin As
these repairs are made, they wUl be in a
p :;'.; Ill ill state value of services rendered by
coui.ty breakdown.

VI

The American Red Cross statUtlcal report

•hows tlie following :

Counties

notni>»

Kiltfl

Ii,i.«tro;i

IWU

Brifir

Hraniria

Itrisn«'

Jl-i.uiM

Jl-inirtt ...
I II. ri,k...<....
(

1 I .- ■'.".'.'.
( riwl.y

1 XHIM V

»,.-•.,:;.■
Fort li€ud..

<if<«t

llii:.ilUin...

Hill

Hunt ..

I.L..^

l-.-^'t'

I,^m(M.>i»s

iJf-cny

Lynn

Mrljrnnan..

Miir;i:i

XWliu'orili.
N «>>rilfRli«i
I'armiT

r.Uii riiiu...

Tarkr-r

Smith

7 .irrant

Tarlor

Tom (ireenc.

TrHv»

f'ti^hur

\ HI /.uult..

Virtnrm

^^ II liiU.
^^ lllmrnnrHi.
ViKing

junil

(1

!>

3

i

P

\u

0

1

311

4t>

n

0

(

(1

ii

(1

1

K

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

0

(1

(1

0

1

n

h

0

0

0

!l

0

I*.

(1

1.^

u

u

n

n

(1

9

0

0

0

(1

11

(1

(1

0

ii

1

1

0

0

A

1

1

0

4

0

0

u

U

n

0

0

0

11

1(1

n

n

0

,«,

(1

u

De- j Minor .Maiof
itntyvd j fl»m- • flam-
age ttge

M

0
A
30
(J
0
1

u

2

30

»

1
0

tl

0

1

0

0

r

38
U

10
0
6
0
(I
I
.-?
2

IS
0

(I
1

0
0
0
0
0

1

0

h

r.-n

ar

an

■n

ai
12

441
12

311

(I

h

10

10

,•1
7!>
a>

4
33A

15

100

31M1

r>

2i
h

20

2.'>

KKl

40

4.T1

17»l

li".

4

1

aou

19

•0

6

S

131

0

aori

IH

0
0
0
2
1

11
u
n
0
0
0
«
0
1

40

U
10

1.^

4

0
1
6
2

8

g

i.s

10

1

3
1
5
1

10
11

' Enlmli li,ri;:ir;,)

cm 5C4

The number of persons evacuated cannot
be determined at this time. We know that
9,056 families have been affected; 36,224
people affected: 8.080 people received mass
care. In the hardest hit areas between 7,000
and 10,000 people have been evacuated from
1 to 4 times due to additional flooding in the
same areas. The American Red Cross has
received better than 37,038 applications for
rehabilitation of homes, furniture, food,
clothing and medical care.

VII

We have had extensive help from the mil-
itary as well as many other major agencies,
but at the present time, no estimate of
expenses or charges from the military or
other agencies can be made for use of heli-
copters, planes, equipment, and personnel.

Please bear in mind that these estimates
are certainly Initial or preliminary estimates
In the purest sense. There are many areas
In the State that are still submerged by flood
waters and other areas In which resurveys
will be necessary, and most of all, conditions
have changed very little for the better.
There are areas In the State that received
5 Inches of rain Tuesday, June 4.

As we can provide more detailed and com-
plete reports, we will be glad to furnish them
to you.

Sincerely,

WixcoME W. Wilson,
Regional Administrator.

SUGGESTION OP PRESIDENT EISEN-
HOWER TO TURN POST OFFICE
OVER TO BUSINESS

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President. I
was greatly disturbed to learn that the
President of the United States, on June
12. suggested to a group of Congressmen
cf his own political party that the Post
Oflace Department might be turned over
to private business for operation.

I am alarmed by this report because.
In my opinion, any such pohcy would
mean the early end of the system of
rural free delivery which has been such
a boon and blessing to the farm popula-
tion of our country. Let me explain
what I mean.

It Is obvious that It costs infinitely
more to deliver a letter in sparsely set-
tled rural areas than in crowded cities.
Yet, under our United States Post Of-
fice Department, a standard rate for
first-class letters prevails everywhere in
the land. It costs me 3 cents to send a
personal letter a few bkxiks to downtown
Washington from the Senate Office
Building. It likewise costs me 3 cents to
send that same letter 3,000 miles to a
friend of mine at the remote end of the
rural route out of Imnaha. Oreg.. in the
granite heart of the great Wallowa
Mountains.

This kind of policy h£is made it pos-
sible for men and women to go into the
American hinterland and to build it up,
and yet still to maintain economical and
frequent contact with their friends and
business outlets elsewhere In the land.
But, under a private -business system,
would such a system continue? Busi-
ness Is predicated mainly on a profit.
Telephone rates, for example, rise for
every few miles of distance added to a
long-distance call, I do not criticize the
telephone company for that. It Is not a
charitable or service Institution; it Is a
business operated for profit.

But I wonder what would happen to
the families in the most farflung and
i^jolated realms of the United States,
geographically, if the Post Office De-
partment is detached from our Govern-
ment and operated under the same rules
as private business? I trust President
Eisenhower has not ventured his latest
proposal seriously. As a member of the
Eienate Committee on Post Office and
Civil Service. I urge him to make it clear
that his recommendation was intended
in jest and not &s a serious advocacy
from the White House.

After all. Mr. President, our Post Of-
fice Department has been conducted as
a governmental function under such il-
lustrious Chief Executives as Thomas
Jefferson. Andrew Jackson, Abraham
Lincoln. Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow
Wilson, and Franklin D. Roosevelt — and
I think they qualify as citizens who have
liad the welfare of this coimtry at heart.

DEFENSE PLANNING— MORE "ALICE-
IN-WONDERLAND'

Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, at
the present time the Secretary of De-
fense is considering the May 31 letter
of protest written to him by the Secre-
tary of the Air Force, presenting the
shocking impact that Defense Depart-
ment Directive 7200.4, issued as of May
31, would have on the program of air-
ix)wer promised the American people by
the President.

Unless this directive is revised
promptly it may well result In reduc-
ing and stretching out this program as
follows:

Elimination of orders for the F-106
fighter, the advanced all-weather inter-
ceptor.

Reduction of about 200 in the orders
placed for the F-104 day fighter.

Reduction of more than 100 F-IOIB
McDonnell all-weather interceptor
fighters.

These three aircraft were planned as
the main defense aircraft for the con-
tinental United States.

A cutback in orders for the F-105
interceptor fighter-
Elimination of one wing of C-130
tactical air transports. This of course
further reduces the modernity of the
Army.

Elimination of orders during the fiscal
1958 for any B-58's, the new supersonic
bomber which is twice sis fast as any
other bomber produced in the free world.

Production slowup of the KC-135 jet
tanker used to refuel the B-47 and B-62
bombers. The shortage of this plane is
already acknowledged to be a serious
matter.

Cancellation of the Snark interconti-
nental winged missile.

Cancellation of the Navaho ramjet
intercontinental missile.

Cancellation of the Matador tactical
winged surface-to-surface missile.

Cancellation of the Rascal air-to-
ground missile, plus its newer version
with greater range.

Cancellation of the Falcon alr-to-alr
missile.

The Department of Defense has ad-
mitted that no analysis of what this

li0'^'

8962

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

l!'i

\i

Ni

!

directive would actually do to the pro-
gram was made before it was issued.

Again we ask therefore — does the
President support his own telecasted
recommendation to the American people
to raise Air F\)rce funds over $600 mil-
lion— or does he support this directive
of the Department of Defense to reduce
Air Force funds over $4 billion.

Congress and the people have the
right to know — what does the President
want?

TWENTIETH ANNIVERSARY OP THE
POUNDING OP THE AMERICAN
GUILD OF MUSICAL ARTISTS

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, la.st
evening I had the honor of speaking at
the 20th anniversary dinner of the
American Guild of Musical Artists,
which is comprised of some of the most
distinguished singers and instrumental-
isti of our time in the classical music
field. I also had the honor of bringing
to the dinner the greetings of the Presi-
dent of the United Siates.

I ask unarumous consent to have
printed in the Record, as a part of my re-
marics. the address delivered by Mr.
Lawrence Tibb€tt. the honorary presi-
dent of AGMA, detailing the distin-
guished 20-year history of this organi-
zation.

There being no objection, th? address
was dfdered to be printed in the Rec-
ord, as follows:
Spekch DELrvERED ON 20th Annivcksart or

Pou^fDING or AGMA at Roos.':vyiT Hotel,

Junk 12, 1957. by Lawrence Tibbett

In the beginning oT most every organiza-
tion some one Individual Is very often
spoken of as beina; the pioneer or the Insti-
gator of that organization. Usnally I will
find upon close and honest scrutiny of the
process of organization of any movement In-
vclvlnic many people of similar intcrest.s —
that Us the result of many minds converRlnsj;
Bimuitaneouslv upon a given idea and surely
no movement can come to full fruition until
this Is so.

Twenty years ago there was nothing novel
In the idea of this guild at all and most ob-
viously nothing new in the Idea of people
In related fields of worlc banding together
to acquire voice, and achieve a balance of
negotiating power between the employer and
the emplovee. When. 22 years, ago I saw
the Immediate necessity of forming a pro-
tective, bargaining and negotiating organi-
zation for performing artists In the classic
music fields, I vainly thought that I was the
first among performing musicians In this
country, past or present, to give birth Ki this
brain child. But my pride of authorship
was soon deflated. When I approached
Jascha Helfetz and Frank Chapman and
Richard BonelU about It they said that they
t*x) had seen the inevitability of a guild and
v.ere on the point of enlisting my aid. Al.so
I r>'und out tnat four of the most illustrious
singers of their time and whom I knew had
tried to organize opera and concert artists
about 35 years ago. Those artists were
Lurrezla B< rl .Mma Gluck, Edward Johnson,
and John McCormack and probably many
more pioneers of whom I know nothing.
Anyway, the four before-mentioned artists
were real pioneers; were working alone, be-
fore others had become fully conscious of
the need for organization. Also I should
mention that as early as 1864 various groups
cf performing artists had achieved protec-
tive orgaiiizatlon in several European coun-
tries.

Now let me briefly give you some facts
und significant milestones in our ao-year
history — really 21 years. In February 1938 I
called a meeting In my home of artists of
promlr'.ence to pass upon and or amend %
tentative constitution and bylaws, and to
plan a second larger meeting of atxjut 40 of
the greatest musical Interpreters In our coun-
try The purpose of this second meeting
was to rai.ae funds and to discuss the work-
ability of our prop«)sed constitution.
Twenty-one artists — all celebrated names —
came to my apartment We passed f.ivorably
\ipon constitution and bylaws and each ima
of the Jl subscribed $.J0O to help organize.
We elected a temporary btiard. set a date — •
.April 17. 1936 — for a general meeting and se-
lected Henry Jaffe as our counsel. Those -l
artists we now call our founding fathers and
yesterday we specially honored tho«« remain-
ing alive At the first general meeting we
enrolled about 200 new members and not long
lifter that we applied for and received a sub.
charter from the AsstX'iated Actors and
Artistes of America, which is our parent body
in the American Federatum of Latxjr.

Then not long after came our first and
txlay still our most important single em-
ployer agreement — the Metropolitan Opera
Co agreement with AGMA. That contract
was not all we wanted ni^r felt we deserved,
but It w.\s the most powerful step we have
ever taken In our advance to our present
status — we now cover practically the whole
l;e!-1 of our defined Jurisdictlon.s.

W,' h.ive here l*)ni^ht official representa-
t.ves of the po?.er'ul .\F of M and I cannot
let this opportunity pas'! without acknuwl-
edging our debt to the .AF of M and its then
great president Joe Weber When we were at
an impasiie w.th the Metropolitan and a
strik? seemed certain and a victory less ht\
J JK Weber Intervened on our bchaif and we
^■>t the a'.;reement

For the next 12 to l.j years AGMA went
on to many victories many defeats atid many
delay.s In those early years of .^GM.A's ex-
l.^ter.ce b<ith employer and employee often
I'joked u^xm one another as enemies bent
upon vengeful destruction. But now I can
safely say that so-culled opponents and pro-
ponents In our various .struggles In these
last 20 years n iw reall/e that b'th sides are
bisically Interdependent We i-.U kn 'w that
m most nesjotiatlons sharp di:Ieren'-es of
opinion exist We all know that abuje of
power made lan: ir.s a necessity We also
know that often when power Is achieved In
labor unions fhat they also often abuse that
power Alas, these characteristics arc all t^,o
human

Now let me say that tn my knowledge. In
the whole lab<ir movement. In no union has
the power of government remained more
firmly In the hands of the working members
themselves than in AGM.\. Our paid execu-
tives and administrators could never be
c;a5.sed as unloners. Mistakes we have
made — but they were made In the firm and
honest belief that we were doing the best
thing for the whole profession.

I must say In closing that nothing tn my
lifetime h.is given me greater satisfaction
than to see my labors on behalf of the wel-
fare of my colleagues come to happy fruition
In our 20-year-old brain child— AGMA.

THE IMPORTANCE OP AMERICAN
FOUNDATIONS

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, one of the
very interesting recent phenomena on
the American scene has been the tre-
mendous growth of private foundations,
designed to foster constructive activities
in virtually all walks of life.

The private philanthropic spirit — the
voluntary zeal to finance worthy public
Ruali — has long been a characteristic of

our countrymen, from men of great
wealth to men of humble mean.s.
Through foundations, that philan-
thropic spirit Is encouraged, channeled,
and facilitated.

If one were to review progress In
America during the past decad'? — scien-
tific progress, cultural. educatl(>nal, and
ether progress — one could hardly write
a history of such progress without re-
cording the Impressive service rendered
by innumerable foundations

In this weeks Time magazine Is a most
interesting article on the varied work of
the great Ford Foundation. It Is, as we
know, now under the able presidency of
Dr. Henry Heald. a former preiident of
the Armour Institute, and a former
chancellor of New York Univenlty. He
is the well-qualified Individual now re-
spcrxsible for the administration of the
Nation's largest foundation, with some
$2 7 billions in resources. I feel that Dr.
Heald and his a-ssociates have a \ery deep
sen.se of the broad responsibility and
trusteeship which i.s theirs.

Other great foundations also bear the
illustrious names and resp>onslbillties of
pioneers of American free enterprise —
Carnegie. Rockefeller, and s.) forth.
These men accumulated vast wealth.
But. contrary to Communist lifs, these
men recognized their deep social respon-
Mbiiity to use that wealth for the public
j'ood. The Rockefeller Founda.on. the
Carne£;ie Foundation, and othe:" famed
organizations bear the .'-tamp of the
t:reatness of their founders end the
greatness of the foundations' contribu-
tions to America.

Men may, and do. honestly cifTer on
this or that particular allocation by the
Frrd or other foundation.s. But as Dr.
Heald points out, in the Time a "tide on
this week's new.sstands. "the wh( le func-
tion of a foundation is to discriminate,
to pioneer, to show by example, to be
prudent, but not afraid, to be li.sky but
not foolhardy, to explain fully. It
has," he pointed nut, "the moral respon-
sibility to be Kreat "

A.S all of us are well aware, part of the
responsibility of all foundations derives
from the tax exemption they enjoy. In
this age of high taxes burdening 160 mil-
lion American.":, a tax exemption is a
matter of deep significance to all.

I noted with deep interest, tliercfore.
an editorial in this morning's New York
Times which points out striking findings
in the first annual report of the Founda-
tion Library Center. This Is a most
valuable organization designe<l as an
assembly point for long-needed informa-
tion concerning foundations. The Times
editorial stres.ses a phase with which I
believe every thinking American will
agree. It Is this: All foundations owe
the pubhc a responsibility for full dis-
closure— not just bare statistics, but lull
description — of the way in which tax-
exempt funds are utilized. 'Virtually all
of the great foundations, of course, dis-
charge that disclosure responsibility.
Some do not. Some foundations have
not fulfilled their accountability.

The occasional malfunctioning of some
foundation should not result In tarnish-
ing the good name of all foundations.
We in America believe that when the

195:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8963

lieht of full public knowledge and under-
standing Is brought to bear on all the
foundations In this land, there will be less
of a tendency for tax-exemption privi-
U'lres to be occasionally misused.

I send to the desk the text of the Times
editorial, and ask unanimous consent
that it be printed at this point in the
body of the Record.

There being no objection, the editorial
u as ordered to be printed in the Recokd.
as follows :
I From the New York Timet of June 13. 1957)

FOUVDATTOM RePOKTINO

American foundatlonB control h pool of
funds worth some %1 2 billion, out of which
they gave away about $600 million In 1956.
Gifts to them enjoy tax deductibility by the
donors and the income from their invest-
meiits Is given tax exemption by Federal
and Slate laws. But considering the vast
power of foundations and the exceptional
privileges they and their supporters enjoy,
t:,e public knows far too little about most
cl them.

Striking evidence of thl« la found In the
first annual report of the Foundation Li-
brary Center, which was set up last year to
help fill the void. A nonprofit educational
agency- Initially supported by the Carnegie
Corp and dlrect«l by P. Emerson Andrews —
thf center is a rei)osltory of all available
fxcts about foundations which it makes
freely open to all those who need to use
them.

This first report gives some reasons for
t!.e public's Ignorance — for which the foun-
dations and Government are In part respon-
sible M.my foundation reports are models
of what they should be, especially those of
the lareest ones Btit of the 84 foundations
with a.ssets over $10 million, only 44 Issue
rmy aiinusl or biennial reports at all. Of
the 659 with assets of tl million to »10 mil-
lion, only 22 make such reports, and but 11
out of the 4.000 with assets under a million.

Government Is also remiss. Compulsory
periodic public reporting to State agencies
h:ird!y exists at all— not even in New York.
All lax-exempt foundations must file annual
fl;;:iii( lal statements with the Federal Inter-
n;il Revenue Service. Tliese may be exam-
ined by the public at Its dlsUlct ofBcee —
fxcept for donations received, which are
kept secret. But the reports are largely
st:it:stlcal and far less revealing than they
i-ho lid be. eepeclally as to details of grants
and the purposes for which they are made.

Full disclosure — through Government
agencies and their own published annual
reports — is sound policy for all foundations,
B<.ith their Importance In our national life
and the privileges they enjoy require It.

SALARY AND EXPENSE ALLOWANCES
OP ALBERT P. HARTUNG. PRESI-
DENT OP WOODWORKERS UNION

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, the
di.stin^'uished senior Senator from New
Hampshire I Mr Bridges! recently made
Public a list of the salaries and years in
office of American labor leaders, which
I am told was prepared by the staff of
the Senate Republican policy committee,
of which the Senator is chairman.

I have now been sent a copy of a letter
from Mr, William Botkin, international
secretary-treasurer of the International
Woodworkers of America, which offers a
correction of the report on this list by
the international president of that union.
Mr. Albert F. Hartung. Mr. Hartung's
salary is not $14,785.13. as reported, but
the more modest amount of $9,100, or

about $175 a week, according to Mr. Bot-
kin. The remaining sums represent the
costs of Mr. Hartung's necessary travels
on behalf of his international union.

Mr. President, I mention this matter
because the headquarters of the union
in question, the International Wood-
workers of America, is in Portland, Oreg.,
near the vast forests from which most of
its members win their livelihood, and be-
cause I am well acquainted with Presi-
dent Hartung of the woodworkers, who
is typical of the best of American trade-
union leadership.

I ask unanimous consent to have this
letter of correction printed in the Cow-

CRESSIONAL RECORD.

There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

INTOINATIONAL WOODWOIKERS

or America,
Poriland, Oreg., June 6, 1957.
Hon. Sttucs Biioces,

United States Senate Building.
WasKtngton, D. C.

Dfai Senator Bridges: I have before me
a copy of the Dally Labor Rejxjrt. Special
Supplement No. 15. entitled "Salaries and
Years In Office of American Labor Leaders."
a report of the Senate Republican policy
committee staff, dated May 1957 (official
text).

In the text of your statement you make
the comment that "the salary figures are not
derived from any Investigation by either
lawyers or accountants, but are rather figures
furnished by the Unions themselves." It Is
quite obvious that you gathered this finan-
cial Information from the forms filed with
the Department of Labor and It should be
noted on this form that It requests listing
the aggregate compensation and allowances
exceeding $5,000 during the preceding year of
the Individual union's three principal officers.

Our organization, the International Wood-
workers of America, not only list the three
principal officers, but we list all employees
of our organization who receive an aggre-
gate compensation and allowances exceeding
the tS.OOO figure.

I note, however, that in listing the name of
our organization, the International Wood-
workers of Amrelca. under the column listed
as salary for our International president. Mr.
A. F. Hartung. you have the figure $14,785.13.
Now the form filed with the Department of
Labor does not request the filing of the sal-
ary only of the three principal of&cers of a
labor organization. To the contrary, it re-
quests the aggregate compeiusatlon and al-
lowances paid. I have filed the informa-
tion requested and so stated on the form
by the Department of Labor and in the case
of A. F. Hartung. president of the Interna-
tional Woodworkers of America, while you
state in your compilation that his salary
was $14,785.13, the truth of the matter, and
as filed on the form with the Department of
Labor, this was his salary and In addition, his
total expenses for the year. In other words.
Mr. Hartung drew a total salary of $9,100,
which Is based on a rate of $175 per week.

In addition his expenses were paid of
$5,685.13, which made a total of $14,785.13.
The expenses of $5,685.13 represents plane,
train, and lease automobile expense, a per
diem of $8 pier day for meals and Incidentals
when away from his International headquar-
ters, telephone, and telegraph expense.

I am therefore requesting that you make
a correction to show the true salary paid to
our International president, Mr. A. F. Har-
tung, which Is $9,100 per year.

Thanking you for your assistance. I am
Sincerely yours,

William Botkin.
International Secretary -Treasurer.

Mr, NEUBERGER. In conclusion,
we all hope for the early recovery of
the Senator from New Hampshire fol-
lowing his hospital confinement.

SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON
DISARMAMENT

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, in
the June 1. 1957, issue of the Washing-
ton Post and Times Herald there ap-
peared an editorial entitled "Keep It
Going." This editorial referred to the
work of the Senate Subcommittee on
Disarmament, of which the Senator
from Minnesota [Mr. HmcHREYl has
had the privilege of being chairman dur-
ing the past 18 months.

I ask imanimous consent that this edi-
torial be printed at this point in the
Record.

There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the Record.
as follows:

Keep It Goino

On June 30 the Senate Subcommittee on
Disarmament Is scheduled to go out of ex-
istence unless its life is prolonged. We
think that In one form or another the work
of the subcommittee ought to be continued.
Since Its creation nearly 2 years ago. the
subcommittee under the chairmanship of
Senator Hubert Humphrey has conducted
extensive hearings and published some ex-
tremely useful studies in the general area
of arms control. It has been valuable In
broadening the knowledge of Its members
in both parties. The cost has been insig-
nificant, and the subcommittee's contribu-
tions to greater understanding of the issues
ought to be maintained, especially In view
of the hopes for some sort of limited agree-
ment with the Russians.

The simplest course would be to extend
the subcommittee as an offspring of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee. If,
however, the Foreign Relations Committee is
reluctant to continue a standing subcom-
mittee, It might be possible to reconstitute
the body as a special committee of the Sen-
ate. Notwithstanding the emphasis in the
LaFoIlette-Monroney Act on avoidance of
special committees, the disarmament unit
already has more or less this status since It
cuts across committee lines. It is composed
of members from the Foreign Relations and
Armed Services Committees as well as from
the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy.
Whatever the precise formula, the work
needs to be kept alive as a sjrmbol of the
Senate's concern with a subject that affects
every American.

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT OF 1957

The Senate resumed the considera-
tion of the bill (S. 2130) to amend fur-
ther the Mutual Security Act of 1954, as
amended, and for other purposes.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, yester-
day, several speakers representing the
majority side on the mutual-security
bill presented their points of view. It
has been suggested that I make the first
speech this morning and present some
of the minority points of view. That
I shall do. I thank the Senator from
New Jersey [Mr. Smith] for his cour-
tesy in allowing me to present these
minority views, and I understand the
Senator from New Jersey will then fol-
low with the presentation of further
majority views. Mr. President, I shall
make this speech without yielding for

!~i'

.M^

^'

8964

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

ilMi

III

i !

I '

^i\

1

any Interruption, so that my views may
be presented in continuity in the Rec-
ord, save and except for possible yield-
ing at a later time to the majority
leader for a matter not connected with
my speech.

t

BACKGROUND OF rOHZICN AID BILI.

Mr. President, the Committee on For-
eign Relations has reported S. 2130 fa-
vorably to the Senate. I voted against
this bill in committee and submit here-
with, for the consideration of the Senate,
the reasons for my opF>osition.

Le: me make clear at the outset that I
yield to no member of the committee in
my support of the concept of mutual as-
sistance amons: nations. I am not un-
aware that in the kind of world in which
we live our own safety as a nation is
closely linked with the safety of other
nations. I am not deaf to the sound of
jet bombers and missiles overhead, and
their implications for our international
relations. Nor am I blind to the dangers
to freedom implicit in the e.xpandins
power of totalitarian communism. I
realize fully that the world changes into
an ever-closer unit under the compulsion
of technolcsy. I know that these
changes have required unusual mea.^ures
of assistance to other nations and new
ties with other nations and I have sup-
ported such measures and ties many
times in the past. I shall support them
again in the future. I shall support
them, however, only when it la clear to
me that such measures are essential to
the national interest and the welfare of
the United States. I shall support them
only when they do not do violence to
the spirit of the Constitution. I shall
support them only when the are designed
and pursued in accordance with the due
processes of our system of government.

When one of these measures or ties
contributes, however, to a rising tide of
anti-Americanism throughout the
world — as foreign aid has contributed in
recent years — I believe the time has
come to pause and take stock. When
foreiKn aid degenerates into a ritual of
annual appropriations of vast simis of the
ta.xpayers" money without clear and ade-
ruate understanding or concern as to
reasons for the expenditures. It Is time
to ask. What for:> When billions of dol-
lars are used to arm and support nations
which have little sympathy with freedom,
it is time to look very closely at the course
on which we are embarked. When mili-
t uy and political aid goes to Communist
or other totahtarian countries of one
J tripe or another on the theory that we
are building alliances m defense of free-
dom, it is time to ask ourselves what kind
oi alliances'' On what side will these
allies be if the bombs begin to fall?"

When the Congress goes on year af-
ter year delegating ever-increasing au-
thority over vast sums of money to the
executive branch, it is time to ask what
is happening to constitutional processes.
What IS happening to the authority of
Congress over the Nation's purse strings?

These questions have troubled many
Members of the Senate. Read through
the debates of the past 2 or 3 years on
foreign aid. In page after page the
doubts are recited. The amount it too

high. Aid in too many Instances Is
making enemies, not friends of their peo-
ple. Congress is recklessly abdicating its
powers to the executive branch. Millions
of dollars are being wasted on arms and
other aid which may someday be turned
against us. as it was in the Chinese Com-
munist aggression in Korea.

All these doubts and others are what
has been troubling Congress in approv-
ing foreign aid in recent years. It is no
wonder that from year to year the votes
against this pohcy have been increas-
ing in both Houses of Congress.

What has been done to remedy this
situation? Last year, in an effort to
resolve the doubts, the Senate created a
Special Committee To Study the For-
eign Aid Program. That committee was
composed of all the members of the For-
eign Re'.axions Committee — including
the same members who have voted to
report S. 2130 favorably to the Senate —
and in addition the chairmen and rank-
ing minority members of the Committee
on Appropriations and the Committee on
Armed Services

The special subcommittee ■^pent almost
a year in intensive study of every aspect
of foreign aid. In the end, it brought in
a unanimous report.

I stres.s that point, Mr President The
subcommiLtee brought in a unanimous
report. Its report .set forth in detail
the weaknes>-es. the fallacies, and the
dangers which had accumulated m the
aid program. It recommended that the
aid procram be continued if — Mr. Presi-
dent— if these weaknes.ses. fallacies, and
dangers were eliminated and it outlined
a series of recommendations to bring
about the necessary changes. Its find-
inj-'s were realistic and its recommenda-
tion.s were con.structive.

The administration paid lipservice to
the work of the special committee. The
administration acknowledged the need
for most of the changes which the spe-
cial committee declared were imperative
for the continued usefulness of the aid
program. Then the administration pro-
ceeded to perpetrate a gigantic hoax on
the Senate and the people of the United
State.s. The legislation which it asked
the Congress to approve gave the ap-
pearance of reform of the aid program
in line with the special committees rec-
ommendations. In actuality, however. It
perpetuated to a large extent the same
kind of bureaucratic structure, the same
kind of sen.seless waste of millions of
dollars of taxpayei-s' money in futile and
costly activities throughout the world.
And it sought to remove even more of
the few remaining restraints and con-
trols which Congress still exercises over
this program.

The Committee on Foreign Relations
made .some improvements in the meas-
ure as It was drafted by the executive
branch. They are. in my opinion, only
superficial improvements. They do not
deal with the real problems inherent in
this legislation. They do not stop the
senseless waste of public funds on dan-
gerous programs. They do not direct
the preponderance of thLs aid into con-
structive relationships with the peoples
of other lands. They do not put an end
to the erosion of congressional controls
over the aid program.

S. 2130 was a bad bill when it was
Introduced in the Senate. It is still a
bad bill as it comes from the Committee
on Foreign Relations. The committee,
in its treatment of this legislation, has
accommodated the administration but
it has done so by ignoring in large meas-
ure the key recommendations of the
Senate's own Special Committee To
Study the Foreign Aid Program.

SPECIAL SCNATI 8TUDT ICNOBED IN THIS BILL

I digress to say. Mr. President, that
this has been a very interesting bit of
behavior on the part of the members
of the Committee on Foreign Relations.
It is an example of Senators wearing
two hats, and two coats, and of exchang-
ing them at intervals. They put on a
hat and a coat — each and every one of
them— as members of the Special Com-
mittee To Study the Foreign Aid Pro-
gram, and they wore them for 11 months
while they made the study. They came
forward with a series of very construc-
tive recommendations for the improve-
ment of the foreign-aid program.

Then they took off their hats and coats
as members of the special committee
and put on their hats and coats as mem-
bers of the Committee on Foreign Re-
lations to deal with the legislative pro-
posals, and they proceeded, with these
hats and coats on, to ignore many of
their own recommendations as members
of the special subcommittee.

I think the Committee en Foreign
Relations had a duty to the Senate either
to come forward and carry out the rec-
ommendations of the .-special study, or to
proceed to teil the Senate why those ear-
lier recommendations which they had
agreed to are not desirable. That is a
kind of Dr. Jekyll-Mr. Hyde perform-
ance which it is impossible for me to
understand in the legislative process.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield''

Mr MORSE. No. T .said at the be-
ginning of my speech that I would not
yield until I had completed it; then I
shall be happy to yield.

E.XC&SSIVK SIZE or AUTHORIZATION

In the President's budget for fiscal
year 1958 the sum of $4.4 billion was
projected for foreign aid. After a wave
of protest had spread through the United
States and the Congress at the size of
this figure, the President announced a
reduction of $500 million in the military
aid aspects of foreign aid. The conten-
tion was made before the committee that
this was a genuine reduction in foreign
aid. No administration witness, how-
ever, provided convincing testimony that
this was actually the case. I am satis-
fled, Mr. President, that it was not the
case.

The evidence suggested on the con-
trary that the administration had merely
asked for $500 million too much for
military aid in fiscal year 1957. which
it could not spend in that year. If it
were permitted to carry over that
amount, it then could do with a budg-
etary estimate $500 million less in fiscal
year 1958.

The administration did ask for the
carryover authority, and S. 2130 grants
that authority.

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8965

This administration has been seeking
to give the American people the Impres-
sion that it has reduced its military-aid
program by $500 million. I say that in
fact it has not done so. I say that In
fact all the administration did was to
engage in a little bookkeeping transfer.
The truth is that the administration
asked for $500 million too much for 1957 ;
It could not spend it. So it sought to
have that amount transferred Into 1958,
and this bill does that. The $500 mil-
lion saving is a bookkeeping transaction
made possible by extravagant budgetary
estimates in fiscal year 1957. It is not a
reduction in mihtary aid.

It is of the utmost importance that In
pre.senting to the American people our
figures about budgetary amounts we
should always be completely intellectu-
ally honest with them about what we are
doing.

The committee did make a real cut in
the total request for foreign aid. It re-
duced the measure overall by about $227
million.

I noticed that the majority leader in
his remarks earlier this morning spoke
about a saving of an amount of more
than $700 million or $800 million. But
he is including in that, of course, the
$500 million bookkeeping transaction, to
which he adds, apparently, the $227 mil-
lion saving by the committee.

I respectfully say to the Senate that
the only real saving in the bill is the
small $227 million cut which the com-
mittee made, not the alleged $500 mil-
lion reduction claimed by the adminis-
tration.

I do not wish to belittle the saving by
the committee of $227 million, but I do
question its adequacy. It is but a spit-
in-the-ocean of foreign-aid waste.

MILITAKT AID

The largest grant of foreign aid 'as
distinct from loans) is contained in title
I of S. 2130. This title authorizes $1.8
billion for military aid. a figure which
represents only a $100 million reduction
In the President's request. To obtain
the true picture of what is really avail-
able for military aid, however. It is nec-
essary to add the $500 million carryover
of military aid from fiscal year 1957 to
this figure. What this bill now does Is
to permit the President to spend $S.3
billion, not $1.8 billion for miliUry aid
in fiscal year 1958. It goes further,
moi-eover, and authorizes an additional
$15 billion for military aid in fiscal year
1959.

How are these funds to be spent?
They are to be spent to supply arms and
ammunition to nations from one end of
the globe to another. They will be used
to build up the armed forces of both
democratic nations and totalitarian na-
tions, advanced nations and primitive
nations, friendly nations and those that
are not so friendly — and all in the name
of the defense of freedom.

Will the people of the United States
know to what nations and in what
amounts this military aid is being sup-
plied? They will not know because this
information is concealed imder the of-
ficial stamp of secret.

I have lodged a protest In the commit-
tee against this practice and I lodge an-

other In this report. The committee has
heard, in my opinion, no convincing rea-
son for these figures to be hidden under
the Imprimatur of secrecy. They are
fairly well known in foreign countries.
They are often discussed as common
knowledge in foreign coimtries. Yet
Congress Is enjoined from having them
in public. The people whom Members
of Congress represent cannot even know
what their Representatives are voting
for.

It is my opinion that If the American
people knew the details about the expen-
diture of their tax dollars by this admin-
istration In foreign aid, their protests
would be so vehement and demanding
that the Congress would be forced by
political repercussions to revise drasti-
cally the foreign aid program. I am con-
vinced that if the American people know
the facts that are now kept from them
by the use of the label of political expe-
diency called top secret, they would de-
mand a cutback in foreign aid expendi-
tures and a revision of foreign aid
policies.

Mr. President. I repeat, in a democ-
racy there is no substitute for full pub-
lic disclosiu-e. If the government of a
democracy is to live up to its obligation
of being the people's government, the
people must know the facts. It is a
matter of great regret and deep sadness
to me that I have to report today to the
American people, "You do not know the
facts behind this bill; and the reason
why you do not know them is that you
have over you an administration which
insists that the details of these expend-
itiu-es and the purposes to which they
are to be put in many, many instances
must be kept from you. and the admin-
istration does so on the pretense that
the security of our country would be
Jeopardized if the American people knew
these facts about the administration of
their own Government."

Mr. President, I deny that. I do not
say that there is not some information
so secret that even the American people
cannot be given It because the issuance
of the information would be an aid to a
potential enemy who might threaten the
security of the American people. But,
Mr. President, after 8 years of service on
the Armed Services Committee of the
United States Senate, and now with
more than 2 years of service on the For-
eign Relations Committee of the Sen-
ate, I am convinced that at least 85 per-
cent of the information which Is kept
from the American people under the
label of "top secret" is not in fact top
secret at all. Instead, it is Information
which the taxpayers, the voters, the peo-
ple of the United States, who owTi the
Government should have.

TREND TO ADMINISTHATIVI SECKECT MUST END

Mr. President, this trend is not limited
to the present administration alone; in-
stead, the trend toward the adoption of
police-state methods In the United
States of America has been going on
now for too many years; but in the past
few years it has taken on the speed of a
galloping stampede across the Nation.

Therefore, Mr. President, from my
desk in the Senate of the United States,
today I tell the American people that

they had better be on guard against It,
and that they should also remember the
lesson and tradition of American his-
tory; namely, that in America there is
no room for a military Junta. There is
greater safety for democracy In demo-
cratic processes and procedures than In
military processes and procedures. I
repeat that there is greater safety for
the American people and the perpetua-
tion of freedom in America by strict ad-
herence to our democratic processes,
based upon our great constitutional sys-
tem of checks and balances, than there
is in the forms and practices of a mili-
tary organization.

I am not one to say that military sup-
port and defense and programs are not
important. But the American people
are being subjected to a type of fear
argmnent. to the effect that if they do
not put their tnxst in the military, or the
military leaders, or executive heads who
purport to speak in the interest of mili-
tary defense, then the security of the
American people may become endan-
gered.

In my judgment we have already gone
too far, Mr. President, in investing our
trust in the military arguments of the
present administration and in advancing
its military policy. I shall say it later
in this speech, from my manuscript, but
I now make the point, in connection with
this matter, that one of the sacred cows
of this administration is the miUtary
budget, and it is time for the American
people to insist upon the most thorough-
going investigation of the military af-
fairs of the Government. The miUtary
budget must no longer be shrouded in
secrecy, as it presently is. The Ameri-
can people had better find out quickly
what is happening to them militarily.
And so. as one who in the past has voted
for adequate military defense, and as one
who will continue to vote for adequate
military expenditures. I shall, as a con-
stitutional liberal in the Senate, insist
that the American people be given more
of the facts about military expenditures.
When they get the facts, Mr. President,
the i>eople will demand two great
changes, in my opinion. First, they will
demand a cessation of military expendi-
tures In some areas of the world, on the
part of the American Government, which
do not strengthen freedom In the world,
but which strengthen totalitarianism. I
hold to the point of view that the time
has come when the American Govern-
ment should be supporting freedom and
free governments, not totalitarian gov-
ernments.

Second, once the American people get
the facts about what is happening to
their present military expenditures, I
am also satisfied they will insist that
their Congress eliminate the himdreds of
millions of dollars inexcusably wasted in
such expenditures.

He imdoubtedly will be heard from
later in this debate, but I had a confer-
ence yesterday with a distingtiished
Member of the Senate whose judgment
on miUtary matters I would not admit
is surpassed by that of any other Mem-
ber of the Senate. Fe pointed out to
me, in our conversation, that his work
in the Senate convinces him that one of

^i.

8966

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June IS

i

I

m

I

Hii#

I|i4

the places vhere millions and millions
of dollars, running into the hundreds of
millioDS. are wasted, is in connection
with so-called defense contracts. In my
opinion, a thorough inTesti«ation by the
Senate is needed of the procedures pres-
ently employed for defense contracts.

Therefore, so long as I feel that the
foreign- aid program is not being admin-
istered in keeping with a basic safe-
guard of democratic procedure, namely,
full diacloEure to the public of govern-
mental facts, I shall continue to oppose
the pohcies of government by secrecy
which this administration follows to far
too great an extent.

One reason for my dissent from the
recommendations of the majority of the
Foreign Relations Committee members
is my belief that the committee should
Insist on a greater degree of public dis-
closure of the facts concerning the places
where the money is to be spent and the
purposes for which it is to be spent.
The money we are dealing with in tliis
bill does not belong to the Congress of
the United States; It does not belong to
the President of the United States; it
belongs to the people of the United
States, and they are entitled to know
what is being done with it in great detail.

BIU. DOES MOT MAIKTVIIf CONgmUHOKAX.
CHBLKS

If we are to keep this country free and
avoid a trend to government by men
instead of strengthening government by
law. Congress must not abdicate its con-
stitutional duty to exercise checks upon
the executive branch of the government.
The majority of the committee cannot
cover up with language the fact that in
essence it is recommending an increased
delegation of arbitrary discretionary
power to the executive branch of govern-
ment, and in particular to the E*resident
of the United States. This delegation of
power goes far beyond the delegation of
administrative duties necessary to carry
out congressional policy. The delegation
of power to the Executive Inherent in the
position taken by the majority of the
committee is a delegation of legislative
policymaking power to the President of
the United States over foreign economic
and military aid. It is a dangerous prin-
ciple. It endangers our historic con-
cepts of constitutional checks and bal-
ances. It endangers the legislative
process because it amounts in part to
authorizing the executive branch — under
the guise of carrying out administrative
functions — to in fact make legislative
policy decisions.

The proposal of the majority to require
the President to file reports with the
Congress advlsmg the Congress as to
what action he has taken or in some
instances what action he proposes to
take in carrying out the foreign-aid pro-
gram is not an effective check upon rule
by the Executive. It is at best a proposal
to lock the stable door after the horse
has been stolen.

The Presidential report filing proce-
dure Involves a serious weakening of a
historic policy precious to the rights of
free men and women that under our
Constitution legislative decisions are for
the Congress, and the administration and
execution of legislative policies in con-

formity with the spirit and intent of
Congress are for the Executive.

If Senators want proof of the point
I make, that the filing of reports by
the President is an empty gesture, I
invite Members of the Senate to go
downstairs to the Foreign Relations
Committee room and to examine the re-
ports the Executive has filed on the com-
mitments and expenditures in connec-
tum with execution of the Eisenhower
doctrine in the Middle East.

What do we find, Mr. President? We
find reports filed by the Executive con-
taining the most glittering generalities.
When a person sets through reading one
of these reports, he knows no more about
what has happened to the money than
he knew before he started, because he
docs not have to go to the committee
room to know that the money would
have to be spent for items In certain
categories, such as highways, utilities,
arms, and ammunition. When a person
gets through reading a report that tells
him no more than that, what does he
knoA? He knows ne.xt to nothing. But
what we are entitled to know, Mr. Presi-
dent, is, in detail and specifically, exactly
what the money was spent for or how it
is proposed to be spent. That is what we
should know.

Of course, if Consrress were not ab-
dicating its legislative functions, and if
an annual authorization were required,
at least representatives of the adminis-
tration would have to come before a
committee and submit a blueprint of the
specific details of the proposed expendi-
tures. But in an escape of responsi-
bility, the gunraick and subterfuge is
adopted of having the Executive file a
report, so the Executive meets the re-
quirement without, in effect, in fact tell-
ing us very much about what the ad-
ministration has done with the money or
what it is doing with the money.

No. Mr. President, we cannot justify
an abdication of Congres.ilonal legislative
responsibility by saying. "We vote the
money for the President, and we have
put in the bill a requirement that the
President shall file a report and tell us
what he has done with It or proposes to
do with it."

Secondly, the weakness In this pro-
cedure. Mr President, is that It does not
carry with it any requirement that the
President obtain approval of his pro-
posed expenditures when he files his
report.

Oh." ?ays the majority in debate In
the committee, "but it means, of course,
that at least we have notice and we can
take afBrmative action, if we wish to,
thereafter."

I do not know whom they think they
are kiddin'4. other than the American
people. They are not kidding me. Mr.
President. No Member of the Senate
should be kidded by that rationalization,
either, because we all know what hap-
pens. When vf^ pass a piece of legisla-
tion Uke this it is behind us. Then we
are almost smothered with additional
pieces of legislation and legislative
duties, which oome before us each day.
The fact is, it is forgotten. Bad prac-
tices can continue for a long time under
tills kmd of abdication or delegation

of lesislatire responsibility to the Ezecu-
tiv«. and the Coogress will be quite una-
ware of them.

That was not what was Intended. Mr.
President, when our system of checks
and balances was established. That was
not what was intended when full legis-
lative responsibility and authority were
vested in the Congress. What was m-
tended by the constitutional fathers was
affirmative action on the part of Con-
gress in regard to each legislative pro-
posal, at the time the request was made
for funds to be provided In that pro-
posal and to be spent under it. That
was the intention.

The procedure proposed is a way of
undercuttmg the precious clieck requir-
ing affirmative action on the part of the
Congress of the United States in respect
to executive activities. We cannot check
the Executive in any other way, be he
Republican or Democrat. We cannot
check him unless we protect and pre-
serve the check. In this bill. I respect-
fully say. Mr. President, in my opinion,
the majority of the committee is voting
away one of the most precious checks
the American people have against arbi-
trary, capricious, and discretionary con-
duct on the part of any Executive.

Mr. President, as one who taught both
legislation and constitutional law for
years. I cannot walk away from my deep
conviction and understanding of the
Con.sUtutlon. as I believe it was in-
tended to be practiced and carried
out by the Constitutional Convention
which wrote It.

Oh, I know. I am dealing with an ab-
straction. When we start arguing in the
Senate of the Umted States about these
very precious abstract constitutional
principles, those who »-i.sh to see them
eroded away or delegated away are fully
aware of the fact that the men and
women on the streets, in the factories and
in the homes of America will probably
not take the time to interest themselves
in abstractions, because the vicl&^tudes
of life, constantly- thrusting themselves
upon the average citizen, are so time
cjn.suming that tlie average American
citizen tliinks usually in terms of specific
personal matters — taxes, broken side-
walks In front of the home, Kart>age dis-
posal problem.^, police protection — the
day-by-day matters which constitute
most of the contacts between the citizen
and his government, local. State, and
Federal.

But, Mr President, as abu.ses continue
to accumulate. American liistory shows
that finally there comes a time when
people wake up to the fact that misman-
agement, malfeasance, and violation of
abstract principles of government have
been going on for too long, and then the
people are heard from. I happen to be-
lieve that one of the obligations of states-
manship in the Senate is to try to avoid
such periods of serious repercu&slons in
the body politic.

But I warn the Senate today that if the
Congress of the United States continues,
as it does in this bill, to ignore the pre-
cious checks protecting the p>eople from
the arbitrary discretion of an Executive,
the time will come when the people will
rise up and ask the question: "How

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8967

come? Where were you? Where were
you. as my Senator, when such proF>osals
were before the Senate of the United
States?" Then the people will act.

So in this speech today. Mr. President,
I am sure I speak more to the American
people than I do to the United States
Senate, because I am not unaware of the
fact that in all probability, although I
continue to hope for something better,
the die has been cast on this bill. But
the record against it must be made, and
tlie record against this delegation of lee.-
i.slative policymaking functions must be
made. I shall be perfectly willing to
stand on that record, and be judged by
it not only In my State but throughout
the Nation.

I have heard. Mr. President, from too
many scholars in the field of constitu-
tional law to have any doubt as to the
soundne.ss of the position I am taking in
oppo.«;ition to this delegation of authority
to the executive branch of Government.
What we do here today, Mr. President,
or when this bill comes to a final vote,
will be the basis for a considerable
amount of scholarly writing in the field
of lecislation and constitutional law be-
cause, Mr. President, In my judgment
this bill cannot be reconciled with sound
constitutionalism. If we are to keep
this country free and avoid a trend to
povernment by men instead of strength-
ening government by law, I repeat that
Contiress must not abdicate Its constitu-
tional duty to exercise checks upon the
executive branch of Government.

For too many years now, in our coun-
try, under both Democratic and Repub-
ican adminLstrations, there has been an
eroding away of legislative responsibility
clearly vested in the Congress by our
cnn.stitutional fathers. It must stop if
wp are to preserve the position of Con-
pre.ss in our constitutional .system of gov-
ernment. We should start with this for-
e:in aid bill by modifyini? those parts of
It that .seek to expand arbitrary and
di'^cretionary power of the executive
branch of the Government in the deter-
mination of foreign aid polices.

The testimony before the committee
pives no evidence of any overriding secu-
rity rea.son for secrecy on how much
money is given to each country for mili-
tary aid. It mav be a convenience for
the executive branch not to have to tell
the people of the United States how
many millions of their hard-earned dol-
lars are going to Yugoslavia, to Spain, to
Pakistan, to Formosa, to Japan. It may
be a convenience to that branch but it is
an inexcusable affront to the democracy
of the United States.

DEFFN.SE SrPPORT ALSO EXCESSrVi:

The .«;ccond largest item of gifts In-
cluded in the bill is $300 million for de-
fense support for fiscal year 1958.
Ayain. this represents a genuine commit-
tee reduction of $100 million from the
President's request. But again, the com-
mittee has pone further, at the request
of the executive branch, and has already
authorized an additional $710 million for
defense support in fiscal year 1959—2
years hence.

Defen.se support, as the executive
branch emphasizes, is made necessary

only because of the military aid we give
to other countries.

A substantial part of the defense sup-
port program consists of giving economic
aid to the countries which have mili-
tary weapons which we have made avail-
able to them under the military aid pro-
gram. I think I am permitted to say
also that a large part of it goes to help
pay for their own domestic military ex-
I)enses — in some Instances even the
wages of their soldiers. We call that
military defense support.

Those countries cannot support the
armed forces that our military aid makes
possible so we are compelled therefore to
give them economic aid to sustain the
burden of these forces. Thus, the vi-
cious cycle is complete. The taxpayers'
funds are poured out for military aid.
Then hundreds of millions more are
added for defense support so that mili-
tary aid can be continued. Thousands
of ofBcers of the armed services go over-
seas at high pay and privilege to admin-
ister the military aid. Then hundreds
of civilians go over at high pay and priv-
ilege to administer the defense support
that makes the military aid possible. All
the while, most of the peoples of the re-
cipient countries just manage to keep
their heads above water while a few man-
age to get rich on the parade of American
military and civilian officials and the
streams of dollars pouring into these
countries, all at the expense of the Amer-
ican taxpayers. Necessary reforms are
put off. Recipient governments are un-
der no pressure to be responsible to their
peoples since American aid can always be
counted on to rescue them. They are
under pressure to keep their armies big
so American dollars will keep on coming.
This is, to say the least, a fantastic form-
ula for futility.

Is it any wonder that the tempo of op-
position to foreign aid quickens among
the people of the United States? is it
any wonder that the tide of anti-Ameri-
canism rises throughout the world? Is
it any wonder that riots against the
United States break out in Formosa, one
of the chief recipients of aid? — in fact,
a recipient so receptive that in many
parts of the world Formosa is called a
satellite puppet state of the United
States. But the puppet broke a string
or two a while back, and engaged in a
riot against the United States. We know
that strong anti-American feeling exists
in Formosa, but I ask the question. Do
we know all the facts? Have we been
given all the facts about unfortunate
conditions which exist in that area
which, in some parts of the world, is
referred to as a satellite of the United
States?

Yet, when the Senator from Montana
[Mr. Mansfield] proposed in committee
that military aid and defense support,
together, be reduced a total of $800 mil-
lion, in £in effort to curb this strange
and costly procedure, his proposal was
rejected by the Committee on Foreign
Relations. The committee majority
contented Itself with a mere reduction
of $100 million for each type of aid.

In doing so, they accommodated the
executive branch but they did not give
adequate attention to the observations

of the special committee. The report
of that committee had raised the whole
issue of how well military aid and sup-
porting aid were Integrated Into our
strategic concepts of national defense
and our foreign policy generally.

Many of the special committee's ob-
servers had raised questions as to the
level of armaments being fostered in
some countries. They had also pointed
out that in some cases the types of
arms were ill suited, too complex, and
too costly for these countries.

But we continue to send it, at great
expense to the American taxpayer.

They had indicated the dangers of
military aid promoting a competition
among recipients for ever-increasing
amounts of arms from the United States
and ever-increasing amounts of defense
support aid in order to maintain those
arms. Finally, the special committee re-
port and the hearings before the For-
eign Relations Committee on this bill
leave no doubt that unrealistic exchange
rates are adding tens of millions of dol-
lars annually to the cost of defense sup-
port to the people of the United States
while enriching a few speculators and
importers in the recipient countries.

This country needs allies and. in some
cases, extraordinary military and sup-
port aid may be necesssary to assist
them m resisting dangerous totalitarian
presssures from within and without.
That was true when NATO was organ-
ized.

I was one of the ardent supporters of
NATO. I can remember, as though it
were yesterday, the historic speeches
made by the great Arthur Vandenberg
of Michigan in support of NATO. I was
proud, as one of his disciples and stu-
dents, to participate in that debate, to
which he refers in his autobiography,
because I knew then, as I still know,
that NATO is of great importance to
the security of my country. But that
does not justify waste in its administra-
tion. There is terrific waste in its ad-
ministration, and there has been terrific
waste from the begiiming. I want a
sound foreign aid and military aid pro-
gram, not a wasteful one.

This country does not need and should
not seek, perpetual dependents anywhere
in the world. If our aid tends to pro-
duce a continuing and increasingly ex-
pensive dependency in any country, then
it does violence both to our best inter-
ests and to the best interests of the
peoples in the recipient countries. Aid
in this pattern may help to prop up
an irresponsible government which pro-
fesses friendship for this country and
flatters the administrators of this pro-
gram. Sooner or later, however, the
people of this coimtry will pay a ter-
rible price for this unmitigated folly.

CONTINUATION AUTHORIZATIONS IGNORE CHXCKS
BT ELECTION

As already noted, this bill authorizes
not only excessive appropriations for
fiscal year 1958, but it goes beyond that
and authorizes large sums for fiscal year
1959. What this means is that next year
military aid and defense support will
not be reviewed by the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee and the Armed Serv-
ices Committee. The amounts which

mm

f;^

!

.

8968

CX)NGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

may be re<ruested In fiscal 1959 win be
reviewed only by the ApproprliUions
Committee.

In my Judgmoit. that la an Inexcus-
able delegation of leglslatlTe cbllsratloa
and responsibility. In my Judgment, we
should annually review these requests
and annually take action on them.
Why? What is the purpose of a national
election? C^e of the purposes of a na-
tional election is to give the people at
the voting booths a check upon Con-
gress. We will have a national Con-
gressional election in 1958. Senators
must realize what we are doing in the
pending bill. We are making commit-
ments beyond that election. We are
making^ commitments for 1959.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
Lausche in the chair) . May the Chair
inquire what explanation the majority
gave for granting the authority into the
year 1959?

Mr. MORSE. I should like to say to
the distinguished occupant of the Chair
that, although I should like to answer
his question directly. I stated at the be-
ginning of my speech that I would not
yield for questions until I have concluded
my speech. I shall come to that point
later In my speech. In fairness to other
Senators who have asked me questiorxs,
I would prefer not to answer that ques-
tion at this time.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair did not understand the situation.

Mr. MORSE. I am sure the Chair will
get the answer as I proceed with my
speech. I should like to dwell a little
longer on the point I was making.

One of the things we must keep in
mind is the relationship of the ballot box
to Congress, as a check on Congress.
We need to keep in mind the history of
our whole election s^-stem. We must not
forget that the Pounding Fathers and
the people of their tunes not only feared
an arbitrary Executive, but they also
feared — and had great fear, I may say,
Mr. President — of a legislative branch of
the Government on which the people
did not exercise a direct check. These
fears were bom of experience.

Therefore they wTote into the Con-
stitution a series of checks. For ex-
ample, they established limitations on
the length of the tenn in the House
and in the Senate. It is very interesting
to read the constitutional debate in re-
gard to this check. People had in mind
that they wanted to protect themselves
by a check on Congress itself, by the
requirement that the Members of the
House shall stand for election every 2
years, and the Members of the Senate
every 6 years.

As we read the debates, we cannot es-
cape the finding that the people looked
upon a Representativo as the direct rep-
resentative of the people in his local
d strict, and that they looked upon a
Ssnator, not as the representative of the
people of his State alone, but as a rep-
resentative of the national interest as
well. That is why — and I believe this
Is very interesting in its bearing on the
relationship between Members of Con-
gress and their constituents in the early
days of our country — there was a time
in our history when the common prac-
tice was for a Representative to bring a

Tislting constituent to the office of the

Senator. The constituent did not thin^
of going to the oCBce of the Senator, ex-
cept by first going to the office of his
Representative and usually having the
Representative take him to the office
of the Senator. Now, I sometimes think,
the reverse is true. However, that shows
the change in protocol, so to speak.

Coming back to the point I was mak-
ing, the provision for a 2-year election
is a very important people's check upon
Congress. In the preelection cam-
paigns just such Issues as I am talking
about are bound to be raised in many
parts of the country, if not throughout
the country. In those campaigns the
people, who. after all are the reservoir
of democracy in America, have the right
to express themselves at the ballot box
as to what ought to happen in the matter
of foreign-aid funds. But under the
pendmg bill we seek to bind them be-
yond the election, into 1959. I do not
believe that is consonant with what I
consider to be the American system of
checks and balances.

The majority does not satisfy me. any
more than did the Secretary of State,
with the argument that it is desirable
to have a longer period of time in which
to make plans for future expenditures.

It is possible to have blueprints for
a longer period cf time, but the blue-
prints ought to rest upon our making it
clear to every foreign country involved
that they depend upon an almost re-
ligious adherence to the precious check-
ing principle of democracy. We can say
that such is our plan, but it Is dependent
upon the annual review by the elected
representatives of a free people, to de-
termine if it should be changed. I
know of no good reason why this Con-
gress or any other Congress, sitting at
a given time, should be allowed to pro-
ceed with a program which binds not
only future Congresses, but binds the
American people for future years beyond
the time when they have a check on Con-
gress m an election at the ballot box.

That is one of my major points. I
happen to believe that foreign-aid ap-
propriations should be in issue in 1958.
The people should have a chance to
elect their representatives on the basis
of what they think the foreign policy
should be. They should not be put in
the position where they may elect a
group of representatives who do not
agree with the policy or philosophy of
the bill, and then have those repre-
sentatives bound because Congress has
already obligated the money and com-
mitted the Nation into 1959. Cannot
Senators hear the argument that will
be made if we then try to change It af-
t*?r we have made the commitment?
Cannot Senators hear the argument that
will be made on the floor of the Senate?
Mr. President, the eagle up there on the
ceiling would almost flap its wings at
the arguments that would be made about
the honor of our Nation. We would be
told that we were honor bound, because
we had committed ourselves into 1959.
That is an old strategy. We must not
let it fool us. That would be the alibi
of those who wanted to erode the legis-
lative processes of Congress. There is
no reason in the world why we cannot

work out a blueprint project Into the
future and present It as what our plans
will be tf — I say if — a Congress repre-
senting a free people believes that
further funds should be authorized and
appropriated to extend and carry out
that program. But If we can authorize
it for 2 years, we can do it for 4 years.
If we can do It for 4 years, we can do
It for 6 years. Where will we draw the
Une?

Mr. President, I am not at all con-
Tlnoed by the argument I heard In com-
mittee, "Oh. but this is a matter of de-
gree."* So often we hear the argument
that it is a matter of deirree. I say It Is
either right or wrong. I do not believe
in degrees of right or wrong. I believe
we have a duty to be right with the Con-
stituUon. not half ri^ht with it We
ought to keep full faith, not part faith,
with the checks and balance require-
ments of the Con.stitution.

Oh. Mr. President, I hear aiwther
argument being made: "We do it In
some other phases of our fiscal policies.
The Export- Import Bank does it on a
direct loan relationship with other coun-
tries." Mr. President, let us be frank
about it. We know what we are doing
in the Export-Import Bank arrange-
ment. The Government has established
a bank to do what I am sure all of us wish
could be accomplished by private bank-
ing institutions, instead of by a Gov-
ernment banking Institution. In estab-
lishing a Government bank to make
loans to foreign governments, we knew
that the bank should be allowed to exer-
cise some of the banking procedures
that a private bank would exereise. I
hope the time will come when the great
banks of the country, under what I have
spoken of so many times as a policy of
the dollar following the flag, rather than
the flag following the dollar, will be able
to do much of the financial lending
which is now being done through the
Government by way of the Export-Im-
port Bank. That Ia the argument you
will hear, Mr. President. But I say it is
Irrelevant to the principle which is be-
fore us in the foreign aid bill.

This is a bill v. hich involves the whole
broad scope of governmental policy ques-
tions in the field of foreign relations.
How long should the American people
continue to pour money into Yugoslavia.
for example? Or Formosa? Or Spain?
Or Italy? Or any other countiy? By
naming the=e countries, I do not mean
to make any invidious comparisons.

How long should the American people
continue to pour money into the Arab
states, which are. for the most part,
complete, absolute, totalitarian govern-
ments? That is the question of foreign
policy which is before us.

Who should decide if The President
of the United States? My answer is "No."
Who should decide it? The Congress of
the United States? My answer is still
"No," modified by this explanation; Con-
gress should decide it only for the time
Interval between elections, so that the
people win be free to exercise their bal-
lot-box check In the next election.

Yes, that is an abstraction, but It Ls a
pretty precious principle of a demo-
cratically controlled government.

19

O I

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8969

SECCmiTT AKCTTMthfT DOES NOT JtlSTirT MANY
PARTS or BILL

Mr President. I am not going to be
mP5morized or fooled by the flag-wa»ng
fcccurlty argument. I think now is the
time to make these observations about
that arpument. As we hear the ration-
alizers of the procedure of almost unlim-
iied power, they wave the flag almost
into latters when they refer to such
power being necessary for the security
of our country. That argument needs
t3 be analyzed; some questions need to
be asked.

In regard to each of the specific pro-
posals, the question needs to be asked.
What is the relationship of this proposal
to the security of our country? That is
v.hy I have been heard to say that the
pouring hundreds of millions of dollars,
for example, into Saudi Arabia has very
httle relationship to the security of our
countrj'. Saudi Arabia has tremendous
oil reserves, which it ought to be willing
to put up as collateral for a loan.

I see very little relationship to the
security of my country in a foreign aid
policy which authorizes the President of
the United States to spend money in
Saudi Arabia, with the specific expendi-
tures unknown to us.

I see very little relationship to the
security of my country In the expendi-
tures of vast sums of money for an air-
ba.'^e in Dhahran. Saudi Arabia, because
I doubt that the alrbase would be in
existence a few hours after the start of
an atomic war with Russia; just as I
thmk very little, If any, oil ever would
come out of those oil wells if we ever
tot into a war with Russia.

No; when the flag Is waved In jus-
tification of such expenditures for the
security of our country, we need to ask
many penetrating questions about the
.specific implementation of the program
in relation to specific countries. When
we do that, then we will come to the
conclusion that . the security of our
country in many instances, imdoubtedly
would be stronger if we were carrying
out a program of sending economic as-
sistance to raise the standard of living
of the people of those countries, rather
than expecting that the military aid
would ever be of very much use to us
once the bombs started to fall.

To use a h>TX)thetlcal, what makes
anyone think that a jet plane sent to
Pakistan would do us very much good in
a war with Russia? We would be lucky
if it did not fall into the hands of the
Russians immediately.

In my judgment, we are sending mil-
lions of dollars of military equipment
into some weak countries, countries so
weak that the military equipment may
prove to be one of our great liabilities;
in fact, we may find some of It being
shot back at us in case of war.

That is why I shall say later In my
speech that we had better analyze the
sacred cow of this administration — its
military budget — and why the American
people had better get the facts about it.

Mr. President, with all due respect to
the able members of the Appropriations
Committee, they cannot and oiight not
to be expected to review the strategic
and foreign-policy Implications Inherent
lii these aid programs. That is a re-

sponsibility which falls to the members
of the Armed Services Committee and
the Foreign Relations Committee who
have specialized in these matters.

To grant a 2-year authorization for
these programs, as S. 2130 does, amounts
to an abdication of responsibility by the
Committee on Foreign Relations.
Again, It has taken place in order to
accommodate the wishes of the execu-
tive branch. Again, it has been done by
ignoring the unanimous recommenda-
tions of the Senate's own Special Com-
mittee To Study the Foreign Aid Pro-
gram.

That committee had this to say of
military aid :

Congress should continue to authorize ap-
propriations annually, pending a clear deter-
mination or the role of military aid In the
total strategy of national defense.

And of defense support, the special
conunittee had this to say :

The committee believes that any changes
In legislation which would deny to the Sen-
ate an annual review of supporting aid
would raise dangers of failures to adjust
this aid to changing circumstances. It
would raise dangers of an undue expansion
of supporting aid programs and unnecessary
and excessive demands on the resources of
this country.

I want to stress this point It is an
interesting position for the Committee
on Foreign Relations to find itself in.
because, do not forget, the report of the
special committee was written with the
members of the Committee on Foreign
Relations wearing what I previously re-
ferred to as their hats and coats as mem-
bers of the special committee. All of
them submitted a unanimous report. In
their own special study, while they were
wearing their hats and coats as members
of the subcommittee, they said this:

The committee believes that any changes
In legislation which would deny to the Sen-
ate an annual review of supporting aid
would raise dangers of failures to adjust this
aid to changing circumstances. It would
raise dangers of an undue expansion of sup-
porting aid programs and unnecessary and
excessive demands on the resources of this
country.

I submit that is a wise recommenda-
tion, and It Is In accord with existing
practices. Until now, the tendency of
the executive branch to engage In useless
and ever-Increasing and costly military
and related aid activities abroad has
been held In check to some extent by the
need to justify their programs each year
before the Committee on Foreign Rela-
tions. That restraint — that check — Is
now removed. For 2 years, that branch
can do what It pleases, when It pleases,
and where it pleases. They iited only to
come back and ask the Appropriations
Committee for more money In fiscal 1959.
Will the Appropriations Committee at
that time see fit to deny what the For-
eign Relations Committee has already
authorized?

DEVKLOPMZNT LOAN FUND

The bill represents an Improvement In
one respect over past legislation of this
kind. It makes an effort in title U to
bring together all assistance for the eco-
nomic development of other countries
into a single development loan fund and

to place this aid on a self-liquldating
basis. It provides $500 million for fiscal
year 1958 for repayable loans to get this
fund started. In theory, this change is
soimd and it is In accord with the rec-
ommendations of the special committee.

At this time, however, no one knows
how the new fund will work. No one
knows how the fimd will affect other
foreign lending activities of this Gov-
errmient. The Export-Import Bank, for
example, has several billion dollars out-
standing in sound loans to countries all
over the world. Will this fund jeopard-
ize or supplement the activity of the
Export-Import Bank? How will it affect
the International Bank? How will it
affect private Investment overseas?

Further, no one knows whether all de-
velopment aid under S. 2130 will in fact
be channeled through the fund on a re-
payable basis as it is clearly the Inten-
tion of the committee that It should be.
Will development aid still go out on a
grant basis, camouflaged imder defense
support or some other title of this bill?

These are highly pertinent questions,
Mr. President. Yet, the Committee on
Foreign Relations did not receive full
and complete answers to them. The
committee did write In a desirable safe-
guard in the form of an Advisory Loan
Committee; but that, in itself, is not suf-
ficient to assure that the fimd will be
run In a sotmd fashion.

We must remember that it Is only an
Advisory Loan Committee.

There is no question that a need ex-
isted to get this fund started promptly,
and obviously all doubts could not be
resolved at this time, if that were to be
done. If the committee had been con-
tent to provide $500 million to get the
fund under way in fiscal 1958. It would
have been possible for Congress to con-
sider the implications of the fund in
detail during the next few months, and
then write intelligent permanent legis-
lation for it.

Mr. President, in the course of this
debate there will be offered an amend-
ment to seek to carry out the recom-
mendation I have just made. However,
that is not what the Committee on For-
eign Relations did. This bill does in-
deed authorize $500 million to begin
operations of the fimd during fiscal 1958.
But ag£kin. to accommodate the admin-
istration, it goes beyond that. It au-
thorizes the operators of this fund to
borrow from the Treasury of the United
States $750 million in fiscal year 1959,
and another $750 million in fiscal year
1960. It empowers the operators to bor-
row this $1.5 billion additional without
further authority or action on the part
of the Congress, regardless of whether
elections occur in between. In effect
then, this bill places, not a $500 million
fund, but a $2 billion fund at the dis-
posal of the executive branch; and Con-
gress will have nothing more to say in
the matter unless It raises specific ob-
jections.

Oh, yes, Mr. President, It will be said
that we can always proceed by subse-
quent action to repeal action we have
previously taken. But, for reasons I
have already outlined, that seldom hap-
pens. The Congressional proponents of

-/•F1

lll»

8970

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

this kind of expansion of power for the
Executive are always wont to say, "But
we can always change our minds later.
Let us make it the law now. We can
change it later, if experience shows that
should be done." Mr. President, that is
an old, threadbare alibi, too. for the
delegation of Congressional power. The
fact is that is not the way Congress usu-
ally acts. Once a proposal is set forth
in black and white on the law books,
the tendency in Congress is to become
absorbed in new problems, which, as
they arise, are as pressing as this prob-
lem is pressing today. As a result, in
practice, the check is lost.

The Senate is being asked to grant
this authority, not after the careful con-
sideration and the passage of the pro-
tective legislation which went into the
creation of the Export-Import Bank or a
Reconstruction Finance Corporation or
a Home Owners Loan Corporation. In-
stead, it is asked to do so in haste, in a
title of an omnibus bill designed for a
multiplicity of purposes. Tliis proposal
is buried in the bill, in cormection with
a great many issues. It is not before
the Senate as a single-bill proposal. In-
stead. It is a part of an omnibus bill
which contains many controversial sec-
tions. I wish to say that if the proposal
of the special committee is a sound one.
let $500 million be authorized this year.'
Then let us apree that we shall take
under study and consideration the ques-
tion of whether the amount should be
increased for 1959 and 1960. There i.s
no hurry in this case. I know of no good
reason why we cannot begin with $500
million. I know of no good rea.son why
a commitment of $750 million must be
made now. for 1959. over and above one
of $500 million for 1958. Similarly. I
know of no good rea.son why at this time
It is necessary to make a commitment of
$750 million for 1960 Let us take our
time in this case. Let us begin with the
$500 million, and then examine the
matter again next year. Such procedure
would be in keeping, too. with the annual
review check which I believe is so im-
portant.

Mr. President, in order to accommo-
date the executive branch in this mat-
ter, the majority of the Committee on
Foreign Relations ignored the advice
as r have .said, of the Senate's own spe-
cial committee. The special committee
had endorsed the desirability of a revolv-
ing fund, but it had this to say about
its organization:

This fund Is too Important to be set up In
haste. Interim measures may be nece.ss;uy.
but the fund should not be established In
perm.Hnent form until its implications have
been fully examined by the executive branch
and the appropriate committees of Congress.

With that recommendation of the sub-
committee. I wholeheartedly agree, and
I believe that the full Foreign Relations
Committee should have taken action
consistent with that recommendation.

Mr. President, there is one other major
title of the bill to which I take objection.
Title rv provides for what is called spe-
cial assistance. Part of this aid is ear-
marked for a variety of worthy pur-
poses. Part is for more dubious pur-
poses, such as contmued subsidies of

tyrannical governments in the Middle
East. And part of this aid is not ear-
marked at all. A total of $100 million
is made available, to be used at the dis-
cretion of the President. He can use it
for humanitarian purposes, for military
purposes, for political purpo.'^s, or for
whatever else may .suggest itself. There
is no significant limitation on this dis-
cretionary power, and little accountabil-
ity as to how It IS exercised.

My objections to this title are two.
and they are simple.

Mr President, there is a delicate mat-
ter which I wLsh to mention in rather
broad terms, but at least I want the
Record to show that I referred to it.
There are those who seem to think it is
good administrative policy for the United
States to adopt some of the tactics of
the totalitarian governments—Commu-
nist. Fascist, and ethers— by having a
fund of money which can be used in a
sort of unaccounted-for way for certain
secret activities of American foreign
agents. Mr. Pre.sident, I abhor it. I do
not want to vote for the authorization
or appropriation of one dollar which
could be used, under the discretion of
anyone, for bribery.

When the Secretary of State was on
the witness stand m the committee, and
when he would not t.-U us how some of
this so-called discretionary money is
going to be used. I asked whether he
thou?:ht totalitarian leaders would stay
'bought." I think the implication of
that question covers the point I have in
mind. I do not believe we build a sound
foreign policy or win the respect of peo-
ples abroad, whenever it becomes known
that we seek to beat communism by the
adoption of Communist tactics.

I do not hke it. either. Mr. President.
becau.se, as a lawyer. I cannot reconcile
it with morality I do not consider it
to be a moral policy, and I do not think
that temptation should be placed before
any President. To the contrary. I think
we must see to it that we. the elected
rcprei^entatives of a free people, know
how the money is to be used, because
the uses to which the money is put can-
not be separated from action carrying
out a policy.

As I have been heard to say before,
government by secrecy frightens me. i
do not accept the notion. Mr. President,
that it is in the interest of our security
to provide a fund of money in the
amount of SlOO million that can be used
by any President, in his own discretion,
for any purpose to which he wants to
devote it.

Mr. President, when I say that, as one
who has been severely critical of the
present President I desire to add for the
Record that my comment is not critical
of this President. I am talking about a
policy. It would make no difference
whether it related to the present Presi-
dent or Harry Truman or Franklin
Roosevelt, or any President of the past
or any President of the future: but the
Senator from Oregon Is going on record
today as being against any so-called
secret fund of $100 million that can be
used by a President to apply to his own
purposes.

Speaking now of the future far re-
moved from thiii administration, let me

lorj

say $100 million, under a certain set of
facts existing in the world at a given
time, could be used to stait a war if
there were in control of the Government
a military junta greater than that we
already have. A hundred million dol-
lars is not peanuts. One hundred mil-
lion dollars In a tinderbox area of the
w orld can ignite the tinderbo.x.

I know when I make that argument
the question will be asked. 'Are you re-
flecting, for example, upon -.he patriot-
ism of any President of the f jture?" Of
course, that is a completely nnnsequitur
question, because if there is anything
Mr. President, you and I as lawyeis
know, we know that if a procedure per-
mits of abuses, we had better change the
procedure One of the mos;, important
duties we have as United Siates Sena-
tors is to keep the procedures of Gov-
ernment clean and pure in relation to
our constitutional system. We need to
keep in mind the fact that when the
Republic was born, it was born out cf
a fear, based upon experience of arbi-
trary power of a powerful executive
The Republic. Mr. Pre.sident. was born
out of an insistence upon the part of our
historic fathers that unchecked powers
should not be given to any oecutive.

Here is a procedure. Mr. President
which would give $100 millian cf un-
checked spending power to a Presi-
dent—but never with my vote.

This is no new position for the Sena-
tor from Oregon. The SenUor from
Oregon protested this procedure when
Harry S. Truman was Presidrnt of the
United States, because we also gave him
too much unchecked power in my opin-
ion. That is why I said ear ier today
this tendency has been growin?. and we
have to stop it. It has been allowed to
grow becau.se the American pejple have
been frightened— dehberately fright-
ened—by the security argument, by the
argument that 'If you do not give this
kind of unchecked power, then the se-
curity of the country will be risced."

I am always amused in the Foreign
Relations Committee when I .near the
argument about the calculated risk we
have to run. when somebody *ants to
justify a weakening of a great proce-
dural protection of our people. We
are now living in a world, it if said, in
which the dangers are so great that' we
have got to run the risk on some of
these things. We have got to run the
risk that may be theoretically entailed
in giving a President this kind of un-
checked power— as though that falla-
cious argument answers the question we
raLse. The question is, Can we reconcile
what you propose with the constitutional
system which was established by the
Founding Fathers, who made it perfectly
clear that Congress should not give un-
checked powers to a President? The
answer is. "No."

So far as the security of our country
is concerned. I happen to be one who
believes our country will be more secure
and our Military Establishment will be
more efficient and effective and our de-
fenses stronger if we require at all times
the kind of a civilian control, through
the Congress, for which I am pleading
today. So I say I dissent from this pro-
posal of the majority.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8971

I object to the erosion of Congressional
authority over the expenditure of pub-
he funds which the discretionary power
implies. I object to the size of the ex-
penditures which are allowed for this
purpose. Not only does title IV place
$100 million at the complete disposal of
the President, It also permits him to
ti.m.sfer an additional $150 million
from other parts of the bill to be used
al.-o at his discretion.

The Committee on Foreign Relations
reduced the authorization under title
IV from $300 million to $250 million.
That was, in my opinion, a meritorious
action, except that it did not go far
rnouuh. It is conceivable that .some dis-
cretion may be necessary for the Presi-
dent to meet emergency situations
abroad. There is nothing to suggest the
amount made available for this purpose
ouKiit to be as large as is still provided
for in this legislation.

By way of conclusion. Mr. Pre.sident.
I w ish to say that two of my colleagues,
the Senator from North Dakota I Mr.
Lancer J and the Senator from Louisiana
I Mr. Long) joined with me In voting
against S. 2130 in committee. I have not
invited them to join with me in this mi-
nority report, bccau.se I feel so deeply
about what I consider to be a serious
weakening of the legislative functions of
Cjn!Tre.ss as symbolized by this bill sis
it came out of committee, that I decided
to present this minority report as my
individual views.

The Record should be clear that yes-
terday afternoon I had a conference
with the Senator from Louisiana I Mr.
Long I . who said he would like to see my
report. I said I would be glad to have
him see the report, but I wished to make
It very clear to him that I was not sug-
f^esfng he join with me in the report,
for the rea.son that I go into great detail
on .some of my constitutional views, and
to reconcile the language with the posi-
tion of the Senator from Louisiana on
.-^ome facets of it I was sure would take
ho long that we would never get the re-
port in on time: and in addition it would
make it necessary for me to modify some
of my language so that it would not
carry out the point of view I wished to
express in my .speech today. The Sen-
ator agreed with me. before he saw the
report, that for this reason he should
not join in the report, but should see it
only for the purpose of determining
^hai he might wish to add sis a supple-
mental report on his part, which he has
done, and about which he can speak for
liim.self,

I should like to say that we shall be
shoulder to shoulder on most of the
amendments proposed to the pending
bill, of some of which the Senator from
Louisiana will be the author.

I wish to make clear, however, that
I join with the Senator from North
Dakota I Mr. Lancer] and the Senator
from Louisiana I Mr. Long] in their
major objection to the bill on the ground
that hundreds of millions of dollars of
taxpayers' money could be saved by re-
ductions in many of the items in the biU.
I am convinced that many savings can
be made without weakening our defenses
in the slightest degree. In fact, it is my

Judgment that reductions in the bill
would strengthen, rather than weaken,
the security of my country. I am un-
able to see how waste of the taxpayers'
money strengthens the defenses of
America. In the last analysis, a strong
economy is essential to a strong defense.

Furthermore, it needs to be stressed
that powerful political forces in our
country have succeeded in convincing
many Americans that our military
budget is an untouchable sacred cow.
Whenever a Memlaer of Congress sug-
gests that the Military Establishment is
in need of a thorough revision, he must
expect to be attacked and critized on
the basis of the false charge that he
advocates a weakening of our defenses
and a risking of our national security.

Such charges are nonsense, and the
people need to be awakened to that fact
quickly. There is no place in America
for a military junta. We must not
countenance in America any weakening
of the historic principle that military
affairs must always be subjected to the
strictest civilian inspection, control, and
policymaking. The time has come to
put the military budget on the legisla-
tive operating table and remove some
of the cancerous growths from our body
politic.

The nuclear age is upon us. The mill-
tai-y tactics and strategies of World War
n and the Korean war, including both
combat and the general defense of the
Nation, are now obsolete. Yet we con-
tinue to pour hundreds of millions of
dollars into a military establishment of
our own and of foreign nations which
are being spent on obsolete programs.
We waste manpower, and spend hun-
dreds of millions of dollars of the tax-
payers' money in the wasting of that
manpower.

One of our allies. Great Britain, ap-
pears to be far ahead of us in the recog-
nition of the need for a thorough revi-
sion of its military program, with
resulting reductions in its cost. It is
interesting to note that some of the
American oflQcials, in attempting to alibi
our failure to reorganize our own de-
fense program as Great Britain is do-
ing, charge that Britain is bringing
about great economy in her defense
because she is planning to rely upon
American defenses for her security. An
adequate reply to that false charge is to
say "Tell it to the British." I am satis-
fled that her defense program will not
be based upon a national pwlicy of be-
coming a defense satellite of the United
States.

What Is happening in fact is that
Britain's leaders know that the nuclear
age calls for a reorganized defense pro-
gram. As long as the Congress of the
United States continues to appropriate
the billions of dollars it is now appro-
priating to our own and to foreign mili-
tary establishments with as little con-
trol over the actual expenditure of the
funds by the military and over determi-
nation of the policies upon which the ex-
penditures are based as now exists, we
will continue to waste billions of dollars.

This year is the time to call a halt in
this waste. This foreign military aid
bill is the place to start. It is my hope

that the full Senate will adopt amend-
ments reducing substantially the mili-
tary authorizations called for in this bill.

6. 2130 brings to a head an issue which
deeply disturbs many people of my State
and many people throughout the entire
United States. The issue is whether the
Senate is going to go on year after year
with a program that has already in-
volved $60 billion in expenditures in a
decade and which in recent years has
brought the Nation only increasing har-
vests of ill will abroad. Or is the Sen-
ate going to make the kind of thorough-
going revision of this program that it
must have if it is to serve the interests
of the people of the United States, the
ordinary people of other countries and
the peace of the world?

The Senate established the Special
Committee To Study the Foreign Aid
Program. The report of that committee
pointed the way to the kind of revision
that is needed.

If the recommendations of the special
committee are followed more closely this
bill can be revised so as to remake the
foreign aid program into an undertak-
ing worthy of the support of the Senate
cf the United States. The cant and sub-
terfuge which the executive branch has
introduced into this legislation can l>e
eliminated. The erosion of congressional
powers can be stopjied. Hundreds of
millions of dollars of the taxpayers'
funds can be saved. I submit that this
kind of revision has not been made by
the majority of the Committee on For-
eign Relations. And until it is made this
bill is a hoax. It does not fully meet the
needs of the citizens of the State of
Oregon or any State. It does not war-
rant the approval of the Senate of the
United States.

Therefore, for the reasons I have set
forth. I urge the defeat of the bill in
its present form, and the adoption of
a series of amendments which will be
offered by a group of us as the debate
progresses.

I wish to thank the Senator from New
Jersey [Mr. Smith] for his patience in
waiting for me to conclude my remarks,
preparatory to beginning his own. I
should like to extend to him the cour-
tesy of a call for a quorum, if he will
permit me to suggest the absence of a
quorum.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I do not
feel we need a quorum, because we are
making ovu" record here. I do not think
we need to take the time for a quorum
caU.

Mr. MORSE. I am advised, I may say
to the Senator, that the majority leader
has requested it. Under those circum-
stances, I should like to suggest the ab-
sence of a quonim.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Very well.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.

The Chief Clerk proceeded to call the
roU.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Presi-
dent, it was my great privilege yesterday

8972

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June IS

•ii>

n

to attend the naval review In Hampton
Roads. Norfolk. Va. Therefore. I was ab-
sent when the mutual security authori-
zation bill was taken up for considera-
tion by the Senate. However. I have read
the very excellent presentation made by
the distinguished senior Senator from
Rhode Island I Mr. Green], our beloved
chairman of the Committee on Foreign
Relations. I note that he bestowed
praise upon the members of the Commit-
tee on Foreign Relations for their part
In the work of the committee, but that
he very modestly did not give himself any
recognition. I cannot help adding the
thought that the Senator from Rhode
Island is the man who has been behind
not only the studies leading up to the
report, but has supported these studies
for almost a year, preparatory to devel-
oping ihe whole program of mutual se-
curity. Therefore. I desire to have the
Record show the deep feeling of appre-
ciation and affection we all have for our
chairman in his work on the bill this
year.

I also wish to commend my colleague,

the distinguished Senator from Wi.-^con-

sin (Mr. Wiley I. who spoke yesterday

In behalf of the bill.

n

cnviniAGt or th« bill

Mr President, the Committee on For-
eign Relations has reported a bill which
represents a major shift in the admin-
istration of the mututil security program
and a clarification of its aims and ideals.

Concerning the preparatory work for
the program, a word of commendation
and appreciation should be spoken in
behalf of the staff of the Committee on
Foreign Relations. I know my colleagues
will agree wiih me when I say that the
work the members of the staff have done
during the past year in preparing ma-
terial and a.ssembling the reports con-
cerning the foreign aid program deserves
great praise I wish to give the members
of the staff that credit publicly.

I urge every Senator, before he vote.^
on the measure this year, to read care-
fully the very excellent committee re-
port, which was prepared largely by the
staff, but which was participated in by
all the me.nbers of the committee before
the bill was reported favorably.

Also. I urge every Senator, before he
votes on the proposed legislation, to read
the report of the special subcommittee,
compo.sed of the members of the Com-
mittee on Foreign Relations and of other
committees, concernuiij the year-old
study of the whole subject of mutual
security assistance.

A.S a result of the study, there is a good
possibility of attaining increased effi-
ciency and effectiveness In the program
and a clearer understanding of its aims
by the American people and by the peo-
ples of other countries.

Personally. I have distributed to the
people in New Jersey and elsewhere a
great many copies of the report of the
special committee. Questions have been
directed to me about the program for
this year. People have been misled by
the references to giveaways. So I felt
it worthwhile to send them copies of the
report, and I have received very favor-

able responses concerning the approach
which the committee has taken this year.
The mutual security program is
acknowledged by all thoughtful Amer-
icans to be an integral part of our foreign
policy and a positive extension of our
responsibility as the foremost free nation
in the world. The committee stated in
its report:

The mutual security program • • • ha«
produced result* solidly In the American
national Interest. American foreign aid ha«
played an Indl.spenAabie part In keeping the
fre« world free.

The question, therefore. Is no lonser
"whether." but "how." and the 1957 act
goes a long way in answering this query.

In a recent article in the New York
Times, the distinguished junior Senator
from Montana [Mr. M.\.NsriEi.Dl wrote of
the need for tripartisan^ihip in the con-
duct of American foreign policy.

I was so much impressed with the
article, although a Senator on this .'^ide
of the aLsle. that I commended the Sena-
tor from Montana for his article con-
cerning tripartisan foreign policy. By
this was meant not only cooperation be-
tween the two partu's m Congress, but
also cooperation between Congress and
the Executive in the formulation of
policy. In my judgment. Senate bill
2130. now penauu. ifRtcts the benefl..s
of the tripartisan approach An amalga-
mation of policies proposed unanim<)u.^Iy
by the Senate Special Committee To
Study th.e Foreu-n Aid Program and
Polices Proposed by the Efxcutive. it
comes to this body for consideration as a
measure devoid of attributes of partioan-
ship.

It may Wf^Il be desi -nated ' unpar-
tu>.an," as our former colleague, the late
Senator Vandenb^rtj. used to say. and
certainly it can be de.sij-nated as tripar-
tisan. as the junior Senator from Mon-
tana I Mr. M\.N>FiELDi slated the other
day. Among the many other laudable
rea.sons for the pa.s.sa^e of tiie bill, this
fact IS worthy of our considerate atten-
tion.

Mr. President, the able senior Sena-
tor from Rhode Lsland i .Mr Green; and
the able senior Senator from VVi.sconsin
I Mr. Wiley i have enumerated the major
changes in the mutual- security program
contemplated by tlie bill: namely, the
separation of military assistance and de-
fense support from long-term economic
aid. the 2-year authorization of military
assistance and defcn.se .>upport, the cre-
ation of the development loan fund, the
increase in the technical-assistance pro-
tram, the clarification of purposes, and
the creation of a special assistance title
to permit use of funds for emergencies,
both economic and political, and for
humanitarian purposes.

The Senator from Rhode Island
pointed out aLso that instead of 85 per-
cent of the moneys being authorized for
military and defense programs, as was
done last year, this amount has been re-
duced to below 75 percent m this bill.
ni

HISTOBT 0» MUTU.*L SfCtTirrT

Let me speak for a minute concerning
.some of the history of our mutual .secu-
rity programs, which have been under so

much fire. I shall not repeat the able
explanations which have been made by
our colleagues; instead, I wish to speak
about the 10th anniversary to the battle
for peace and freedom. Ten years ago
this spring, the American response to the
advance of International communism
was first enunciated in the form of the
so-called Truman Doctrine of aid for
Greece and Turkey. I had the honor to
be a Member of the Senate at that time,
and I voted for the measure, feeling that
it was a new and most significant step.
It was a startling and courageous pro-
posal, announced at a time when the
forces of the free world were perhaps at
their lowest ebb.

It was shortly after that announce-
ment that General Marshall made his
famous address at Harvard University.
m which he enunciated what ultimately
became the so-called Marshall plan, and
which has evolved, since that time, into
the kind of mutual or forei;;n aid which
has been extended ever since.

Western Europe w.is then in desperate
economic straits. The .savage destruc-
tion of the war lay as a crushing burden
on the prostrate continent. Severe
winters had depleted the already dan-
gerously low agricultural r.tocks.

In the Middle East. Greece was In im-
minent danger after the announcement
by the hard-pressed British that they
could no loncer continue aid. Turkey
was being menaced by Soviet armies on
us b<>rders The Arab countne.s were
sitting on a powder keg labeled Pales-
tine

In Asia. India and Pakistan were both
on the veru'e of acquiring independence,
and a feud over Kashmir, which still
troubles their relationships. Fighting
was ra;,Mng m French Indochina, and
between the Dutch and the people of In-
donesia. China was the scene of brutal
carnate.

Peace, a word which had .sounded so
thnllingly in American ears just 2 years
previously, had become a hollow mockery
in a world of turmoil.

Ten years have elap.sed since that fate-
ful initial decision by the United States —
10 years of hope and pain, but really 10
years of progress America was then
being launched into an unknown fu-
ture Our experience with for.M'/n
relief had been limited to specific
emergencies and the aftermath of World
War I. Throu'zhout our long history we
had never contracted an alliance with a
foreign nation during a period of peace.
That is a very impre-ssive thought. I
have had it checked and. I repeat,
throughout our long history, we had
never contracted an alliance with a for-
eign nation dunni^ a pencxl of peace

But gradually we became aware that
if the free world, including the United
States, wa.s to survive, we would have to
flu'ht for peace just as effectively as we
had had to strive to win the war. We
.^^ea-sed our opportunity and our responsi-
bility.

The weapons at first were primarily
economic, although .some military assist-
ance was given to the Greeks and Turk.s.
But the terrain was new and unknown,
and knowledge had to be acquired from
experience.

19.

J I

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8973

rv

THE EXPERIENCE Or 10 TEARS

It was a novel and heretofore incon-
reivable position for the Nation. After
the close of World War II. we had hoped
and expected that the other countries in
the world would be as desirous of peace
as we were, and that aggression would be
met by the collective security system of
tiie United Nations. These expecta-
tions were premised in the hope that
Ru.si-ia believed in them as ardently as
we did. But the years since 1946 have
been replete with evidence of increasing
duplicity and aggression by interna-
tional communism. The list is a long
one. I need not cite all the Instances,
but I call attention to Czechoslovakia, in
1948; China, In 1949; Korea, in 1950;
Vietnam, m 1953; Guatemala, in 1954;
Quemoy and Matsu. in 1955; and Hun-
fc,ary and the Middle East, in 1956.

The record is indisputable proof that
the peace which we have sought and
wi.shed for will not be obtained until the
free world confronts international com-
munism with such strength that the
latter finally realizes it cannot gain its
ends through either aggression or sub-
version. We now understand that in or-
der to make this realization effective, an
unceasing effort most be maintained by
the Free World.

Up to now. our programs have mainly
been responsive to crises. Much of our
aid has been on what might be called a
cra.''h basis.

We have been experimenting with ad-
ministrative devices, as well.

There was the Marshall plan, then
NATO, the Korean war. and military aid
to Asia. But there was also point 4 and
UNICEF and the World Health Organ-
ization and CARE. There was ECA,
OEEC. TCA. FOA, and ICA.

There have been trial, and error, and
chanue. as we have recognized the depths
of responsibility and the enormity of the
mutual effort. Underlying It all has
been the gradual dawning that the awful
alternative to the containment of com-
munism and the growth of responsible
nations desirous of collective security
and law, is American hegemony pur-
chased at the price of nuclear war.

During these 10 years we have har-
vested both experience and victories.
From 1944 to 1949, during a period when
we had dismantled the most powerful
military machine in the world, interna-
tional communism conquered 14 coun-
tries, with a population of over 725 mil-
lion people, and an area of 5 million
square miles. From 1950 to 1956, how-
ever, after the mutual security program
had been created, international commu-
nism has conquered 2 countries, North
Vietnam and Tibet, with a population of
12 million people, and an area of one-
half million square miles.

The statement of Secretary Dulles be-
fcie the House Foreign Affairs Commit-
tee is an eloquent summarization of
these facts. Secretary Dulles said:

N't i>ne of these seized nations, was at the
time of seizure, protected by treaties of
mutual security and the common defense
system created thereunder. But not one na-
tion which did share In such a common de-
fen.-^p has been lost to International com-
munism.

It must be remembered in this con-
nection that some 19 new nations have
come into existence since World War n.

Other gains have been significant.
The military strength of our allies
abroad has substantially increased. A
network of defense alliances, supported
by local forces, and backed by United
States mobile power, has been created.
Through the fiscal year 1956, the United
States expenditures for military assist-
ance were $17.4 billion. Defense ex-
penditures by our allies amounted in that
period to $107 billion. I wish to empha-
size that point, because so frequently it
is said that we are carrying the entire
load. I repeat, that during that period,
the defense expenditures by our allies
amounted to $107 billion.

Actual figures tell the story even more
concretely. In 1950, the active ground
forces of our allies numbered about 3^2
million not too well trained and inade-
quately equipped men. Their naval
forces numbered fewer than 1,000 com-
bat vessels. Their air forces were
equipped with about 11.000 conventional
aircraft and fewer than 500 jets.

By the end of 1956, the ground forces
of our allies had been increased to 4.8
million, an increase of 37 percent in
quantity, and with a far higher standard
of quality and morale. Their navies had
over 2.300 combatant vessels, an increase
of 139 percent. Their air forces were
equipped with over 12,000 conventional
aircraft; the numbers of their jet air-
craft had been increased to nearly 11,000,
or 22 times as many as they had in 1950.
When the forces of Canada, Australia,
and New Zealand are added to these, the
total includes active ground forces of
over 5 million men, an air force of over
27.000 planes, 12.500 of which are jets,
and 2.500 combatant naval vessels.

Mr. President. I refer to those numbers:
because, as I have said, yesterday I had
the privilege of going to Hampton Roads,
Va., where there was the most significant
and impressive naval review ever held
in western waters. Included in the re-
view were not only a large part of the
fleet of the United States in Atlantic
waters, but also naval vessels from, I be-
heve, some 18 foreign nations; and in
the reviewing group there were not only
representatives of our own Government,
including the Secretary of Defense, but
also the ambassadors of all the nations
whose vessels were included in the dis-
play.

Moreover, strategic geographical sites
have been obtained close to the borders
of Russia, where important airfields and
locations for guided missiles are being
constructed. These gains have not only
enormously Increased our potential for
defense, but they have also meant the
saving of untold billions of dollars which
otherwise we would have had to spend on
defenses here In America.

Besides these triumphs, stemming
from the mutual security program, the
industrial might and the skilled peoples
of Europe have remained in the free
world, and the vital resources of Africa
and South Asia have been retained. If
we had allowed the Industrial power of
Europe to fall to the Communists and

the resources of Africa and Asia to be
forbidden to us, the Soviet would have
secured a potential infinitely superior to
our own. These considerations demon-
strate the importance of this program
from the standpoint of our own national
seciu-ity.

At the moment we are engaged in a
series of disarmament discussions in
London. History has proved that the
most effective way to deal with Russia
is from a position of strength. Because
the power of the free world has been
built up through the mutual security
program, there is greater hope for sin-
cere results now in the disarmament con-
ferences than ever before.

ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE BILL

Mr. President, these have been the
strides accomplished for the military
containment of communism.

Of equal importance have been the
measures undertaken to foster the eco-
nomic growth of the underdeveloF>ed na-
tions. With the exception of the
Marshall plan aid to Western Europe,
economic assistance and technical co-
operation have comprised a relatively
small part of the entire mutual security
program. In this respect, it is im-
p>ortant to note, however, that — dollar
for dollar — we probably get more from
our technical-cooperation program than
from any other aspect of the mutual
security program.

The efficacy of the Marshall plan Is
demonstrated by the fact that none of
the original Marshall plan nations is
now receiving economic assistance. I
wish to emphasize that point; namely,
that of the original Marshall plan na-
tions which were helped by the first im-
pact of our aid — and we did give them
economic assistance — none of them is
now receiving economic assistance from
the United States. Some 21 countries
are receiving bilateral economic £is-
sistance from the United States today,
and some 28 countries are receiving mili-
tary and economic assistance. Both
groups are outside of the Marshall plan
group I mentioned a minute ago.

The advent of the Korean war and
Communist aggression in Asia neces-
sitated a curtailment of economic as-
sistance in favor of military aid. In
more recent years, due to the mounting
strength of our allies and the nuclear
stalemate between Russia and the United
States, communism has tended to divert
a good part of its attention from overt
aggression to economic penetration, and,
I regret to say, subversion in the under-
developed coimtries. The consequent
peril to the freedom. Independence, and
self-determination of these countries has
heightened American emphasis on pro-
grams designed to foster their economic
growth and development. As a result,
the new approach to mutual security as
set forth in Senate bill 2130, which
is now pending, envisions a division of
fimds for economic aid. In section 400.
funds are authorized to be appropriated
to the President to be spent "to main-
tain or promote political or economio
stability" or for conjunction with mili-
tary assistance.

[r

ti

Pi

t '

I !

8974

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

I call especially to the attention of the
Senate the fact that In title 11 — the
long-term development loan fund Is es-
tablished, to be administered on a busi-
nesslike basis.

We have not heretofore had a loan
fund as such. There have been loans,
but the loan fund provided under title
n IS a new departure, and was provided
largely as a result of studies made by the
committee and the recommendations of
practically all the experts we sent into
the Held.

In recent years about 7 percent of our
mutual security funds has gone into de-
velopment assistance, and about 4 per-
cent into technical cooperation. Under
the bill presented this yeir, about 14
percent will be directed toward de%eIop-
ment assistance, and about 4.3 percent
for bilateral technical cooperation.

Unlike the military area, where num-
bers of Jet planes and soldiers and bases
can be counted and actual defense prog-
ress determined, the economic assistance
program can be evaluated only over a
span of years. In Europe, at the end of
the Marshall aid era. production had in-
creased over 1938 by some 40 percent.
But this was assistance to an already
highly industrialized area. Conversely,
substantially all economic assistance in
the past few years has gone to under-
developed and relatively underdeveloped
nations, and complete statistics in this
re.spect are not yet available, nor will
they be in the very near future.

We are cognizant, however, of nu-
merous specific and gratifying examples
of production increases in such nations
as Thailand, Taiwan — Formosa— and
India, agricultural development in Iraq
and Vietnam, and currency stabilizatioa
yrotframs in Chile and Bolivia.

FtTlPOSKS AMD LONG-tTRU ATMS

What is essential to keep in mind Is
the purposes and long -term aims of eco-
nomic assistance.

First and foremost is the security of
the Umted States, which entails a.ssist-
anre to underdeveloped nations to the
end that their very hi?h aspirations for
freedom and economic development will
be satisflled through orderly and peace-
ful measures of progress.

Second, vital raw materials will be re-
tained and continually made available
to the United States. We do not want
those raw materials to eet into the hands
of Russia or her satellites.

Third, the development of strong, free,
and independent nations throughout the
world will provide legitimate satisfaction
to the desires of rising nationalism and
will .substantially reduce the danger of
conflict arisintr out of attempts by inter-
national communi-sm to penetrate into
areas where it suspects power vacuums
to exist. That is one of the dangers
which is hard for some people to under-
stand who have not been to countries
where there is a danger of power vac-
uums. Where they exist, communism
rushes in by subversive methods.

Fourth, a high level of economic ac-
tivity Is. on the whole, more favorable to
genuine stability and responsibility in
government than are poverty and misery.

We must bear that In mind. If the
people of underdeveloped nations are
to get on their own economic feet and
become self-sustaining, they must t>e fed
and clothed.

Fifth, as these underdeveloped nations
grow In economic strength they win bo
better able to sripport military pro^rrams
and utilize advanced weapons, all m the
Interest of mutual defense.

Sixth, if other countries within the
orbit of the free world are t)etter off. they
form larger markets for American ex-
ports and the development of Iniema-
tional trade.

Seventh, as the underdeveloped coun-
tries attain higher levels of economic
development, their existing Inconvertible
currencies will secure standing in the
world market for the furtherance of In-
vestment and trade

Those of us who have been abroad, are
aware of the great uncertainty with re-
gard to currency stabilization. I can re-
member the days when we could buy
bank credit,"?, and every country, what-
ever it might be. would be listed on our
certificates. Indicating what the ex-
chan.'3:e rate of the dollar was In every
one of those countries. That Is no
loni:;er true. Now there Is a legal rate
and a black-market rate, and one does
not really know where he stands.

Of paramount consideration is the un-
deniable fact that economic progre.ss
amont: the underdeveloped nations will
be reflected in greater strength for the
free world. There Is an exclUng and
Significant relationship between Uie
orderly economic and social progress of
these nations, in fulfillment of tlielr
cherished aspirations, and the develop-
ment of forces desirous of achieving a
workable system of collective security
and of peaceful change.

When a farsighted program of eco-
nomic assistance promises mutual bene-
fits to the United Sutes and to the
underdeveloped nations, it is worthy of
our strongest possible support.

Freedom, self-restrained but vibrant
and inspired by the guidance of Almuhty
God, has been won by those who. through
history, have recogmzed and felt the
ultimate value of the individual human
beinK. 'Ye shall know the truth and
the truth shall make you free." These
immortal words are the giuding star of
our destmy. But God helps those who
help themselves, and it is our purpose to
help the underdeveloped countries to
help them.seives and thus to be prepared
for full freedom.

Economic assistance combined with
local self-help can destroy the insidious
weakening effected by illiteracy, poverty,
malnutrition, and disease. When these
are supplanted by knowledi^e and
strength, confidence and hope will swell
tiie legions of the truly free.

But here a<am. we must remember,
tiie effort will be long and arduous and
the attainment of victory resultant upon
the maintenance of eternal vi-ilance
ajalnst complacency, apathy, and smug
satisfaction.

«n

nuTATi luvTsnmrr
Mr. FYesident, I wish to say a word

now about the possibilities of private

Investment, which has been much dis-
ciLssed.

Why cannot prtrate investment ef-
fect at this stAire the Intended alms of
economic aaslstance under the mutual-
•ecurlty program?

The answer Is very precise. A
groundwork of social overhead capital —
that Is. roads, dams. irrigaUon projects,
airfields, railroads, and commmunlca-
tion systems — must first be created in
the underdeveloped nations. Private
Investment can be of a.sslstanoe in some
of these, but the main burden at this
moment will have to be borne by local
and foreign public funds.

The analogy is often made to the
great amounts of foreign private capital
*hich furnished priceless aid to the
economic development of this Nation
during the 19th century, in the early
years of our history. But, the analogy
is not entirely a tnie one, because we
had skilled labor, political stability,
trained management, and local indus-
try already in existence. This is not
the situation In many of the underde-
veloped countries In the world today.
A basic framework has to be laid by
local and foreign pubMc assistance first.

That. Mr. Pn^sident, is also one of the
primary rea.'rons why it has not l>een
economically feasible to create a long-
term busineiwlike development loan
fund prior to this year.

We have gone through the period of
expormientauon and learning and have
reached the point where we think eco-
nomic growth can profit by the use of
long-term loans. Much had first to be
done through the medium of economic
grants. Much had to be accomplished
through technical cooperation in order
to Instill skills in local labor, introduce
knowledge of management, and fiscal
and accounting practices, and teach
methods of increasing agricultural pro-
duction so as to enable a shift of labor
to be made from farms into Industries-

A great deal more effort Ls necessary
In this respect. It is true. but. likewise,
much has been done.

Fur those who have been skeptical of
the validity of economic assistance to
date, this truth is all Important. A
level must first be attained in order
that a businesslike program of devel-
opment loans can be established. It Is
the hope I think of all members of the
committee that eventually private In-
vestment will be able to be substituted
for all of the functions of the develop-
ment fund. But for the moment, the
fund demands the support of all of us
as an essential cog in the maturing of
our program of economic assistance.

TUX
CONCLUSIOIf

Mr. Pre.sident, In concluding my re-
marks I have a few observations to make.

This is the 10th anniversary of our
battle for peace and freedom. I have
tried to depict the process and the tri-
umphs which have been attained in the
military and the economic phases during
the pest 10 years.

We are engaged In a great Ideological
conflict We are fighting for men's
minds. To win, a.s to triumph in any
war, planning, and programing are

lo:

J /

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8975

e.sspntial. to the end that the resources
and capabilities of the United States and
our allies will be used most effectively
and efliciently. It is a mutual effort. I
have already referred to the military
pi (It rams of our allies. In the economic
field Irom 1952 to 1955 our allies con-
tributed some $3.2 billion in foreign
a.vsi.stance to underdeveloped countries.

Of this amount some $47 million was
contributed to the United Nations activi-
tie.s and about $346 million to the Inter-
r.atinnal Bank for Reconstruction and
Development. Of counse, a fair amount
of It went to colonial po.sse.ssions or former
colonial pos.se.ssion, but its purpose and
motivation was to increase economic and
.stK-ial development.

We have harvested experience and vic-
tnne.s in these 10 years. Today, four
concepts stand out with crystal clarity.

Fir.st The struggle of the free world
mu.st be unremittint,iy maintained until
victory IS .secured.

Second The mutual-security program
mu.st be continued until that victory- is in
6ii:ht.

Mr President, I think I read all the
reports which came lo our committee
from the different experts we had re-
tained, and who were helping us. Every
Millie one of them said that the mutual-
security program must be continued
until we could see the end of the road
of this present ideological struggle.

Tliird Both aspects, military assistance
for defensive strength, and economic as-
si.stance for the orderly and responsible
development of underdeveloped nations,
are indi.'^^pensable parts of that program;
and

Fourth Administrative and fiscal poli-
cies and institutions must be revised to
carry out most effectively a long-term
program in the national interest.

To meet the challenge we must adopt
modern techniques.

This bill, in my judgment, goes a lon<?
•^ay toward bringing our tactics up to
date. As the senior Senator from Rhocie
Island has i^o ably stated, the bill is by
no means perfect, and it will need
chr\nges as the years come along. It
vull. however, enable us to do a far more
effective and more efficient job than we
have been able to do in the past.

The amounts authorized, as the Pre.si-
dent has stated, provide the necessary
minimum to carry through the program.
Wliolesale slashes would not only im-
peril our national security, but endan-
ger the forcefulness of our leadership
of the free world. I strongly urge all of
my colleagues to support and adopt it.

The bill calls for a program of con-
tinuance of strength here at home, and
a program of military assistance and
economic aid with our allies and the na-
tions m the Free World abroad, in a joint
effort to increase the strength of a sys-
tem of collective security and law. It
"•ally can be called a bill for peace and
freedom.

Rus.sia has given no Indication of a
]• s.sening of its unrelenting desire or
purpo.se to conquer the world. For us
to relax in the struggle now is to face
the horror of war tomorrow, unprepared
and .substantially weaker than the Com-
munist nations.

We have the planning. We have the
program. We have the capabilities.
We have the allies and the potential.
We can weld these together now with the
will to win.

Mr. President, let me close by inviting
the attention of my colleagues to the
history of our own country. What mo-
tivated people from abroad to come to
settle In America? It was their as-
piration for freedom, self-determination,
and the right to follow the dictates of
their conscience and follow their God as
their God directed. They came here
with that flaming spirit. They de-
veloped that spirit. They gave to the
world a nation which has far surpassed
any other nation not only in prosperity
but in moral leadership. We are the
heirs to that responsibihty. We have
shown to the world what we can do here.
Now the call has come to us to accept
our responsibility elsewhere.

I shall close by paraphrasing from
Abraham Lincoln's famous Gettysburg
Address, when he said the sacrifices were
not made in vain, that they were made so
that government of the people, by the
people, for the people should not perish
from the earth.

That is my view of this bill. My belief
Is that it is our destiny to follow through,
despite its imperfections, with the kind
of legislation we are now studying so
sincerely, so as to find the best way to
do that which means so much to the
future peace of the world.

Mr. CASE of New Jersey. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I am glad
to yield to my distinguished colleague.

Mr. CASE of New Jersey. I wish to
congratulate my distinguished colleague,
the senior Senator from New Jersey, on
the admirably lucid and persuasive ex-
planation he has given of the program
before the Senate, which is presented
by the Committee on Foreign Relations,
It has been most helpful to me.

Even more, I should like to take this
opportunity, briefly, to express my per-
sonal appreciation for the leadership
which my senior colleague has given in
the great Committee on Foreign Rela-
tions, in the Senate, in our State of New
Jersey, and in the country as a whole.
As the foreign-aid program, in its vari-
ous phases, has been worked out and
applied, he has been in the forefront of
those who understood its purposes, the
changing needs to which it has been
applied, and the changes in it which
have been necessary. A great measure
of the success which has attended the
joint effort by all people of good will and
understanding in bringing this program
to us in a form adapted to present needs
is due to my distinguished senior col-
league from New Jersey. I wish to ex-
tend to him, in this brief and inadequate
statement on my part, my personal ap-
preciation for his help to me in my ef-
forts to understand the program, to
know more about it, and to be helpful
in it.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank
my colleague very cordially.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, per-
mit me to preface my remarks on for-
eign aid today with a few observations.

A special Senate committee studying
the foreign aid program stated recently :

The committee recognizes that there are
Americans who believe that these expendi-
tures have not served the national interest
and others who believe that they have.

I am in agreement with the former
conclusion but respect the opinions of
those who adhere to the latter view, and
ask that my thoughts be accorded the
same tolerance.

Let me emphasize that my views on
foreign aid are not directed at any indi-
vidual or group.

Rather, they are aimed squarely at
the system and at the policy.

Or to be more exact, my criticism is
directed at the lack of policy and the
lack of system.

I feel strongly that the humanitarian
responsibility of feeding hungry people
from our great supplies of surplus food-
stuffs and the practical responsibility of
taking every possible measure for our
own military defense are necessary and
justified. The only limitation applicable
to these efforts should be the extent of
our country's capability, as viewed liber-
ally, in the light of unchanging practical
experience.

But, certainly, this does not mean that
it is the duty of the overburdened
American taxpayer to subsidize through
foreign aid political or social experimen-
tation or all manner of global projects
of doubtful value throughout the earth.

Foreign aid projects which strengthen
the defense posture of this nation are
necessary and justified and shall have
my full support. However, I am equally
firm in my opposition to those projects
which seek to do for persons in other
lands what we are either unwilling or
unable to do for our own citizens here
at home.

The safeguarding of the economy of
this Nation demands that we give care-
ful scrutiny to each foreign aid proposal
in order to determine that our country
gets full value received for its expendi-
tures. This is particularly true in light
of the fact that, as of last March 31,
this country had an unexpended foreign
aid balance of $7.7 billion which would
be more than suflBcient to carry on our
foreign aid program for some 2 years
if not another dime were appropriated
for it.

It must further be borne in mind in
properly evaluating this program that
the Federal Government now is paying
35'8 percent interest on the money it
borrows to finance such imdertakings.

It is also my view that in the field of
economic aid, assistance should be lim-
ited insofar as practicable to loans.
Such help, of course, should be coupled
with the encouragement of private en-
terprise to invest its capital in sound
business ventures abroad.

In all of our policy, we seem to have
overlooked the prime factor that should
guide our considerations. It was ex-
pressed well the other day by Adm. Ar-
thur W. Radford, Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, when he declared:

We cannot trust the RussianB on this or
anything.

8976

CONGRESSIONAL RJECORD — SENATE

June 13

We have been at a loss In thwartinj?
the vigorous and direct approaches of
the Khrushchevs and the Bulganins.

Pure idealism, that in many instances
has characterized our diplomacy, has
been no match for the cunning and cal-
culating practicaJists in charge of Krem-
lin diplomacy.

Our panicky policies have produced
negative re3ults.

We have no definable objective.

Nor have we had a stable or consistent
policy or plan to achieve it.

A lasting and honorable peace seems
further away than ever before. Our
pre."?nt policy presupposes that global
v.ar IS inevitable — just a matter of time.
Yet. time seems to be njnning against us.

Dollar diplomacy is no substitute for
calmness, care, consideration, and cool
deliberation in the conduct of our for-
eign policy.

The fact that we have sacrificed the
lives of thou.sands of American youth on
foreign battlefields and have spent over
$115 billion in foreifrn aid during the last
40 years attests our willingness to do
more than our part to preserve peace in
the world.

The American people have drafted
their youtli and have given of their ma-
terial substance without demands, with-
out conditions or without even an ac-
counting.

No people In the history of the world
have given so much to others and asked
so little in return.

We have jeopardized our economy and
mortgaged our future by giving away
billions to stop war.

The dread specter of runaway infla-
tion threatens every institution in Amer-
ican life today.

It threatens the home, the church, the
school, and business, and it is built into
tiie whole foreign aid undertaking.

It is completely mconsistent to give
lipservice to "controUins" inflation
while feeding it at the sam.e time with
profligate foreign aid ventures and the
outpouring of billions of American
money for foreign aid giveaways.

The purch.ising power of our dollar
has shrunk over 50 percent in the last 18
years. It is down 3 ' 2 percent in the past
12 months.

We cannot close our eyes to the fact
that in the very ne.xt decade, if the pre.«;-
ent trend is allowed to continue, we will
have a 25-cent dollar, or one worth even
less.

Already our national debt, per capita
a-s well as the sum total, far and away
exceeds that of all other countries of the
frt^ world combined. This does not
count State and local debts.

The tight money policy adopted by the
present national administration has sent
the cost of servicing the national debt
soarini; by some $600 millions annually
even in spite of the fact that there has
been a sh^-ht reduction in the amount of
the debt itself.

Foreign aid is In a large way respon-
.'^ib'.e for the denial of tax relief to mil-
lions of Americans whose earnings have
been confiscated in large amounts by the
P't'deral Government to pay the bill for
this spending across the seas.

We are paying wartime taxes in peace-
time.

Prom 1792 to 1950 Americans paid $406
billion in taxes to their Federal Govern-
ment.

Prom 1950 to 1957 we paid to the Fed-
eral Government $433 billion.

For $406 billion we fought and won 6
wars.

For $t06 billion we fought an indeci-
sive police action in Korea and have
watted what diplomats call a cold war in
peacetime.

Today, roughly one-sixth of the gross
national product of this countiir is being
paid m Federal taxes.

One wonders how long this Nation will
survive such a drain on It.s economy.

The Pre.'-'ident's brave pronouncement
of stabilizing the cost of living has fallen
by the wayside.

During the 1957-58 fi.scal year the Fed-
eral Government expects to collect out
of the United Stages taxpayers the stu-
pendous total of $75 8 billion.

I say with all candor that unless the
present policy of Federal spending is held
in check, all hope of a tax cut at any
time in the future will vanLsh and we
will be confronted with another round of
Federal tax increases and more likely the
imposition of new or additional taxes.

During the la.«=t 12 years we have st)ent
more than $5 billion a year for foreign
aid — a total of more than $62 billion.

It Is hard to visualize what this huge
amount of money would have done for
the people of this Nation.

It would have provided for our every
need in the way of schools, hospitals,
highways, and permanent improvements
of every sort.

There would have been enough to pro-
vide a needed increase in presently in-
adequate pension and retirement pay-
ments, and there would have been enough
to end the depression on the farm and
provide our farmers a fair return for
their investment and labor.

We are told tliat unless we send dol-
lars, we will have to send our youth and
pay with blood.

In that statement, we have a clear-cut
admission of a total failure in our for-
eign policy. And we have evidence of a
total failure to achieve any concrete re-
suits even after the expenditure of all
these biUions on peacetime foreign aid.

"Send dollars to save sending .sons.'*
sounds irood as a slogan, but it is noth-
ing more than a delu.sion. History has
proved it so on more than one occasion
in the recent pa.st.

Congress should not be deceived by
tricky phrases and clever slogans.

Congress should not be stampeded
Into adopting a course that can only
bring us nearer the 'brink of war," if not
carry us over the brink.

The present policy of weakening this
Nations economy and defenses through
InefTective foreign aid. If continued.
makes it inevitable that we will be forced
aeain to st^nd our sons to fight and die
In foreign lands.

Add to this the unpleasant prospect
that our Nation, with her resources dis-
sipated to the four corners of the earth.
may lie prostrate, vulnerable to attack.

It is in that light that we must reexam-
ine and readjust the whole field of our
present foreign-aid policies from top to
bottom.

Mr. President, although I am new In
Washington. It Ls difficult for me to de-
tect any appreciable de^ree of logic in
the foreign economic-aid program.

To make any sense Jut of some of
these giveaways requires that one dis-
card all of the tried and proved maxims
of human experience.

It appears to me that in this strange
program, truth is inverted and results
in a mirage.

I can conceive of no other activity
In governmental operations so lax and
inemcient where a total of $363 mil-
lion could be lost for over 2 years with-
out anybody finding out about it.

Perhaps the most alarming aspect to
me of our foreisn-aid program is that
many well-meaning and sincere people
have been p:T.suadrd that all of this
vast array of money is buying us some-
thing in the way of future security.

Tlie record .shows, and will continue
to unfold, the sad fact that we have
not bought one iota of the protection
we must have in case of necessity, even
in spite of tlie bitter sacrifices we have
been called upon to make.

Thousands upon tliousands of hiphly
paid American jobholders and their
families have been dispersed throughout
some sixty-odd nations of the earth to
show these nations how to spend our
money — and how to get even more to
spend.

People do not like to be forced to de-
pend upon charity.

So It is with natiorL>5.

Foreign aid, extended to the point of
continuous dependency, breeds ill-wl'.l.

The truth of this conclusion was d'?m-
on-trated recently when the Finance
Mlni.«rter of Pakistan publicly expre:>?ed
grave concern over the harmful effects
to hi.s country of continued dependence
on United States aid,

A compilation of news di.<5patches quot-
Inc Minister All appeared in the May 23.
1957. issue of the Washington Post and
Times Herald. By way of lllu."5tration.
I ask unanimous conj?ent that one of the
articles be printed at this point in the
Record as exhibit A.

There being no objection, the ar.icle
was ordered to be printed In the Record,
as follows:

ExHrurr A

pAKisTA.v Aid URora Limit on United Statis
Hm.p

Karachi, May 22 — Pinance Mlnlst^ gyed
Amjad All says PHkLstan should "face .^rlm
realities" and quit depending so mucli on
United States aid.

Amjad All. Palclstan's Ambassador tc the
United Slate.s for 3 years, told newsmen yes-
terday at Peshawar that "our economic de-
pendence on the United States has g-own
beyond expectations «nd the sooner wi" get
to our feet, the better for us and the coun-
try."

America, he added, was providing Pakistan
with between 700,000 and 800.000 tor* of
grain this year, while the Government waa
Importing a further 300.000 to 400.000 tons
lndep)endently. America was also prov.dlng
foreign exchange to help build Pakistan's
foreign exchange reserves aa well as giving
military and techaicai aid.

19o7

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8977

"There mu":! be ft limit to our commlt-
rriPi.'s. and It Is up to the whole nation to
rise to the ncc:A.slon, face grim realities, and
r.-.r\ke up what Is lost," he declared.

Mr, TALMADGE. Mr. President, we
next come to the logical question: Has
tl.e expenditure of all these billions of
American tax dollars bought any lasting
friendships based on this spending and
this spending alone?

No. It has brought only adverse critl-
ci. m and inveterate hatred of the nations
involved.

Kecent news dispatches from Japan,
Formo'-a, Lebanon, and other countries
reporting numerous manifestations of
anti-.^mcrican sentiment are disquiet-
In?, mdfcd. Even Western Europe, ac-
cordin;4 to the United Press, is extending
a cool reception to American tourists. I
ask unanimous ccnsent that the United
Pres'^ ai tide entitled "Criticism of Amer-
icans l)y Europeans Has Mushroomed
Fincc the Suf^ Crisis." marked as exhibit
B. be in^'erted in the Rzcord at this point
in my remarks.

Tliere being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

ExHrarr B

CRiTTrr'-M or AMrr.ir^Ns bt Ettiopeans Has

Mr-HBooMFD Since the Sitez Ceisis

(Ey Claire Cox)

(Editor's N'vne — Criticism of America has
TTr unted In E'ir<"rp since last fall's Suez
crisis. It Isn t confined to newrpapcr ac-
c< anis and living-room conversations. Even
T) '^ Ararrlcan tcuil.st abroad this ye.TX niay
hfuT wime of It. United Pres-s correspondent
f u.'e Cox did as she motored with her hua-
b; :.d Uir )ugh Briialn end the Continent.)

ly ND .N - A horde of more than 700,000
Am •ri'^Riis are looltlng forward to trips to
K r ;>e ti.ls year, but la Europe looking for-
V irrt to them?

lap lT;i;:;ins and French both treat the
.*.ruerican touri.st as a ciUld — the lUilian* as
V.f'.r own. the French as someone else's.

Eclh advertUe widely fur vUita by Amerl-
Cii.!). E .ih say they axe t^lad to see Anicrl-
c..:^. But waUe the Italians smile when
V.' V tai;e >uur dollars, the Freacii Just take

cormr, cbjticism

The BritLsh don t drink tea eo much any
ni ifp. These days they down Amerlcan-
f !e cnGee and crltlclne the United States.

nnti.^h streets and highways are traveled
b'.- P-Mtens In Amertcan-style automobiles.
Lt r.aun shops feature styles fresh from Fifth
A.e.'iue. There Is an Am ijr lean -style soda
1 ind.itlon at Sliakespcares b.rthplace at
iiu„t:urd.

But Britons malte It quite clear that wlille
ti.ty may buy American, they dont have to
hv ;jr I- American.

I lit- Swiss are pleased at the chance of a
p' .»t< r II. come from tourists than watches.
1 :•-• W»-yt Germans are glad Americans feel
lii re Irce to visit their country and they
h i^ I. r a revival of the friendly exchanges
o: ; .i,twar— World Wax I— days.

But some Swi.sa are angry at the United
Si..ies f .r Us higher tariffs on Swiss watch
niuvenents and lu decision not to back the
li.-r i.^h-FTench Invasion of Sue*.

^ome West Germans resent American efB-
c.'-ncy and dlslUce Yankees because of the
presence of the United Statea Army In Ger-
L1R :.y 13 years after the war.

These are Impreeslons pained after 2
rriimUM- motoring through Britain and the
Continent. They came only from dealing
^;'h persons who live off the tourtet business.
A tourists chances of meeting someone other
Cni 565

than a cab driver, a waiter, a tourist guide, or
a chambermaid are slim Indeed.

Onr visit to Britain began with a rocky
Toyage across the English Channel from
France. During that storm-tossed ride I sat
fighting olT Beaslcla:iess and was a captive
audience for an English woman's attacks on
Americans.

"Americans aren't liked anywhere," she
said. "They are going to have to find a
solution to the Middle East. • • • The
Americans didn't do any real ground fighting
In World War II. They sent planes to flatten
everything and then moved troops In with
little fighting."

PREACH FREEDOM

We heard some French crltl-.lsm of Amer-
ican policies and a Paris cab d..ver charged us
$8 for a $1 ride without butting an eye.
But a French Government travel bureau offi-
cial sa.d. "I gue<^8 we cnn be anr^-y at the
United States without being an^-ry at all
Americans."

A Swiss travel ofBclal said, "We hear the
United States preach freedom and then clamp
dawn on Swiss watch lmport3. Otherwise
we have a friendly feeling toward Individual
Americans."

In West Germany, an American travel rep-
resentative reported, "the attitude toward
Americans here is petting better all the time.
They do resent us a little but only the some-
what boisterous draftee types who whoop It
up on weekends and paydays."

Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, in the
future, it would be well for us to remem-
ber this lesson that we have learned
through hard and costly experience.

Words and dollars can never triumph
when national policies are ambigruous,
incoherent, and muddled.

Only the continuous visilance of the
American i>eopie can stop the powerful
forces which are determined to spend '.is
into bankruptcy.

I do not stand alone In my conviction
that the Irresponsible fiscal policies being
followed by our Federal Government pose
a continuous and worsening threat to our
national existence.

Being such a threat, there is the real
danger that a great deal of the agitation
for more and more spending on foreign
aid and otherwise is prompted, without
justification, by some who would hasten
the day of our insolvency.

We should remember that the planners
have come here year after year asking for
more billions, and have promised Con-
gress that if it will just vote this money
the world will be safe, that all will be
well and American aid can end. Now
foreign aid, instead of being sold to Con-
gress as an emergency year-to-year pro-
gram, has assumed the tag of a perma-
nent obligation of the American tax-
payer.

Not being satisfied witli giving aid to
our friends and allies, we have given bil-
lions In aid to the so-called neutralist
nations.

We have done this with no questions
asked under the fear that seme of these
recipient nations might take their friend-
ship elsewhere.

We have given millions in economic
aid and vast quantities of military sup-
plies to these nations.

No thought has been given to the stark
peril that in the future our very arms
might be hurled against our own sons.

We have seen Tito, Nehru, Nasser, and
others visit and play hosts to the Com-

munists in orgies of friendship and anti-
Western demonstration.

Now it is solemnly proposed that we
begin a program of "aid" to the Com-
munist satellite countries of Eastern
Europe.

How much success can we expect there
when Tito has taken our jet fighter
planes, our weapons, our food, and other
aid totaling a billion dollars, yet, pub-
licly, proclaims himself and his country
just as close to Moscow as ever?

It is nothing short of catastrophic for
our leaders to be deceived into thinking
that a red flag by any other name is a
different color.

Do we not know that so long as we are
committed to this vast and indiscrimi-
nate foreign aid policy, the Reds can
shout "Wolf," and off v,e will have to go
In all directions with our checkbook as a
cure for the world's problems? We will
be made the principal targ^et for any-
one who may desire to play international
blackmail against us.

Cannot we see that under such cir-
cumstances the Communists can whip-
saw us to eventual collapse between one
contrived "emergency" and another?

Contrast our lack of policy with the
firm directness of the Soviets. While
they make swaggering promises, they
negotiate sharp trades and agreements,
paradoxically, in the best capitalist tra-
dition.

In the furtherance of their policy of
world trouble-making, bluff and bluster,
two tourists from Moscow. Soviet Pre-
mier Bulganin and pudgy Communist
Party Boss Krushchev, staged a noisy
and smiling procession for propaganda
through India, Burma, and Afghanistan.
Throughout their travels, the two men
from the Kremlin act^ as canny busi-
nessmen. They adhered strictly to capi-
talistic methods. They gave nothing
away. They promised nothing for free.
If a prospective buj'er was a bit hard up
for cash they advanced it at a profitable
interest rate.

For example. In neutralist India,
which had received $1 billion worth of
free goods from the United States, and is
now slated to get that much more, the
Russians agreed to furnish that country
with ore mining machinery, but only on
condition that India would purchase a
million tons of ferrous metals. Even
the widely heralded gift of a Soviet steel
mill to their happy and overly gracious
host Nehru, was no handout. It is to be
repaid to Moscow by 12-year credits at
2 "2 percent interest.

In Burma, the two traveling salesmen
from the Kremlin bought half of the
Burmese rice crop and in return ar-
ranged to help Burma expand its agri-
cultxn^ and industry, not for free, but
at an agreed price for goods and services.

In Afghanistan, the touring capitalists
from Moscow offered a $100 million loan
to be used for the purchase of goods ex-
clusively from the Soviet Union.

In the face of this new business and
financial news, our high -policy makers
In Washington panicked. They pan-
icked despite the fact that for the
1954-56 period, Soviet loans to other na-
tions, usually at 2 percent or better in-
terest* totaled only 4 percent ol the

8978

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

United States outlays in dollar values
dunntj the same period. Dunne; this
periud the United States gave $12 billion
to other nations.

One wonders why this country, with
its reputation for ingenuity. ory:aniza-
tion, and production, cannot secure fa-
vorable agreements in carrying out our
foreign policy and programs of foreign
aid.

The reason. I am afraid, i.s that the
Consrress has abdicated much of its con-
stitutional responsibility over appro-
priations.

By appropriatin;^ for economic aid and
mutual security larger amounts than
possibly can be utilized in a single fiscal
year, the Executive has taken control
over the purse away from the Conuress.

The late^t figures published m the May
24. 1957. issue of the U, S News k World
Report, show that over $70 billion in
unexpended balances are on hand in
various departments and agencies, and
$7 5 billion of this amount comprises the
foreign-aid backlog.

On May 15. 1957, the International
Operations Subcommittee of the Com-
mittee on Government Operations, of
the House of Representatives, issued a
most informative and enlightenin-.: re-
port on budgetary procedures of the In-
ternational Cooperation Administration.
There is only one conclu.sion that can be
drawn by any open-minded persons after
reading this report, and that is the ICA
has no budget procedure.

Congress has been handing this
agency, and its predecessor agencies,
bulions of dollars of the people's money,
without any previous determinauon of
how the money is to be spent, and with-
out any audit or accurate check to deter-
mine whether the money was spent for
the purposes intended.

The information in House Report No.
449 IS a shocking revelation of tiie tiscal
Instability that seems to have gripped
our Federal Establishment. After read-
ing this report. I mu.st say with all
candor that I am appalled at this arro-
gant lack of concern for even minimal
bookkeeping requirements. I am ap-
palled at the ferule held this program
affords for loose practices and the many
loopholes It offers, through its lax ad-
ministrative requirements, for harmful
practices.

So that the people of this Nation may
know the free-wheeling method by which
their tax dollars are appropriated by
Congress and expended by the ICA. I a.^k
unanimous consent that a few repre-
sentative paragraphs from House Report
No 449 on the budgetary practices of the
ICA, as taken directly from this report.
be included as a part of my remarks and
printed at this juncture in the Record
as exhibit C

There being no objection, the excerp^<^
were ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

Exhibit C

E-xcTRPTS Prom a Rrviiw nr the BfDcrr Ton-
MT/i^rii'N A.vD Presentation Practu-es or
THr International Cooperation Aominis-
tration

INTROD renew

Each year the International Cr>op*ratl>in

Administration, flanked by the Departtnenia

of ."^tate. Defense, and Treasury, ar.d other

exe>.utr.9 agenciei, asKs Cungresa lor au-

thority and funds to carry on the mutiial-
securltv proRraiii for amither year In fiscal
year 1958 authority will be reqvie.sted to con-
tinue or initiate mutual-security programs
In approximately 60 countries throughout
the world and to add an e.stimated $3 9 bil-
lion to the more than •60 billion th.Ht hm
been spent for this purpose over the past 10
years.

Uocumer.tlng this request, and exhibited
under military guard to 4 committees of
Congres,«. will be a highly chissihed printed
presentation In 4 or 5 volumes, setting fiirth.
la more than a thousand pages of charts,
griphs. schedules, and narratives, the Admin-
is'rati on's expression of how the funds re-
quested mli^ht be used. It Is on this com-
plicated arr.iv of Information that Congre.'is
mu.st base Its Judgments to authorize, to
tt:'..Ance, and to control the Admluistratlun's
prop<:)sals lor foreign aid.

• • • • ■

TFF- B-TCFT CALL

Within TC.\ the budget f )rmu:iUlon Is a
coiitinumg operation which pret-edes the
presentation by more than a year. Actually.
as a budget fi r a given year Is presented t<3
the Congress, preparation of the budget for
the ensuing ve.ir Is already tinderway

To heijin the assembly of inf jrmation upon
whirh trie bud.:et presentation will be based.
IC.\ issues a budtjet call to the directors of
the varl"Vis operatl'M-.'i miJvsions. located In
e>>-h •'• 'Un'ry where IC.\ operates a foreign-
aid program

In response to this call, the mlssl mi direc-
tor submits a proposed country prowrram. and
R proposed level of aid- — amount of money —
r»'<i ured to carry It out. One would expect
the Compilation of the country program t.i
liulude detailed advance planning, careful
s'.irf rev.fw and full recognition of existing
or f ireseeable obstacles to carrying out. the
ac'ivi'ies proposed w;*h!n the perlo<i f ^r
which funds are requested Careful consid-
eration should be given t«i the availability
of United i^tates resources -technlcuns,
equipment, and funds. Administrative pru-
dence wv^.uld seem to rec^ulre that the com-
piL^tlon be preceded by discussions In con-
siderable detail with appropriate govern-
mental unit."* of the recipient country, ro
that the mission could supplv IC.^ WashinR-
ton with reliable appraisals of that coun'r> a
receptivity to the pripose*! program. Its abil-
ity to execute and absorb the program,
aud Its prospective contributions thereti).

From the committee s review of Individual
country programs in operati.n. It must con-
clude that performance falls short of this
Ideal For the most part, country program
submissions are ba.'»e<l more on Imadclna'ioti
than on fact, ci mprlslng broadly conceived
aspirationa and lo.'se estimates of co«t m. re
n> 'table for their appeal than for their prac-
ticability.

• • • • •

The committee questioned ICA wltnes«e«i
In some detail op. the extent to which pro-
gramlr.g was precede<l by detailed discusal ns
with the recipient coun'rles \CK testified
that pri'r to the receipt of approprlatliins
•uch d:.sou.«Uins were only In very general
terms, since negotiations on a detailed basis
with those countries might give rl.se t<-» ex-
pectations whi.'h I(-".\ could not later satl.sfy.
if Congress disapproved the pr^ .posed pro-
grams or ctirtaiied funds. We find It hard
to believe that American dlj/.omatlc j>er-
•onnel are so Inept at negotiation that they
could n.'t expl >re proposals a go<Kl deal mor»
than Is n.'W done without lrrev<x-ably com-
mitting this Oovernment to a course of ac-
tion prematurely.

As an example of the shortcomings \^->
which lack of fiiller dlscus«U)n contributes. lt>
Is clear from the testimony that ICA gen-
erally lacks firm asuurances, prior to re-
qiiestlng funds from the Congrese. as to what
contrlbvitlons the recipient country will
make to particular projects or to the overall

country program It would seem th.it a very
precise deternunatlon of the size of this con-
tribution would be e.ssoiitlal in det«rmlning
what would be needed In the way of United
States lunds

• • • • ■

To explore the correctness of ICA's conten-
tion In this regard, the subcommittee re-
viewed the narrative pvirtlons of ICA's Mt'}!
budget prebentatliin It Wiva found that the
narrative supjilies labels but .. 't reasons It
tells. In general terms, what the money Is to
bo expended for. but mt why Thi- various
proposals made have substantive amis but no
apparent quantitative objectives The state-
ment that a gUen sum Is required t-i 'balance
the recipient counTy s budsjet ' is an explan-
ation, of sorts, of ihp Use .ntended, b it U doea
not explain why this particular amount of
money is required rathtr than si ne other
amount, how long this pr.Kcss mvist go on.
what United States sectirlty nr jiohiy objec-
tives are furthered by the activity or what
the alternatives are to prt>ceedlnf a« pro-
posed

This !s not merely a matter of t\\ ilty pres-
entation that Could he corrected U note c.ire
and attention were devoted to the prepura-
tliui of this n.irr.itive material. ICA wit-
nesses testif'.ed that there doi'S lot exist,
anywhere within ICA. a "single ttatement
covering all the reasons why a particular hid
level f T a particular country was decided
upon at the time It was decided U[K)n '

The net result Is that the Congre>s is being
asked to authorize and apfir^ 'prl i*e furuls
upi'ii the biisls of vagiie t'enerallti's. Ri;d la
n' t provided with the specific fac'.-. and rea-
Bons necessary V't proper evaluati m of tne
requests made

As the House Approprlai Ions Committee,
after reviewing the VJbl presentation, slated
In Its report

"Committee deliberaMons are made more
dltTlcult, to»i, by the lack of information a«
to past accomplishments, and the vagueness
of data on projected proerams I", appears
that fretjuently programs are f' rmuiate<l
with little 1 r no consider.itlrjn of the needs
of the country or countries concerned "

• • • • •

The 19.^7 budget presentation, for the first
time contained a list of prMp(.>«ed project.^
fir ea. h cun'ry But It did n^c Include
surricient Inf rmatlon to permit their evalua-
tli'f\ fr-im the 8tanf1}>'li.' of reasonableness
and desirability And although this lift
makes It i>.s».ible to determine whs' jv)rt!on
of each country program Is planned as proj-
ect aid and which Is nonproject aid. t is gtUl
impossible to determine the basis upon
which the levels of aid were determ ned

This In effect asks Cf)ngres8 to -ake on
faith the entire foreign aid prograr i The
alternative is to require more and belter In-
formation from the agency.

• • • • •

Substantial amounts of the local curren-
cies receUrd through sales of mrplua agri-
cultural commodities bv the Department of
Agriculture under Public Law 4Hn i,\grlcul-
tural Trade Development and Asslstitnce Act
of li*.54i are allocated to ICA for us<' in the
mutual security pr'igram At March :<1,
19.5ri, Ju.st bef ire the 19n7 bidK-et pesenta-
llou was miule. an aggregate of over •5<.>0
million of such currencies had been pro-
gramed to ICA for use In various countries
on the basis of executed Public Iaw 480
aalea agreementa There Is no clear Indica-
tion In the 1957 budget presentation that
these funds have been taken Into account
In IC.\ planning either on a country basis or
overall At March 31. 1957, the moat recent
date for whlf-h full data Is available, this
amount has been increased to over 11 billion.

ICA wltneaaes testified that almoat half of
the Public Law 480 funds are used In C50un-
trlea where ICA has no aid program. It
Is not clear whether aid programs might have
t>een established Ui thoae counulea Lf there

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8979

had been no Public Law 480 funds. Congres-
Bional committees reviewing the 1957 budget
request were concerned by ttiU problem,
sjod ICA w'.tnesbcs expanded somewhat up^j-i
the formal prcsontatinn by testimony re-
lating to Public Lave 480 fund avall.iblllty.
It dt)es not appear from the published hear-
Ir.i^s. however, any more than from the
prtsenta'ion materlaJ, that ICA supplied a
clear, saii.sfactory answer to the questions
v.e e-k here.

• • • • •

"iLLfbTRATTVK ' ■UDCrr PrtSENTATlON

TVe mainer of budgPt presenu llou used
by IlA HiiCl lis predecefcsora U ',e y unil'.e
taat :u>rnuiily eniplojtd by oxccuLlve ap^n-
aes in re(;ucsti::g funds from the Con-
gress Inbtea<1 of I'sttng the specific activi-
ties wMch will definitely make up the for-
eiFT.-a:d pn gram for the coming year, an
actl\.;y or a type of acMvity Is eet forth
as mere'.y Kltir-trathe cf the kind of pro-
gram that Will be cfirrled out if changi-.g
clrcumsUinces do not prevent It. This hiia
the effect of not binding the aqency to any
specific actr.'lties. and so the Contrrt-ss never
knows In atlvanre what new activitlefl will
be started during the c >mli.g year, or wliat
unfSn; hcd activities will t>e continued.

TliP pr.'T k!.iiwlcd''e by ICA pervmnel, at
he.idquiirtrrs and in the field, that the
•'l.lusir.ilivr' ' budget pre-icnted Is luUhcr
final nor blndluj; uix n the i-KP'.cy nii^y well
be a mnjnr c ntr.bi!t!;,g f.nctor t^i tl:e In-
aJivTuacies In planning that we h.ive noted
pre.iou.sly. In s'ibmlttlng Us budfet. ICA
seems lesa concerned with the presentation
of a planned pr- .n'-inr tlu.n with securing a
lump sum of n,' ney for expendiiure a5 the
a^ucy sees f.t.

• • • • •

CONCLUSIONS

1. The Illustrative me^ht^d cf budRet
presentation does not bind ICA to carry
out any of the activities pr^-iposed to tl.e
Compress In fa'^t. It p^rmlia t!:e ncrncT
C'^mplrfe dlscri'.on In the use of funds,
free of the ret-tmints. checks, and balances
irnerally imjos^d upon tlie executive
branch. It dies not provide toe Congrese
'WkUi a full undcrbtanding of what the
agency Is doing, wliat it has d-iie, and what
It Ir. tends to do.

• • • • •

11 IC.^ cn'lKtently n-^k.^ for an'l rf»<~eirps
n"'tre m ney thf.n It has evi^ been .nble to use
In the year for which requested. This prac-
tice has invited the hasty, last-minute obll-
^Uon of unused fund; , which precludes
Uii'ir return Uj tlte Tre;ii>ury.

12. Funds alluciiled t.j ICA f r^ m the pro-
Cffrts of sales of surplus Ptrrlcultura! c m-
modltles t:n»:. r Ptihllc Law 481 hnve the ef-
ffTt of supplementing the ICA budeet In
tiijal year l'J57, when the nonmllltary
n'.'utu.'\l--rcor;iy budpet ran to about $1.6
bliUon. this supplement anriounted to an
•Cd; t .or. .'ii half bUilwn duilars. Neither the
19j7 budget pre.f tntatlon ntir tO£tlnrj:.y be-
fore thi.s committee m.-^Jies cle.ar to what
extent, if any, ICA cnstders the nvallahlllty
f>f these funds in compiling Its budeet re-
quest. T'.ie omlsKlon of this information
nia>'.es It difflcult fi r the Congress to deter-
mine the amount by which the c<jst of the
forc!gn-ald p: .gram actually excteda the
ICA l:udsct.

Mr TALMADGE. Mr. President, we
have soon the veil of secrecy cloak all

C'f tl.c m;.'«(irc:1s. wa.sle, and extravagance
*hich have been committed in the name
T'f forea-n aid. A total blackout has been
in rfTect on military assistance, and it
h:i.s been hard to get information on
other e.xpenditures.

Ordinary care demands that if for-
c:i:n aid is remotely beneficial, it should
11' t be dribbled away on ill-considered
projects all over the world. The tax-

payers who pay the bill are entitled to
something more than rague assurances
that all Is well.

It appears to the uninitiated that our
foreign -aid planners prefer to speak in
an unknown tongue. In order to confuse
and confound the average citizen. It Is
not without significance that ICA Direc-
tor Hollister confirmed this fact when
he appeared before a Senate committee.
Mr. Hollister arrced that "there are so
many facets to ICA that It is pretty hard
to keep up With all of them." It Is
"very complicated," he said, and added,
"I think that perhajM a fresh approach
would be very wise."

I have studied diligently a mass of in-
formation, such as is available. Find-
ing ."specific information as to results and
finding consistent information as to the
amounts of money involved in foreign
aid are difflcult tasks. It is hard to
draw tangible conclusions. Much of the
material upon which these huge appro-
priations have been based ranges be-
tween unsupported opinion and mon-
strou.s total figures beyond all ccmpre-
h en.": ion.

I detected one thread of truth that
seemed to weave in and out of all of
these reports — that all claims for posi-
tive results are always nebulous. It was
with regret that I found that to be the
case even in the final report of the Spe-
cial Senate Committee To Study the
Foreign Aid Program, as released May
13. 1957.

A few selected quotations, under the
heading "Contribution of Postwar Aid
to National Interest," excerpted from
this report are indicative of what I
mean. Here are a few examples:

ImpofFible to eav •with certalr.ty how
much better off or worse off the United
States Is todp.y because of these expendi-
tures.

One can only ptiefis. • • • «

One cnn estimate. • • •

C"»rec^e and Turkey mipht today be be-
hind the Iron Curtain. • • •

Pormofa m'.fht have fallen. • • •

'Western Etircpe might never have re-
ccjvorc-d. • • •

Iran mipht never have s'urvlved.

It does seem tl:at the American tax-
payer is entitled to a little more concrete
inforraation on what his billions of tax
dollars have bought.

Semiannual reports to the Congress
on activities of the mutual-security pro-
gram are no more ill'on'unating.

Tlie 26-page printed report of the In-
ternational Cooperation Administration,
for the 6-month period ending Decem-
ber 31, 1956. sent to Congress earlier this
year, purports to account for the ex-
penditure of billions of dollars.

Just taking the $3,767,000,000 mutual
security appropriations' figure for the
current fiscal year, we find that only a
page Is used to explain $145 million in
expenditures. And, at an average of 80
lines to a page, a single line of the re-
port represents expenditures of $1,811,-
057.69.

Lack of specific information, general
vagueness, and absence of coordination
of the report Is a true Index to the
nature and character of the program we
are being asked to continue.

Without doubt, one of the most shock-
ing and disheartening governmental re-

ports ever made was that rendered
earlier this year by the International
Operations Subcommittee of the Com-
mittee on Government Operations of the
House of Representatives.

This report deals with the operation
of American-aid programs in Iran and
even to the casual observer the findings
here must be accepted as reflective to a
lesser or greater degree of foreign aid
administration in other countries.

It is an eye opener.

It shows beyond all doubt that foreign
economic aid, as an effective, instrument
of policy, is the epitome of futility.

I ask unanimous consent that certain
selected excerpts from this report, taken
from pages 54, 55, 56, 57, and 53, and
marked as exhibit D be included at this
point as a part of my remarks.

There being no objection, the excerpts
were ordered to be printed in the Rec-
ord, as follows:

Exhibit D
ExcEEPTS Peom a Report on Untted States

Aid OPER.^'noNs is Iran — Report or thb

INTEKNATIONAI. OPERA'no>'S SUBCOMarTrTEK
OF THE COMMITTEZ ON GOVEINMENT OPERA-
TIONS

What this picture adds up to is Eimply that
we have, from 1951 through 1956, spent over
a quarter cf a billion dollars of United States
tax money In Iran, including 3 years of sup-
port to that Government's extraordinarily
flexible budget, at an average rate of 85 mU-
lion a month, with a new set of Justiflcationi
and a new set of reasons being presented to
the Congress each year as to why aid at this
level should be continued.

As significant as the statements made In
behalf of the program have been, the sub-
committee finds that presentations to the
Congress have been even more notable for
the facts they have omitted. There has been
a consistent failure to Indicate to the Con-
gress that Iran In many respects, and even
diiTlng the period of oil nationalization,
was essentially a solvent country quite ca-
pable of working out Its own financial prob-
lems.

The essential and secure source of Iran's
wealth, namely, her oil, Is sufficiently rec-
ognized In the world's financial circles to
make the negotiation of long-range loans
quite feasible. Yet Iran has been reluctant
to u.-^^ Its lean opportunities, both through
the Export -Import Bank and the Interna-
tional Bank for Reconstruction and Developy-
ment, and this reluctance is apparently ex-
plained by Iran on the grounds that loans
are politically unpopular while outright
grants are not.

There was. as well, a failure to tell the
Congress that $10 million of United States
aid funds used to underwrite a currency is-
sue could have been obviated by a change in
Iranian law. Expert witnesses before the
subcommittee admitted that the Iranian
currency, even before this $10 million trans-
action occurred, was one cf the best backed
currencies In the world. Moreover, an ex-
amination of the gold and foreign exchange
holdings of the Bank Melll. Iran's central
bank, showed it position to be strong
throughout the period of so-called crises.

• • • a •

The favilts of the use of the so-caUed illus-
trative program are amply demonstrated In
Congressional presentations on Iran.

Illustrative programs are not actually pro-
grams in any planned sense. Instead, they
are lump-sum requests for funds under
broad categories such as agricultural and
natural resources, or health and sanitation,
supplemented by a gener&l narrative state-
ment of the agency's intentions for the year.

The more significant thing, however. Is not
the lack of specificity of the Justifications,

8980

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 1.

but rather the fact that thev Inv^'.ve n--)
oimmitmeiit that The money appriprlnted
will be spent for the Items mentioned.

The entire presentation Is Iniended to b«
only Illustrative of the way the agency ex-
pei;''j» the monev will be spent. Only after
Congress has appropriated the money tloe*
the International Cooperation Administra-
tion i;et down to the business of doimj; f\rra
and speoirto planning and negoriatin>c with
the host country government. The next year
Congress will be told, under similarly bro.id
categories, how the expenditures were ac'.u-
A^ly made.

The es.sen'lal Justification given by *he
af^ency for continuing the Illustrative
method of pro^ramlni? and budget presen-
tation la tha' United States representaUves
In the field must have a firm allotment of
money In hand before they can negotiate
programs with aid-receiving governments.
According to spolsesmen for the Interna-
tional Cooperation Administration foreign
government officials will not negotiate agree-
metd on a hypothetical baMs. They must be
assured that Ciiited States funds will be
made available The subcommittee has no
basis for disputing this, but It does feel
Impelled t.) point out that not only d'les
It put the United States m the p<'sitlon ■ f
accepting hypothetical commltment.s by host
governments but It also Involves asking the
Unl'ed States Congress to grant firm
amounts of money on the hypothe'ical basis
that a good use will be discovered tor lt_
• * • • •

In connection with reports to the Con-
gress on the use of budgetary assistance
funds the most glaring onu.ssion Is the ab-
sence of Information on wiiat was done with
them once they were re<-eived by the h^wt
country. Repi)rta to the Congress go Into
considerable detail as to the form in which
this assistance was made available, whether
In Imports of sugar, vehicles, industrial
machinery, and so on. Yet. for the most
part, this tells the less slgniflcant aspect of
the use of budgetary assistance funds
What counts most Is the way the recipient
government spent the money received by It
through these imports, and on that side of
the picture Congressional presentations are
very nearly .silent As an example, the Con-
gressional presentation material describing
how the first budgetary assistance funds
were used treats this a.spect of the picture la
the one following sentence:

"The total effect of these varlovis forms of
assistance has been to provide the Crovern-
ment of Iran with a s<'urce of local cur-
rency with which ti:) help meet government
operating expenses, and to carry out mini-
mum essential projects in housing, road Im-
provement, water supply, and health "

Nowhere does it mention 8,3 million used
to ral.se Government salaries, $13 million
used to make up deficits of the National
Iranian Oil Co . $11 million for b<inuses tij
the army, police, and gendarmerie. No-
where does it mention that after receiving
United States aid, the budget deficit In-
creased rather than decreased. Even where
the presentation stresses the Illegal expan-
Bl'in of the Iranian currency under the Mos-
sadegh regime. In describing the chaotic
situation of August 1953 It omits mention
of the fact that the currency even after
expansion was still sound and that the new
government found It necessary to undertake
a similar expansion and In that connection
to have the cvirrency law liberalized.

In the Judgment of the subcommittee, the
Congress should reqiilre as a condition of
all future grants of budgetary aid an ac-
counting not only of how United States dol-
lars were expended In the United States, but
how the resviltant Income was utilized by
the receiving country. It Is this latter In-
formation which affords the only sound
basis for Judgment as to whether It Is being
wisely used. Perhaps most noteworthy lu

this connection Is the fact that rep<->rts fr ^m
the held U) the Department of St.ite and to
IC.\ In Washington contain this kind of in-
formation, but the Congress never gets It
without digging for It

Hie overwhelming reluctance which key
IC.\ officials have displayed In laying their
cards on the table before this subcommittee.
Indeed the apparent Intent of some of the
principal witnesses to snow the subcommit-
tee under with Irrelevant and gratuitous side
Issues, h.is shaken the subcoiiTmlttees con-
fidence In the s«iundnes9 of the reports on
which Ctin^ress has based Its Judgments ot
the entire foreign-ald operation. As a re-
sult, the serious deficiencies In the Iran pro-
gram are not now the principal concern of
the subcommittee With the exercise ot a
good deal of charity It might be possible to
understand many of these as Isolated and
peculiar to the time and place But the
most far-reaching and disturbing discovery
the subc'. mmlt tee made in the course of this
Investigation was that the principal offi-
cials in charge of this program either could
not reci>gnlze these derlciencles or were de-
dicated to the t.isk. especially in dealing
with the Congress, of delendlng by highly
questionable means Indefensible perlurm-
ances.

The subcommlt'ee recommends, therefore,
to the Congress that It give wholehearted
8upp<.>rt and continuous attention to resp>. n-
sible studies being made or t<j be nrade of
foreign-aid programs, especially those under
congressional auspices. It la apparent that
tremendous obstacles will confront every
such effort For this reason, superilclal re-
views over brief periods of time can be worse
than useless In this field of Government
operatloii..^. perhaps more than in any otner.
haste Is apt to overUx)k many essentially
black situa'ions which tend to escape no-
tice by being covered with a coat of white-
wash

Perhaps the most sobering thought to be
expressed about the Iranian-aid protpram Is
that It Is Inextricably wovind up with our
foreign policy as a whole in Iran and IX our
foreign policy today In other lands Is as
entangled with ei^onomlc-ald operations of
the kind described In this report, it Is lean-
ing on a poor kind of Instrument Indeed.
Even more serious is the fact that corrective
action, obvlou-sly tui badly needed. In the con-
duct of aid operations cannot but severely
wrench the whole fabric of our current con-
cepts of foreign policv. To that extent, pre-
cipitate action Is fraught with difficulty.
Yet. If the only way to prevent the further
defeneration of foreiijn aid Is to take such
action, it would perhaps be well worth what-
ever risks may appear to be Involved.

Mr. TALALADGE. Mr. President, we
find thai ^me of cho.-^e .seekina: to Jastify
a continuation of foreit^n aid re.sort to
many rea.son.s for doin^ so. The chief
amons them being;

Fir.st It "contain.s" communi.sm.

Second. It prevents depression at
home.

Third. It reduces the need for arm.s
and men in our own forces.

Fourth. It is a vehicle for friendship
and humanitananism.

Fifth. It is a means of winning less-
developed nations to freedom.

Sixth. It is the principal bulwark of
world peace.

Seventh It act.s as a lid to cap explo-
sive political situations.

Eighth. It is a stimulator of world
trade, investment, and free enterprise
throughout the world.

If all those things were true forelem
aid would be a cure for all world prob-
lems.

Unfortunately, we cannot .spend our-
selves rich.

We cannot cive ourselves strong.

And we had best not rely on others
at this late date to do our fighting for us.

While .some .^ei^ments of American
bu.s;ne.s.s. particularly the larue lndu.<-tnal
Kroutvs and some banks have profited
from foreii;n a:d, it Is a gross absurdity
to contend that America's economic
well-hein!; l.s dependent on forei^in a.d
^;iveaways. Our i.;ro6s national product
now exceeds $400 billion j^er year

Foreit;n aid expenditures are only a
fraction of this amount, and in view of a
sub.stantial use of some of the money ta
make purchiises of Koods and supplies
abroad, it contributes even It'.ss to ou;-
total economy, tliat standpoint con-
sidered.

It is to disregard fact for any per'.on
to look upon these expenditures othtT
than a dram on our people, a drain on
our country, and a burden on generations
of Americans yet unb<jrn.

We have heard much recently about
the Fairless report

While I do not asree entirely with all
the conclu.sions contained in the March
1. 1957, report to the Pre.Mdent by t!it>
Citizens Committee on Foreign Aid, of
which Hon. Benjamin F. Fairless was
coordinator, the report, though not a de-
tailed one, did contain several sugges-
tions for improved administration
which should have been implemented
immediately

It IS a pity that this report, like many
others calling for reforms and improved
procedures, has been shelved to gather
dust.

Apparently the only passane taken
seriously was the mild committee con-
clusion that a collective security program
will be necessary for some years to come.

But even this recommendation was
tempered by the admonition that assist-
ance m grant form should be Kiven only
those exceptional cases where it is clearly
In the national intere.st to do so and when
the recipit nt countries are adjudged un-
able to repay.

The Fairle.ss committee, expre.'vsing
concern over recent cutbacks in planned
western contributions to Free World arm-
ament, urged a higher priority — be
given — in foreit^n assistance programs —
to those countries which have joined the
collective security system.

Our Government, the report said,
should marshal our resources to help
those nations which share our apprehen-
sion of the threat of the Communist
conspiracy and share the same judgment
as to t.he measures necessary to defend
against it.

I share that view particularly as re-
gards helping Britain and other allies in
maintaining sufficient armament to meet
Communist forces whenever and wher-
ever they should seek to move aggres-
sively.

When historians analyze United States
post-World War II aid programs they
may well conclude that we have scattered
our shot and that we would have been
far better off concentrating much of our
backing behind a few trusted allies, with
the primary responsibility upon them
for maintaining order in their respective
spheres of uifluence.

uir>

- -v
4

COxNGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Instead, we have tried to make first-
rate powers out of fourth-rate powers.
all at the expense of our allies and our-

iflVCS.

In his me-s.'=a;;e on mutual security de-
livered to tlie Con;:ress May 21. 1957, tlie
President called for a new loan policy,
if It can rightly be called that.

The President's description of the.se
so-called loans, to be dished by the ICA
deserves clo.se scrutiny.

Here is liow lie defined the ICA loan
policy:

These loans should be made on a reason-
able expectation of repavmcnt In dollars or
local currencies, even th(.uph we should
recognize that this rxi>ectation would be
bused on confidence In tlie long-range de-
velopment of the br.rrowing country and rf
hu;)e f-ir an lmjiro\fd international pt^ltical
cMmnte rather than un presently demonstra-
ble financial suunUiiess.

This policy, of course, does not follow
the policy suggested by the Fairless Com-
mittee

The Committee surcp'^tf^d that in loans
made to ( ther nations a sound policy
be adhered to, as follows:

In our \!pw loans by the United .States
repayable In the inconvertible currencies
of foreign nations are unde^-srable nnd the
practice of graiitlng thcni should he ter-
minated Our rrlatiiMis with other countries
will suffer f.'om United .States coiurol of
lartte amounts of their currencies. The
tound.-iess of the loan device should not be
jeopardized by l.iMllng repavment In for-
eign currenrips which cannot be freely spent
by the United State.*;

Slmilarlv, the valid. ly of International con-
tracts should not l>e undermined by the
granting of loans la clrc',imstan'~es which
there is grave doubt n.s to the ability of the
borrower to repay We recof;nize, however,
that there will be ca.ses In which it Is In the
Interest of the United States to make dollar
loans on more liberal lern-.s than those of
the establlfhed public banks with re.'-jiect
to Interest rates and perixls of repayment.

Any similarity bet'veon the recommen-
dations of the Fairless Committee and
administration recommendations is
pujely superficial.

For instance, the Committee suggested
eid proiMMins geared to 2-year periods,
to be .submitted to each Congress, rather
than at each se.^-.sion.

The President's me^sage. however, en-
\ision^ an indefinite loan program under
ICA of unspecified duration with pyra-
miding' amounts necessary to finance it.
He asks authority to borrow from tlie
Trea.sury in succeeding years within
stated limits. He requests S500 million
for the loan fund for the 1957 fiscal year
and $750 million for each of the next
2 succeedin.^ fiscal years.

Director John B. Hollister, of ICA. even
urued Cnnure.ss to go further than it ever
has in surrendering its power over ap-
propriations when he appeared earlier
this year before the Senate Foreign Re-
lations Committee to argue for authority
to spend as much as $2 billion in eco-
nomic aid to friendly countries over the
next 3 Years.

Though the President's message to
Contiress on foreign aid did not come to
the House until May 21. 1957. William S.
White, of the New York Times, as early
as April 8, in a copyrighted dispatch re-
vealed the present concept of indefinite

aid. The first paragraph of his articla
told the story.

The Elsenhower administration presented
t ) Congress today a fundamentally altered
nnitual-securlty program that would com-
mit this country frankly to foreign aid for
Indehnite years ahead.

Mr. White wrote of Secretary of State
Dulles' testimony before the Special Sen-
ate Committee To Study the Foreign Aid
Program.

Mr. Dulles presented the plan as a new
approach, calling for the establishment
of a special economic development fund
With capital authorization sufficient for
several years to extend economic aid on
a loan basis, the Times story revealed.

It is the same old "temporary" for-
eign economic aid program but in new
and admittedly permanent dress.

If it is felt that this Nation in pro-
moting its interests must assist other
countries in their economic develop-
ment, there are ways much more effec-
tive and considerably less costly than
direct handouts from the Federal Treas-
ury.

One way would be to stimulate the
flow of American capital into needy and
underdeveloped nations through the in-
centive of fast tax writeoffs, such as
are now granted to industries engaged
ui defense production.

Another way would be to expand the
capacity of the World Bank to make
long-term, low-interest loans to worthy
nations upon the security of such col-
lateral as undeveloped natural resources
or industrial potential.

In so doing, the United States would
be able to achieve its goal without in-
sulting the beneficiaries of its assist-
ance, and even more important, with-
out bankrupting the American people.

We should not, with tongue in cheek,
continue to make outright grants calling
them loans.

The question now confronting Con-
gress and all Americans is whether we
have learned our lesson from sad ex-
perience.

A recent Commerce Department re-
port revealed that the United States
has put up more than $62 billion for
foreign aid since July 1. 1945. represent-
ing an amount equal to $364 for every
man. woman, and child living in this
country.

What have we bought with all this
money?

A total security blackout shields ex-
penditures for military aid from in-
quiry.

But we do know how some $40 billion
in American economic aid and outright
grants have been used.

They have been used to subsidize tax
cuts in foreign lands while tax reduc-
tion has been denied our people here at
home.

They have been used to pay off na-
tional debts of foreign countries hke
Norway and Denmark, while our own
debt has mounted higher and higher.

They have been used to stabilize for-
eign currencies while inflation feeds like
a brushfire at home.

They have been used to add millions
of acres to foreign farm crop production,
while acreage allotments for our own

8981

have been reduced here at

farmers
home.

Vast hj'droelectric dams and irriga-
tion and river development projects are
being carried on all over the world,
while floods continue to ravage our land
and while our own industries cry for
more power.

A million dollars of our ta.x money is
being used in Paraguay for the benefit
of ar single religious sect while such
a practice w^ould be frowned on as un-
constitutional and contrary to public
policy in our own coimtry.

We are spending billions in foreign
countries to reclaim or open up new
lands and build all types of new hous-
ing while our own people and our vet-
erans are relegated to substandard
housing.

Highways and bridges are being built
In foreign lands while our own road
system has been neglected for many
years.

While many of our farmers cannot get
their crops to market over muddy roads,
v,e build a huge six -lane turnpike in
Portugal to a gambling resort.

While millions of Ajnericans are sweat-
ing over their tax returns, our Govern-
ment sends a "hot-lips" musician on a
foreign tour and pays him more than the
President.

While unfair foreign competition is
closing the doors of numerous American
industries, we continue to send our tech-
nicians and machines to foreign lands
to provide the know-how to produce
goods that will destroy markets for our
own, due to the vast differential between
slave wages and free wages.

Why, we have even built public rest-
rooms in the Philippines, and bathing
facilities for Egj'ptian camel drivers.
We have sent collapsible toothpaste
tubes to Cambodia, dress suits to Grecian
undertakers, and iceboxes to Eskimos.

We are sending our millions to King
Saud, who maintains 24 palaces, 250
custom-built Cadillacs, a fleet of private
airliners, and whose personal income
from vast oil reserves has been esti-
mated at around $48 million a year.

We have sent opera singers to Italy,
and ultra-violet ray lamps to India. And
we have set up a pension program for
overage Chinese Nationalist soldiers.

While rice production is less here than
in Korea, our technicians have gone
there to try to tell them how to raise rice.
We built a sihca processing plant on
Formosa, where there was not enough
silica to justify its operation.

We are giving free air trips for Arabs
who wish to visit Mecca.

We have built iron and steel plants
costing nearly a billion dollars in 24
countries.

We spent $2 million to provide water
and public bath facilities for 200 Leb-
anese villages.

We have built an Italian village that
nobody wanted to live in.

We have built a road in Iran that leads
to nowhere.

We spent 501,097 United States dol-
lars for a wage and position classification
study for the Philippine Government
while we only spent $205,076.29 for a
special Senate committee study of the

8982

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June

1 "^
1 'J

effectiveness of the entire $62 billion
po.-twar foreign aid pro-am.

The multitude of foreign aid give-
aways which have been carried on by
this country includes apartment houses,
railroads, rolling stock, mininsr equip-
ment, steel mills, factories, banks, gen-
era tint; plants, machines, machine tools,
buildina: materials, supplies, equipment,
commercial airplanes, aviation facilities,
storai;e facilities, warehouses, schools,
laboratories, hospitals, pou-er dams, res-
ervoirs, office buildings, telecommunica-
tion systems, thousand.s of irrigation
wells, Am.erican industrial know-how and
engineering techniques and a host of
other such items for over 60 countries.

All of these thin::.? — and many more —
have been financed by the citizens who
sent us here to represent them.

Mr. President, I must voice my opposi-
tion to such spendint: abroad — however
worthy cr needed — which could not, even
by the remGt^•st .stretch of the imat^ina-
tion, contribute one iota to the stren:;th
or security of our country or the free
world.

I am opposed to economic aid when it
Is done at the expense of the already
overburdened American t-axpayer who
tcxlay is ;-hcuIcIerin2: the t^reatest tax load
of any ci::r:en m history.

The time has come to seelc climinatirn
from the budget of purely foreisn eco-
nomic aid and for a thoroia;;h and
searchin; examination of each militai-y
assistance prejoct to insure that t!:?
American taxpayer is getting his money's
worth in national lecurity.

W:.>e expenditure of militaiT a.ssist-
ance funds could be insured by reducin;,'
the appropriati(;n for that purpose for
the 1957 fi.-c.il year to an amount not to
exceed $1 billion.

Elimination of all economic aid and a
ceihnij on military a.^istance would not;
abruptly curtail pre.3er.t aid prouram.- for
there presently remains unspent $7.5
billion of previous appropriations for
economic aid and military a.^sistance,
be.sidts new money now beins sougJit.

Economic aid could be liquidated with-
out another dollar bein^' appropriated
by the Congress. It could be ended this
year without substantially disturbing the
commitment.s already made. 1 hio could
readily be done because there are still
approximately $7.5 billion already ap-
propriated, and yet unspent, for supplies
and techniques in the many •pipelines"
stretching from our Treasury in Wash-
ington to the numerous beneficiaries in
foreign countrie.s.

Under n^iid supervision and strict ac-
counting, these pipelines could flow for
several years more t() discharge their
contetits Without our putting new money
into them.

I am opposed to subsidizing all man-
ner of economic aid projects abroad so
long as our own people — our farmers,
our veterans, their widows and their de-
pendents, cur social security recipients,
our retired people, our old people, our
disabled citizens, our dependent children,
and all tha^e unable to take care of
themselves — are not adequately provided
for here at home.

Mr. President, on June 23. 1954. one of
cur greatest living generals, speakm-j

before an assemblage of the Nation's
ncv.spr.per editors in Washington. D. C.
expre.ssed some interesting convictions of
his relative to the effectivene.'^s of foreign
aid. His remarks are pertinent to the
dL'cu.s.^ion here, and I wish to read them
to th;s body. He said:

The United St.ites cannot br (\n .^tUs. It
cannot by Its ttnanci.il sacniices cirry rU
otn>>r n.^tions of tl-.e world on Its shoulders,
and we should stop giveaway programs.

Now this Is very true. You could not keep
any other country In the world free merely
by money. You cp.nt buy or Import a heart,
or a soul, or a determination tn remain free.
Con.«ec(Uently, the st.'.teuient that Americin
so-called giveaway pro^r^ims are not going
to keep tiie world free Is absoiu.cly true.

ThrtX" years' hi trry since those words
were uttered confirms their WLsdom and
truth.

The words of this great military leader
do mt seem un-Amencan or isolationist
t-o me

They sound like Jcflersonian democ-
racy.

Wl-nt ceneral. you a'^k. made this
rt-i^omont?

It was Dwight Da-.id Eisenhower.

It was the same General Eisenhower
wh(3 said m 1952:

certainly, I know we must find a substi-
tute for the purely temporary bxislness of
bolstering free n.itlons throu;;h annual
handout-s. That gets neither perm.\nent re-
sults n jr real frie:uis

That was the general.

That was the President.

That v^as tiv' Republican who made
the statement to the Nation's editors
that foreign aid will net buy otiier na-
tions the determination to remain free,
and should be stopped.

I agree with tlie wire and .sagacious
words of the Repubhcan general and the
Republican President.

It is with regret, and with all due re-
spect, that I must voic? my sharp dis-
agreement with the "Modern Republi-
can" President.

The people of .America are determined
to .save tlie blessings of free go\ernment
and individual liberty.

To save America, the humanitarian-
ls;n of old-fasir.oncd democracy must
V.'f.

To save America, the stability and se-
curity of old-fa.shioned Republicanism
must live.

To save .America, all of the faith that
Is epitomized by the oldtime religion
mtist live.

Let no one be deceived by the cries of
those who would destroy us. A return
to fundam.entals is the key to survival
in this day and age even more than was
the case m all tlie other periods of threat
stress and strain that have marked the
hfe of our Nation.

A militarily impregnable America and
an economically invincible America are
the world's best and only hope for peace.

If we are to perpetuate our blood-won
birthright for ourselves and for our pos-
terity, the welfare of the American peo-
ple and the solvency, safety, security,
and sovereignty of our own coimtry must
be our primary concern.

It is mine, Mr. President, and I shall
so vote.

I yield the floor.

THE "OPEN CURTAIN" PROPOSAL
OP SENATOR JOHNSON OP TEXAS

Mr. FUTLBRIGHT obtained the floor.

Mr. MANSFTELD. Mr. Pre:.ident, w.U
the Senator vield''

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yi^ld.

Mr. MANirFIELD. I suggest the ab-
sence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr Mr-
N'M\?\ in the chaii > . Dop.s the Senator
from Aik.insas yield for that purpose?

Mr FULBRIGHT. I do not really re-
quire a quorum.

Mr. MANSFIELD I ha'e been asked
by .several Senators thit they be net Jlcd
whon the Senator from Arkansas bcgis-,s
his speech.

Mr. FT.TLPRIGHT. Very well; I yield
for that purpose.

The PRESIDING OFFICEn. The
nb encf' if a qun:v;m has been sucgesteri.
Ihe Secretary will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceedtd to call
the roll

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr Picsidcnt. I
ask unanimiiiis coiL^ont that the ordCi
for the quoM'm call be rescind<d.

The PRESIDING OFFICEIi. Without
ob'ection. :t is so ordered.

Mr. FLXERIGHT Mr President, one
of the poorest and mo..t di-sappointing
performances I have seen in many years
was the reartien of the S*Tret;»ry of State
to the open curtain proposal mad" by
our m.ajonty leader.

There are times when a man should
be forthrii-'ht ani frank and refu.-e to
take rcfuiie in half-truths and evasions.
There are times when a man 5houM
seize an opportunity and pres.s it vig-
orously and boldly.

Tho'^e times frequently come ti a man
who hiLs tl'.e ri sponsibility of steerin,'
the foreign policy of the strongest na-
tion in tlie Free World.

The proposal of the majority leader
was f'irthrmht and bold. It called upon
our cfflnals to act at a certain time when
events were coming to a dramatic cli-
max.

The majority leader did not blame any
fellow Am-'rican for our present state of
affairs. H" ."^aid that now is the time
to act — now is the time to strike when
the iron is hut.

I have looked over the Secretary's
pre.ss conference reaction to the pro-
posal. He say«:. in effect, that this coun-
try made a similar proposal in 1955 and
that "we are constantly pressing the So-
viets, for example, for these reciprocal
facilities to speak to the Soviet people '

Mr. Pre.sident. I have been associated
with the Senate F'oreign Relations Com-
mittee for many years. I have a rea-
sonable familiarity with the activities
undertaken by those who have the re-
sponsibility for our relations abroad.

If .American representatives have been
"pre.ssing" the Soviet Union for the
"open curtain" proposal for the past 18
months, it is the best kept secret since
the first atomic bomb was made.

Mr. Artluir Krock, one of the most
eminent and distinguished journalists of
our time, puts the facts succinctly in his
column this morning. He says, and I
quote:

This role played by tl-.e &'n.ite majority
le.idcr, therefore, w.is of vastly more Impor-

10

0 1

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8983

tance than could be gathered from this com-
nient by the Secretary: "I waa very glad In-
deed to see the strong endorsement of that
(;x)lnt 9) concept by Senator Johnson
the other day. He made about the same
proposal, or at least adapted, you might say.
The same proposal that the United States
liiid made (at Geneva) . We have been press-
i:.^ Jor (It I off and on, with consistency, for
tiie la.st 18 months." But in reality what
Johnson did was to move this Government
to resume the Initiative on this front after
a lonp period of virtual Inaction. And his
formula is the most precise and detailed In
the record.

Even more puzzling is the Secretary's
implied claim that the "open curtain"
piopo.sal represents administration pol-
icy. Apparently he is not aware of the
views of his chief — the President of the
United States.

The President, In his press conference
on June 5. dismissed the Khrushchev
broadcast as "a commercial firm in this
country, trying to improve its own com-
mercial standing."

Mr. .MANSFIELD. Mr. President, will
t!;e Senator yield?

Mr FUI^RIGHT. I yield.

Mr MANSFIELD. The Senator from
Arkansas is bringing out a very impor-
tant and very significant aspect of the
proposal made by the distinguished ma-
.loiity leader last Saturday evening in
New 'Vork.

I should like to ask the Senator from
Aikansas what connotation he places on
the President's reference to the CBS
.•sponsoring of the Khrushchev program
as a commercial firm in this country
tryinc to improve its own commercial
.s'andine. Does the Senator believe the
CBS performed a public service in trj'ing
to bring one of the leaders of the Soviet
Union into the homes of the American
people, so that the American people
could .see what he looked like and hear
what he had to say? Are we afraid of
this man'' Do we believe that what he
has to .say will contaminate us? Are we
so fear stricken that we are absolutely
helple.ss in the face of a broadcast by a
Soviet leader''

Mr FULBRIGHT. The Senator from
Montana has emphasized one of the
points which should he considered. I
believe CBS performed a public service.
I thought it afforded us a great oppor-
tunity. The President's remarks clearly
j-how his disapprobation of the whole
performance, and he took this particu-
Lir way to indicate it.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Is not that kind of
performance exactly what we have been
trying to bring about, under point 9 of
the Geneva agreement, since 1955?

Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator is
quite correct. It was precisely in line
with that point. What I am trying to
pay is that our policy has not been, so
far as I know, to follow up on that point;
nor has there been any initiative along
that line. Here an opportunity was
given us by the other side. They gave
us a perfect opportunity to say, "That's
fine. We would like to do something like
that in Ru.ssia."

Mr. MANSFIELD. Exactly. However.
wp have not been pressing, as the Secre-
tary of state says, to bring about this
f^ort of interchange on a mutual basis
tiunng the past 18 months.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Not only have we
not been pressing, but the attitude of
our own officials has been one of com-
plete Inaction. In fact, the President did
not even deign to make a direct com-
ment on the broadcast at the time, and
Mr. Hagerty, the journalist who is work-
ing with the President, said the Presi-
dent was "aware of the broadcast, but
did not hear it."

Mr. MANSFIELD. Is it not a fact that
there is a possibility that we may have
been pressing in reverse? I say that be-
cause in 1955 the Soviet Acting Minister
of Agriculture, Matskevich. broadcast
over the Voice of America from Wa.sh-
ington to the Russian people that the
American people were their friends. So
we have a Government agency, the "Voice
of America, allowing a minister in the
Soviet Cabinet to use our facihties to tell
the Russian people what he was observ-
ing in this country.

If it was good for this Government to
do that then, I see no reason why it
was not good for CBS, In reverse, to do
what It did in the case of one of the
leaders of the Soviet Union. If we could
carry the Johnson plan into effect, on
a reciprocal basis, I am quite certain
that the Russian people, as distinct from
their leaders, would be the greater bene-
ficiaries. So far as the American peo-
ple are concerned, we have nothing to
fear. Certainly we carmot be contami-
nated by what the Russian leaders may
have to say.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I appreciate the
Senator's remarks. His last observation
is to me practically the core of this sit-
uation. The administration has given
the impression that it is fearful that
these broadcasts will convert the Ameri-
can people to communism, or will weaken
their belief in our own system. That,
I think, is completely wrong. We ought
to welcome broadcasts such as Khru-
shchev's, because they subject the views
of world leaders to critical analysis, not
only by our own people but also by the
people of the rest of the world. It would
be a very interesting debate before all
the world, if such an exchange as that
suggested by the majority leader could
be arranged.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, it
Is my understanding that Khrushchev's
CBS broadcast has been rebroadcast in
the Soviet Union and in Communist
China. It is my further understanding
that certain parts of the broadcast have
been deleted, so that the people of those
two countries did not get the full text
of what Mr. Khrushchev said to the
American people. That in itself, in my
opinion, is an indication of weakness.

The mere fact that deletions were
made would seem to indicate that there
were some things which the Soviet lead-
ers did not want their own people to
hear. So far as we are concerned, any-
thing our leaders say could be said to
the entire world, and there would be no
deletions made, because we have truth
on our side.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator Is
quite correct. In any case the suggestion
ought to be subjected to discussion and
analysis. What I object to is our lack
of interest in promoting this approach.
I agree that it may be difficult to make

the arrangement. I do not know
whether the Russians will permit it.
However, the only way to find out is to
make the proposal and to press for it
every day, as the majority leader has
suggested.

The President's direct comment on the
opportunities offered by the Khrushchev
broadcast was as follows:

I would say this: If the Soviet Union. In
return for that courtesy of themselves
wanted to ask an American, no matter who
It might be, because, after all, you know
Khrushchev is not the head of the Russian
State — except In power [laughter) — but IX
they should invite an American to come,
and guarantee that there would be no
Jamming, there would be no Interference,
that they wouldn't put up counterattractlona
to take people away from their radios, and
all that sort of thing, for that time. If you
can believe that that will happen, I can tell
you this, that somebody In this Government
would be glad to accept.

Mr. President, is this the reaction of
an administration that is actively press-
ing for the open curtain? Is this the
kind of response which would meet the
call of the majority leader for bold, vig-
orous action?

Does this represent initiative? Does
prying open the Iron Curtain mean that
we sit back and wait for an invitation
from Khrushchev? Is this a strong de-
mand that Khrushchev permit our lead-
ers to address the Russian people as he
has addressed ours?

Apparently, the Secretary has some
friends who think it is. Mr. Edson, NEA
columnist, said yesterday that the Sec-
retary "punctured the Johnson balloon
pretty effectively but the Secretary let it
down gently, with more butter."

I agree with Mr. Edson in one respect.
It is that the Secretary of State has the
habit of letting constructive proposals
down gently "with more butter." But.
somehow, I do not think that "butter" is
the key to prying open the Iron Curtain.

The Secretary of State apparently
clings to the idea that his only interest
would be in a full-blown agreement for
regular weekly broadcasts. I agree that
this should be the objective. But I sub-
mit that it is far wiser to take whatever
steps are possible in the belief that with
experience and through trial and error
we may break down the antagonisms
which now threaten the entire world.

The point is to act when an opportu-
nity is presented, rather than to let an
opportunity go by default.

Mr. President, the Secretary repeated-
ly calls for bipartisanship. He has had
It from this Congress — fully, completely,
and honorably.

He will continue to have It because
foreign policy must not become a polit-
ical football if the Nation is to survive.
But I tell the Secretary frankly that his
superciUous reaction to the majority
leader's proposal does not inspire con-
fidence.

The best that can be said for him is
that he reached back to a proposal made
18 months ago — when the time was not
ripe — merely to demonstrate that he was
not caught napping.

Instead, he should grasp this oppor-
tunity to join in a proposal made for
action now. He would have had the

8984

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

\\

'

wholehearted and enthusiastic backing
of Congress and, I think, of the country.
Mr. President, I refer again to the
terse and accurate logic employed by
Mr. Krock in his article this morning.
He sa:d:

Immedlatel7 following the Khmshchev
television Interview the President, the Sec-
retary, or some hl?h-level representative
could have thrown this bixjk at the Kremlin
and repeated the prop>osa;s. Instead, for a
week the administration discussed what
cuuntermeasures to lalie and announced no
conclUEloiis.

I a=k unanimous con.^^ent that Mr.
Klrock's fine column in this mornin^'s
New York Times be printed at this point
in the Record.

There being no objection, the article
wa.<; ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:

[P^om the New Y'-;rk Times of June 13. 1957)

A Great De.\l Morj: Orr ■ Tha.n On"

(By Arthur Krock)

W.\shin";ton. June 12 — It U a matter of
record that point 9 In the 17 principles f r
broader East-West relations that were pre-
sented to the S<jvlets at Geneva In October
lOovi, by the French <in beh.ilf ol the western
powers was a prrposal that once a month, rr
thereabouLs, the radio communications of all
4 nations be opened tj free exchanges of
t.ilks en current afr.iirs. This w.is correc'y
recalled by Secretary of State Dulles at his
news conference yesterd:ty.

But It la eqxially true tha- all Amerlnn-
Sovlet exchanwtes on these pr' p'>sals. Includ-
ing point 9. were terminated by Washln£;toa
from the time of the brutal Soviet repres-
sion of the uprising In Hungary un:;l last
April, and th.it since the exchanges were
resumed there has been no pre.^slng by Unl'ed
States authorities with respect to p> Int 9,
despite the Secretary's statement to the same
news conference that he understood there
had been.

It Is also true that for the week after -he
Khrushchev television Interview arranged by
the Cniununa Broadcasting System, -.he
adminlstra'.; -n. Instead of seizing the opp )r-
tunlty to revive p<Mnt 9. and !n full ri)rce,
was unable tn make up !*s mind on a cr>\in-
t«rmove. .After the even's In H-meary It
was not until Senator Lynoo.v B Johnson,
the majority leader In his branch, made the
New York City speech in which, greatly ex-
panding pt-mt 9. he urged that we should
not let a single day pass without raisin-^ ••■e
Issue of the free fl'W of Ir.rormatlon wi'h
the Kremlin, the Unl'ed Natinrs, and by
everv other means, that anv hlsh admirls-
tratiim ofTi<-laI prfsed -.Lis vital pr<ipusal In
tile Geneva principles.

JOHNSON'S ROLB

This role plaved by the Senate majority
leader therefore, was cf vaiitiv m..^re Imp -r-
tance than could be gathered from this ccm-
ment by the Secretary; "I was very g:ad
Indeed to see the strong endorsement of that
I point 9 1 concept by Senator Joh.nscn the
other day. He made almost the sam.e p-"-
poFa! or at least adopted, vnu might say. the
same prop<isal that the United States had
made | at Geneva | We have tieen pressing
f'lr I It I ctl and on. with consistency, for
the last 18 months." But In reality what
Johnson did was to move this Governmfi-.t
to resume the Initiative on this frLmt after
a long period of virtual Inaction And his
formula is the most precise and detailed In
the record

The Geneva proposals to the Soviets for
Ea^'-WVs' oxfhan^es were largely the hamll-
work of William Harding Jackson of Prin.-c-
ton, N. J , who at the time waa spe'-:al as8l.-.t-
ant to the President In this and i -.her areas.
He truly was pressing the 17 prln.lples w.'h

heavy accent on points 8, 9, and 10, until
the break caused by the Hungarian uprising.
Early this year Jackson completed the period
for which he had agreed to serve, and promo-
tion of the Geneva proposals Is now the task
of Ambassador W. S. B. Lacy. He is alert
and able, and If Immediately put forward as
the State Department's .■^p'^kcsman, with the
perfect fac.;ittes provided by Geneva, he
could have taken the Initiative that was left
to Senator Johnso.n. B'lt this was not done,
and ff>r more than a week the only reference
to this excellent In.-trument f^r hoisting
Khrushchev on his (jwn petard waa In a State
Department handout for which a minor of-
liccr was selected as the Is.su.ng a^ent.

THE GENEVA PROPOSALS

The pertinent passages In the Geneva pro-

piosals were:

"8. The systematic Jamming of broadcasts
( f news and lnfurmatK>n Is a practice to b«
dtpiored. It Is Incjmpatible with the di-
rective from the four heads of g ivernme-.t
; a- the summit conference] and should be
ci.s.;ont;:iufd.

'■9. The S<)vlet Unl' n and the Western
Powers should ci nslder the desirability of
exchanging monthly unc.-nsored broadcasts
ou world devtl'jpments This couid take the
furm ot half h .urs for the S'^viet Union on
the Wf.ilern broadctstlng system.s w.'.h re-
ciprocal arr-ingements for the Western Puw-
ers on the Soviet system.

"10. The ccv.^^^Tr■\\\p of out!::o!ng pres.* dis-
patches and the denial to Jnurnallsts of ac-
cess to normal sources of Information are
serious barriers to the free circulation of
Ideas. The four governments, where appro-
priaie. should take immediate stt-ps to re-
move such barriers "

In November 1^55, the Soviets made a
coijnterproposal for a 4-p<-)wer d'^claratl :i.
arid thi-s is hrw Srcre'.i.-y Dul'ea analy.-ed It
wi:h respect t<i the p.us.^as^e above

••Item 8 • • • Is rejected. Item 9 • • •
appears also to be rejected, although it Is
suggested that there might hereafter he an
agreement covering broadcast exchanges.
Item 10 • • • Is rejected."

Lmmedlately following the Khrushchev
television Interview th.e President, the Socrt».
t..rv. nr some hlgh-ievf-! rf'presen'a'lve cnuld
have tiirown this book at the Krfmlin and
repeated the proposal*. Instcnd. T r a we.k
the administration discussed what counter-
mei'.sures to take and announced no conclu-
sions.

Mr Presidt^nt, will

I yield.

I think it ought to

the John.son plan

Mr MAN'SFIELD.
the Senator yield'

Mr FULBRIGHT.

Mr MANSFIELD
be brought out that
has had .siron:: bipartisan appmbatlrn.
I recall the approval of it L;iven by the
minority leader, the di.'stingui.shed Sena-
tor from California I Mr Knowlanh',
the di;;tingui>hed Junior Senator from
New York I Mr Javits', and the distin-
guished senior Senator from New Jersey
iMr. Smith!.

It appears to me that this is another
indication of the respunsib.lity of Con-
gress, and m this cast of the Senate. I
e.xpre.ss the hope that this feeling of re-
.>ponsibility will be recoi;ni/.ed and lliat
before too long the majority leader and
the minority leader may ^;et together
with the Secretary of State, to .see what
can be done to take advantage of the
opening.s. as they occur, and to get away
from the hubit of fearing to take the
initiative, and of waiting. It seems to
me. to react only to the initiative taken
by the Soviet Union.

I am bound to confess that sometimes
there IS nut even a reaction. I should

think It Is about time for the adminis-
tration to go on the offensive and to
come up with some new ideas, such as
the Johnson proposal, which Is really
not a new Idea, but la. In effect, a com-
pilation of many ideas, in part, which
have been approved by the President
from time to time.

I hope we are not so bereft of Ideas
that we arc not able to take the dii)lo-
raatic. economic, and propa^ianda offen-
sive. I sincerely hope that the bipartisan
endorsement of tlie di.'-tin 'ui>hed major-
ity leader s plan of hi.st Saturday. June
8. will be taken into consideration by the
President, and the Secretary of Slate, as
well.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I thank the Sena-
tor from Montana for his comment, I
certainly hope the administration will
take courage from his statement.

Th^re is one other thouriit I should
like to le.Tve with re'.'ard to the remarks
of the Sonator from Montana fMr.
Mansfield 1. It has .^cmed to me sev-
eral times in the pa^t that the admin-
i^trntiLn lacked the courage of its con-
victions. I have heard it said that the
administration did not take this or that
course, or pcihaps this or that sucnes-
tion, for fear that Congre.ss might not
a,ree with it. Perhaps in some casts
there miizht have been oppo-^ition. How-
ever. I d) nut think that ls a sound
reason not to make any proposal which
the administration believes is Justified
in the public Interest The Senator
from Montana is aware of some of those
ca'^'^s.

If there Is anything I can do. or that
we can do, as Members of the Senate,
to give the administration a little cour-
age or a little conviction to move into
this field, I am certain we are ready
and willin;: to di it. I know the ma-
jority leader when he made his sugces-
tions was hoping to do that, and had
in mind ttivini; the administration some
coura^ie to move actively into this field.

ML^TUAL SECURITY ACT OP 1957

The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill iS. 2130) to amend further
the Mut'ual Security Act of 1954. as
amended, and for other puri")oses.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. Pre.sident

Mr. GREFN. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield''

Mr FULBRIGHT. I yield to the Sen-
ator from Rhode I.sland.

Mr. GREEN. The junior Senator from
Georgia iMr. TalmadgfI has just sub-
mitted, on page 13 of his statement con-
cerning the Mutual S<'curity Act, an im-
pressive list of alleged mi.sdeeds by the
Admini:stralion. I am a.-king the Ad-
muustration to give me by tonorrow
morning its cuminents on such of those
poinl.s as the Atiminislriilion believes
are untrue or misleading.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I thank the Sena-
tor from Riiode Inland. I shall be very
^ilad to sec the comments of the Ad-
ministration. I happen to know about
a few of those cases, I do not know about
all of them. Therefore, I shall refrain
from commenting upon tliem at this
time.

Mr President, I de.sire to speak briefly
about liie Mutual Security Act ol 1957.

fiOfiA

rnvr.RPQQTnvAT PFrnpn

QFMATF

7 1 / 1 1 /J 1 y

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8985

We are again considering an authoriza-
tion for the mutual security program.
The fiscal year 1968 program is again a
large program, although It is only about
half as big as these programs have been
in some years in the past.

The mutual security program is very
Important to the security of the United
.Slates It is a protrram which has been
I acked by both political parties over the
past 10 years. I see no reason why this
measure should not be free of partisan-
jhip.

There are three things which I should
like to point out which ought to make a
Giiierence in the Senate's consideration
(t fcreiu'n aid this year. First, no sub-
je( t h:LS been studieti more thoroughly
since tlie la.st session of the Senate than
1 jreign aid. Second, ve have before us
en e.xecutive branch bill which has been
ami lided by the Foreign Relations Com-
niiiue to conform so far as possible to
piior recommendations made by the
special Committee To Study the Foreign
Aid Program which the Senate estab-
I .-lied last year. Third, the bill as re-
painted by the Committee on Foreign Re-
Litioas ctntiiins several long-needed
La:-,ic improvements in the mutual se-
luiity program.

a;i of us recall that Senate support
V as strong for Uie Marshall plan when
iL wa^. hist b<-gun. Senate support was
alH) strong for military assistance at
ti.e time of the Communist attack in Ko-
na and for Uie next 3 or 4 years after.
We also know that opposition to tlie
low 1*411 aid propram began to grow in
liJ54 and 19o5 and continued last year
*hen there were 30 votes cast against
iho mutual security appropriation bill
on final pas.aije and Ihe.'-e votes were
equally divided between the 2 parties.
Everjb( dy agreed. I think, last year that
it was time to paui^ and take a hard
lo.k at this foreign aid propram.

Tl.e Senate did take a careful look at
tlie foreinn aid program. We estab-
lished a Special Committee To Study the
Foreign Aid Program. I want to empha-
size that point of procedure.

The si>ecial committee was composed
of the entire membership of the Com-
mittee on Foreign Relations, plus the
r.inking members of the Committee on
Aimed Services, the dLstinpuished senior
Senator from Georgia IMr. Russell],
one of Ih.e senior Members of the Sen-
.T'»\ the di.'Jtinguished senior Senator
from Ma.s.sachusetts fMr. Sai.tonstall);
to'-Tther with the ranking members of
the Committee on Appropriations, the
di-t.nguislied Senator from Arizona [Mr.
HrvDEN). the senior Member pf the en-
t.;e Senate, and also the senior member
of the Democratic Party, and the senior
Senator from New Hampshire fMr.
B'lncEsl, the senior member of the Re-
publican Party of this body.

The special committee made exhaus-
tive ,<:tudies, and the committee's findings
were reported to the Senate on May 13.
without a dissenting vote. I think It was
an excellent piece of work. The report
^Hs based not only upon the studies
made by the committee Itself In open
hearings and In private hearings, but
also upon studies made by Its representa-
tives, some of the leading citizens of the

United States In their fields, and some
ol the finest organizations and institu-
tions which were equipped to study mat-
ters in this field.

The Senate was not the only body to
study the foreign aid program. The
President of the United States created a
special executive branch task force head-
ed by Mr. Benjamin Pairless. the former
president of the United States Steel
Corp. The President's International
Development Advisory Board, headed by
Mr. Eiic Johnston, also made a study.
The House Committee on Foreign Affairs,
under the leadership of its outgoing
chairman, Mr. James Richards, com-
pleted a study of foreign aid in December
of last year.

All these reports agree on several
things. They all agree that mutual se-
curity programs have served us welL
That military and economic assistance
programs must continue for the foresee-
able future if we are to protect ourselves
in this world.

I may say that none of these reports
undertake to say that a mistake has
never been made in the administration
of this program. In the case of a pro-
gram so large and so extensive as this
one has been — a program covering many
different activities, and with many dif-
ferent administrators — it is not difficult
to pick out individual mistakes. Bat I
submit that, viewing it in proper per-
spective, it will be found that the mis-
takes involve a very small part of the
overall operation.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, at
this point will the Senator from Arkan-
sas yield?

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Is it not true that
In the case of a program of the scope
of this one — a program which touches all
areas of the world, areas in which there
are many developments, both econom-
ically and politically, which frequently
are beyond the experience of our own
people — It is entirely possible that there
will be miscalculations, and that one
project or another may get out of hand
and may end up as undesirable or un-
necessary, or that there may be projects
In which there is waste. In other words,
If one wishes to engage in finding very
little blisters on the trunk of the great
oak tree, it is possible to make it appear
that the oak is almost ready to collajyse,
or that It never should have been a tree
In the f^rst place; whereas if one con-
siders the totality of the program, and
does not concentrate upon a little error
here or a little mistake there, one finds
a rather encouraging picture of a pro-
gram which should enlist reasonable
commendation and support. Does not
the Senator from Arkansas agree as to
that?

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Yes; I think the
Senator from Minnesota is correct.

However, I do not wish to question the
right and duty of any Member of the
Senate to direct attention to any cases In
which there has been either a mistake in
judgment or plain stupidity. Attention
should be called to such cases. I myself
have called attention to some of them;
and I welcome statements such as the
ones which have been made on the floor

today, and I think the public is entitled
to an answer in each case.

I do not say that some mistakes have
not been made. I think some of them
could be explained in such a way that
any reasonable man would agree that
they were not really serious mistakes,
whereas I think some of them were bona
fide mistakes

But I suggest forcefully as I can that,
granted that there have been some mis-
takes, yet, in comparison to the overall
program and the vast amotmt of bene-
ficial activities which have been carried
on in a wise manner, the mistakes are
relatively small.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Arkansas yield further
to me?

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield.

Mr. HUT^IPHREY. I surely wish to
Join in the statement the Senator from
Arkansas has just made, namely, that
no one would wi.sh to stifle the investiga-
tion of errors of either omission or com-
mission, and no one would wish in any
way to diminish the efforts of those who
seek to inquire into this program. Per-
sonally, I welcome the criticisms. I my-
self have made some of them. For ex-
ample, I am not sure that all the mili-
tary assistance which has been extended
to seme areas of the world has been as
efi^ective as the proponents had hoped it
would be. I think sometimes such as-
sistance may generate local armament
races, for instance.

But, Mr. President, let me say, by way
of a simple analogy, that il one were to
hire the finest contractor in the world to
build the finest building man's ingenuity
and genius could devise, if at the com-
pletion of construction it appeared that
some of the pipes leaked or certain parts
of the building were of faulty construc-
tion, that would not mean either that the
mistakes should be glossed over or that
the entire building should be torn down.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. That is a very good
point, Mr. President. Granted that
some mistakes have been made, that is
no reason for cutting the program be-
yond a reasonable amount.

I myself have criticized the program in
Pakistan. I opposed the military pro-
gram there; I did so on the ground that
it is out of proportion, and that it is
beyond the capacity of the country to
support it. I hope the agency will take
heed of that criticism. But I do not
think the proper answer is to eliminate
the entire program.

Although I may be in error, neverthe-
less, I do not agree with some of the proj-
ects. But there, again, the Senate as a
legislative body is not equipped to ad-
minister this program, and to say that
this, that, and the other thing must not
be done at all. We can use our per-
suasive powers upon the administration.
Goodness knows, Mr. President, I wish
the administration were 'wiser than it is
In connection with both this program
and many other programs. But the de-
cision was made in November, and this
program should be continued; and I be-
lieve it should be continued at about the
level the committee has recommended.
I think the committee reported a very
good bill.

fc

litti'

I

8986

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Arkansas yield once
more to me?

Mr. FLTLBRIGHT. I yield.
Mr. HUMPHREY. It seems to me
that the major mistake which has been
made m relation to the mutual-security
program is the lack of candor with the
American people as to its duration. A
calculated effort has been made to have
the people believe, year after year, tJiat.
somehow or another, the current year
would be the last year of the pro;:;ram.
I think that is wrong. I welcomed the
statement the Secretary of State made
during the past week, when he and one
of his assistants said that the program
may go on for another 10 years

Certainly there would be better \>ev-
spective if some long-ran^e planning
were done. I do not believe ther- i.s
much chance of making a major reduc-
tion in our defense budget or in our
mutual-security budget ui;til the Soviet
Union begins to change its attitudes
and to curb its appetites. I think we
must make up our mind to that. I am
of the opinion that the American peo-
ple are big enough, strong enough, and
sufficiently tough-minded to take this
kind of news. If one wishes to call it
bad news, that is all right with me. But
the American people can take the news
that they have on their hands a prob-
lem which will remain for years to come.
I think that is wher^ the greatest mis-
take has been made; the people have
beeen led to believe that, somehow or
other, the program would simply wither
away because soon the problem would
be solved.

Mr. President, the program will be
over when the free nations — the United
States and our allies — are strong
enough, in their collective security, to
overcome the Soviet Union imequivo-
cally. The day when the Soviet Union
realizes that it cannot win in Africa
and Asia, and that it has lost the battle,
politically and economically, is the day
when it will be possible to cut back our
defenses and our mutual-securitv pro-
gram. To do It any sooner would be to
throw in the towel before the fight was
half over.

Or one might say that we have now
come to the 5th inning m a 1-game
world series. Mr. President, in the 5th
inning I am not ready to call off the
game and to award the victory to the
opposition. But I sense that somt' of
the people are becoming a httle tired in
the 5th mning. I suggest that we con-
tinue in the ball game; and once we
have won it. we can cut back on some
of the expenditures, as some persons
have advocated.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I thank the Sena-
tor from Minnesota.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I thank the Sena-
tor from Arkansas for yielding to me.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr President, as I
have said, all the reports agree on several
things; namely, that the mutual security
programs have served us well and that
the military and economic assistance
programs must continue for the foresee-
able future if we are to protect ourselves
In this world. These reports also agree,
however, that the mutual security pro-

grams need substantial revision if they
are to be fully effective in the national
interest.

I would point out again the remark-
able agreement of opinion on these fun-
damental conclusions about the foreign-
aid program. I would emphasize that in
the Special Senate Committef- To Study
the Foreign Aid Program, consisting as
It did of a complete cro.ss section of Sen-
ate opinion, there were no minority
views. It seems to me. therefore, that
after all the.se reexaminations, no re-
s[X)nsible per.son should now rise and say
that we should stop the foreign-aid pro-
gram a!toi;ethor. The question for us
today IS not whetht-r we should have a
foteign-aid program The question we
should debate is whether thp pending bill
IS wt>ll calculated to ijive us the kind nf a
foreign-aid program which v.-Al best
serve American inteiests

Professors of t:overnmrnt are fond of
•sayint,'. when reft-rrini: to the relation-
ship of the Cotwress and the President
in the matter of drafting lei:i.-^lat!on.
that 'The President proposes and the
Congrrs.s disposes " The bill before us,
S 2130, IS a shinms example of the re-
verse of that generalization. If Sen-
ators will study this bill clasely. and
compare it with the various recommen-
dations made in ttie .several studies of
the foreign aid proi^ram conducted by
Coni,'re.ss and by the executive brancli.
they will .see that the President's pro-
p<;)sals for the fiscal year 1958 were pro-
foundly influenced by the report of the
Senate Special Committee To Study the
Poreu-n Aid Proi;ram Senators will
find that the study of the Senate Com-
mittee had a far i,'reater impact on the
Presidents recommendations to the
Congre.s.s than did tlie conclusions of the
Presidents own advi.sory committee on
the foreign aid program.

I wish to spend a few minutes dis-
cussing one striking new feature of thLs
new mutual security bill. It i.s a feature
which wa.s strongly recommended by
the Senate special committee. I refer
to the propo.sed development loan fund.
Let me summarize the mam featui-es of
this loan fund.

First, the fund is a 100-percent loan
fund; not 75 percent or 90 percent, but
100 percent. The bill provides that no
grants are to be made from the fund's
assets.

Second, the development loan fund
is separated from any other kind of eco-
nomic aid. One of the troubles with
economic aid m the past has been that
it has been all mixed up as between eco-
nomic aid for defense purposes and eco-
nomic aid for development purposes.
The new loan fund gets away from that
kind of confusion. It also gets away
from the tendency to administer eco-
nomic aid as if it were a political slush
fund to be used for keeping a friendly
government in power or influencing this
or that temporary pohtical issue. The
proposed development loan fund Is in-
sulated from extraneous purposes except
that of promoting businesslike develop-
ment of the resources of friendly coun-
tries, in the interest of the United
States.

Third, the loan fund will take an In-
vestment approach to economic aid.

Tlie proposed legislation provides that
prospective borrowers must prove to the
administrators of the fund that they
need capital for sound projects. They
must also prove that they cannot obtain
the capital they need from private
sources or from other pubhc lending
agencies. The loans that will b<' made
will be those which we may have a rea-
sonable expectation will be repaid.

Fourth, for the first time we have in
this loan fund a part of the mutual .secu-
rity program which is aimed spe( ifically
at ILs own termination. One thing
which has always distressed mt about
other kinds of aid. such as mililiry aid
and defen.se support, nece.ssary as they
are. is that It is hard to see the end of
them. 'When the question is a.'ked as
to when military aid will end, the answer
is that It depends on the Ru.ssia is. and
that answer us not very sati.sfymr.

When the question is asked, however,
when this Development Loan Fund will
end, the answer is much more satisfying.
The purp<j.se of the loan fund is to help
less developed countries rea-^h such a
stage of economic development that they
can generate for themselves, from their
own internal re.sources and from private
capital, the necessary investment needed
to keep their economies growi ig. At
that point, when a foreign coun-.ry can
sustain Its own economic g^owt^ devel-
opment, loans from the fund wll stop.
In the administration of thus kinc of aid.
for the first time, we know cleary what
we are trying to do. and we know that
if we administer it wisely it will one day
end.

Mr. LAUSCHE Mr. President, will
the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. FULBRIGHT I am glad to yield
to the distinguished Senator from Ohio.

Mr LAUSCHE. The senior Senator
from Oregon i Mr. Morse I this morning
made a very vigorous argument c. aiming
that there Is a weakness in the bill inso-
far as It does not follow the recommen-
dation of the special committer which
was created by the Senate Comm.ttee on
Foreign Relations to study the foremn
aid program. He pointed out t lat the
committee recommended as follovs;

Thaf Congres.s should continue fo author-
ize approprlatliinB annually pending a clear
determlnatK)n of the role of military aid la
the total strategy of national defente.

He then went on to point out in re-
gard to the development loan find, in-
stead of the authorization beirg con-
fined to 1 year at $500 million. ;t gives
authorization for the years 1959 and
1960. allowing an expenditure of not to
exceed $750 million a year.

I should like to hear the Senator's
version of that departure from the rec-
ommendation made by the speci.il com-
mittee.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Unfortunately, I
do not have the recommendation? of the
special committee before me, but It Is my
Impression — and I was on the special
committee — that we accepted — at least
I did — the loan fund suggestion from a
general recommendation to that, effect.

I am glad to give my own reafons for
the recommendation. 'We are seeking to
create a new approach — that is. a lend-
ing approach — as distinguished from a

io:}7

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8987

prrint approach, which It has been pri-
marily. The aid was primarily that In
t!:e beginning, and only in recent years
h.-is there been injected the Idea of loans.
Last yiar we required a miijor part of
the aid— not in tlie military aspect, but
jn uiiier aspects — Lo be covered by a
lenriim: provision, amounting to 75 or
HO i>ercent. However, we are seeking to
create a revolving fund. I think, in
order to do that, it is absolutely neces-
sary to create tlie belief on the part of
the countries with which we expect to
do bu.sineiis tiiat tins is a coniinumg
p:o;ect. and will be so for a rea.sonable
pfMod of time. The estimate of what
that period of time will be has varied
all the way from 5 to 10 to 15 year.<;. I
per.sonally think It will be at leact Uiat
long.

Ti.e Idei is to point out to the other
countries that we are renlly establishing
surli a fund I do not mean that we are
romtr to be called upon to appropriate
$.'•00 million or $750 million every year.
What I think we can do is to create a re-
voImh" fund, and as collections from the
other countries are made, .such funds can
be used t<) replace the money u'^ed for
loans. If the money is loaned in the
proper way. I hope that perhaps we can
later — and I am not at all proposing It
at thiB time — u.^e the repayments com-
ing' L.ick to us as a result of aid under
the Marshall plan to replenish the fund.
Tliat is the way I look at it for the future.

I think the Senat-or will as/ree with me
that we cannot propf>se to a country a
lone- time project if we have only a 1-
yrar authorization, and if there Is no
n sumnce of the continuity of the pro-
f^n.m. What we are set-king to do w
liave people believe we arc m earnest
about this, that we are going to create
this fund, and that they can rely on it,
and thei^forc we should see if we can-
not get together and develop a i-eal proj-
ect, with the prospect of increasing the
productivity of the other countries to
such an extent as will enable them to
pay the loans back. In that sense It
may be said that the purpose is a psycho-
logical one. I personally would go so far
hs to .say that I doubt we can efficiently
lend $500 million the first year. To me,
t:.at Ls no rea.son why we should not ap-
piopnate the money. We are going to
hu\e to appropriate the money if we
ure going to make a bi-eak with the past
and create the belief and confidenco
that we mean business in creating the
new approach, the lendmg approach.
1 hat IS the reason for it.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Let me say to the
S( nator from Arkansas, that I subscribe
luily to the mutual-aid program. How-
ever, when the Senator from Oregon
quoted the recommendations made by
the special committee, and then proceed-
ed to point out that the action taken

Senator

go

clear up the point. I believe there la a
reasonable interpretation.

On page 26 of the special report, the
Senator will notice, near the bottom of
the page, is a comment on what I be-
lieve he refers to, that the committee
further recommended that the appro-
pnate standing committee make a
broad inquiry into the present relation-
ship of military aid to the strategic con-
cept of defense.

No, that is not thi point. I am wrens
there.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Will the
permit me to read this?

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Very well;
ahead.

Mr. LAUSCHE. In the statement
this morning, the Senator from Oregon
made a further criticism of what has
been dene, and he stated that the spe-
cial committee made this recommenda-
tion:

The committee believes that any changee
In legislation which would deny to the
Senate an annual review of supporting aid
would raiae dangers of failures to adjust
this aid to charging circumsUnces. It
would rnlse dangers of an undue expansion
of suppcrting aid programs and unnecessary
and pxrer-'lve demands on the resources of
thU country.

The Senator quoted this language as
having been uttered by the special com-
mittee. Til en he laid down the proposi-
tion that the members of the Committee
on Foreign Relations who were members
of the special committee did not follow
their own recommendation.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. In the first place,
about denying tlie Senate the power to
review, I say that is simply not so under
Uiis bill. Certainly I intend to review
this lendmg program, especially, in-
deed, more carefully than any other, be-
cause I have a very special interest in it
I have done all I could to help create it
I intend to see, so far as I possibly can,
how it operates. The Congress can do
that. I am sure we can call up those
who administer it at any time we wish
to, and ask them questions.

The bill provides for reports to the
Congress. There is no reason at all why
at this time next year, if there is any-
thing wrong with the operation of the
program, we cannot change it. To say
that this procedure Is not in accordance
with the requirement of annual review,
in my opinion, is incorrect. I do not see
anything inconsistent between the way
this fund is established and the require-
ment for annual review.

Let me say further, In regard to the
appropriations on the military side, that
the Conmiittee on Appropriations will
have to appropriate the money the sec-
ond year, if that is what the Senator is
talking about All we do here is author-
ize a lower ceiling for the second year

by the Committee on Foreign Relations, than we authorize for this year, at the

which in cllect consisted of the same
ncombership as the special committee,
was different. I felt that he had made a
very forceful point. He further quoted
lanuuaLie from the recommendation of
the special committee. I should like to
read now from page 7 of the minority
views of the Senator from Oregon.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Before the Sena-
tor proceeds to that item, let me try to

request of the administration, so that as
a procedural matter they may include
the request in the regular Defense De-
partment appropriation bill, which
comes up earlier in the year. Tlien they
would not have to wait.

Mr. LAUSCHE. Let me say to the
Senator from Arkansas that I am not
subscribing to the argument of the Sen-
ator from Oregon, but I beUeve the chal-

lenges he made have a strength which
command that we give attention to them,
with a view to making certain that im-
der all the circumstances we have
reached a final conclusion which will be
to the best interest of the country.

The Senator from Oregon CMnplained
that instead of having two committees
examine the problem in 1958 — that is,
the Committee on Foreign Relations and
the Committee on Appropriations — by
projecting this program into 1959 and
1960 we have eliminated the Committee
on Foreign Relations and have as-signed
the responsibility solely to the Commit-
tee on Appropriations.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I do not think,
considering the way the bill has been
drawn and the fact that there is a very
substantially reduced authorization, that
there is any great danger in such a pro-
cedure. When we consider the history
of the program, we realize it has been
going on now for a number of years. I
can see nothing in the ofBng which
would be unique so far as that as-
pect is concerned. I am talking about
a part of the bill other than that having
to do with the loan fund, which is the
part the Senator is referring to, I be-
lieve— the military-assistance feature.

Mr. LAUSCHE. I am talking about
the loan ftmd.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Undjr this au-
thorization, the creation of the fund it-
self does not in any way insulate those
in charge from a periodic examination.
The bill itself requires reports. As a
member of the committee, I can assure
the Senator — and I know the ccanmittee
feels this way — that the loan provision
will be a matter of special interest, until
it proves itself.

I have had, as many others have had,
considerable experience in this matter.
The Senator is also a member of the
Committee on Banking and Currency,
and knows of the operations of the Ex-
port-Import Bank, which operates in
much the same way. We receive a re-
port every year. Every time we consider
the confirmation of a nomination with
respect to the bank we give it special
attenticm. Even without the confirma-
tion of an appointment, we always go
over the necessary matters with the
bank ofiScers. The procedtu^ has
worked extremely welL

I was especially interested in the old
RFC, which operated in a similar man-
ner. We certainly investigated them.
I invite the attention of the Senator,
and of the Senate as a whole, to the
report filed the other day. showing the
very satisfactory results of that opera-
tion. I can see no danger in this pro-
vision as to the loan fund.

In regard to the authorization for the
military-aid aspect, as the Senator
knows, that is in two parts. We author-
ize a certain amount for this year, and
we authorize a lesser amount for next
year. That is all. for the 2 years. I see
no particular danger in that. It is a
great convenience to the Department of
Defense in their preparation of the
budget and the submitting oif it to the
Congress.

When we understand, first, that there
Is a great similarity in the program
from year to year and. next, that the

.1

!Ni

8988

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

Appropriations Committee next year Is
going to go over it just the same as
this year. I see no particular danger in
that aspect of it. either.

Mr. LAUSCHE. The argument of the
Senator from Oregon on the same prem-
ise was directed toward the military aid.
that it had gone to 2 years mstead of
only 1. My interpretation would be that
this is somewhat of a modified form of
a long-range program of aid. In.stead
of having a 5-year program, for which
there would be some advance knowledge
as to what might be expected, the com-
mittee determmed that they would ad-
vance it for a period of 2 years. Even
the 2-year period is not certain, becau.se
it is subsequently dependent upon what
the Committee on Appropriations may
do.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator is
quite correct.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield to the
Senator from Minnesota.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I think one point
which needs to be added to the very
excellent observation made by the Sen-
ator from Ohio is that the 2-year period
for mihtary assistance, what is known
as the defense-support aid. is the period
of this Congress, the 85th Congress, and
the membership of this Congress, with
no ensuing elections.

As the Senator has pointed out, the
Committee on Appropriations consists of
very able Members of the Senate. They
are equipped both by stafT and by ex-
perience, background, and general apti-
tudes to examine most meticulously into
the actual dollars which are to be appro-
priated. What the legislative committee
does IS to authorize.

I am happy to note for the record that
the authorization of military assistance
fo- the first year is $1.8 bilhon. with a
mandate or order to the Department of
Defense and the Department of State
that they cut it down to $1.5 billion for
the second year. If they do not cut it
down, then they must come back to the
committee for a renewed authorization.
Furthermore, we have never before
Imposed the requirement of a 6 months'
report by the administration. Now the
administration must com.e to the com-
mittee with its report every 6 months. I
think the Senator from Ohio knows that
legislative committees are necessarily
and properly jealous of their jurisdic-
tion. When the report comes it will not
be filed away and forgotten. It will be
gone over meticulously, by examination,
inquiry, hearings, and testimony, so that
we shall have a concurrent working
knowledge, with the administrative
agencies, as to what is developing under
the program.

Furthermore. In connection with the
development loan fund, while it is true
that the Foreign Relations Committee
wa.s also the special committee to study
fore^'n aid. wt should not forset that
when the Mutual Security Act for this
year was presented to us. it was presented
after we had made our recommendations.
It was presented to us with excellent
te.stimony, and we comniended those who
te.sfmed. It was pre.sented to us in the
liisht of developments which had come

to our attention as the result of private
studies which had been made by the
Massachusetts Institute of Technoloizy
and the Brookings Institution, two of the
finest such agencies in the world. In
connection with the loan fund, the Uni-
versity of Chicaiio and other agencies
recommended not 1 year, but a capital
revolving fund extending over many
years. What we have done is to go into
the long-term type of planning.

Mr, LAUSCHE. How were the acen-
cies to which the Senator refers enlisted
to give their aid ">

Mr HUMPHREY. They were hired.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. We paid them for
their service.s

Mr. HUMPHREY. Independent re-
search was done, and the research was
correlated, compared, and evaluated by
members of the committee.

1 he Senator from Oregon I Mr. Morse I ,
in pmpointini: what he considers to be
the weakne.sses in the bill, has done a
service He has actually underscored the
elements of streni;th in the bill. For the
first time we are to get some reasonably
long-term planning. At least 2 years is
better than 1

In connection with the loan develop-
ment fund, while $2 billion is author-
ized for a 3-yeaf period, that does not
mean that we shall come forward each
year with a $750 million appropriation.
The fund will be a revolving fund.

The minute we put the as.si.stance on
the basis of a loan, those who are re-
spon.'iibie for granting the loan will be-
gin to make a much more careful study
of the pro;ects Furthermore, the engi-
neers in the field will make a much more
careful study of the program. By point-
ing out what he believed to be weak-
nes.ses. the Senator from Oregon has
actually under.scored what I consider
to be the elements of strength in the
mutual security program.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator vield?

Mr FULBRIGHT. I vield.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I ask
unanimous consent that the Senator
from Arkan.sas may yield to me for
the purpose of .sug^e.stmg the absence
of a quorum and subsequently submit-
ting a proposed order, with the under-
standing that he shall not lose the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICTTl. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.

The clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent. I ask unanimous consent that the
order for the quorum call be rescinded

The PRESIDING OFTICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.

f NANIMorS-CONSCNT AGREEMENT

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, on behalf of the minority leader
and myself, I propose an order, which
I send to the desk and ask to have stated.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pro-
po.sed order will be read.

The Chief Clerk read the proposed
order, as follows:

OrdiTf-d, That, effective on FYlday, June
14, 1957, at the conclusion of routine morn-
ing bu.sSne.s.q, during the further con.'^ldera-
tl'in of the btU (S 2130 > to amend further
the Mutual Security Act of 1U54, as amended.

and for other purposes, debate on any
(imendment, motion, or appeal, excpt a mo-
tion to lay on the table, shall be iimited to
2 hours, to be equally divided and ( <jntroiled
by the mover of any such amendment or
motion and the majority leader: Pnn-.ded,
That In the event the majority le ider is lii
favor of any such amendment or m )tlon. the
time In opposition ihereuj shall be .-ontroUed
by the minority leader or some .Senator des-
ignated by him; Vruiided /urthrr That no
amendment that la not germane t.. the pro-
visions of the said bill shall be re.-eued

Ordered further. That on the qie.stion of
the final pa.vsage of the said bill dpoate .-.hail
be limited to 3 h.)ur8. to be equal y divided
and controlled, respectively, bv Ihi majority
and minority leaders: Proiided. That the
said leaders or either of them may from the
time under their control on the passage of
the said bill, allot addltlon.Tl tln.e to any
Senator during the consideration of any
amendment, motion, or appeal.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the proposed order ?

Mr. LONG. Mr. President, je.serving
the right to object, I should lik.> to sug-
gest to the distinguished majorr.y leader
that If the proposed agreement is en-
tered into, and if the Senate :onvenes
at 9 30 tomorrow morning, if amend-
ments are ofTered at that time very few
Senators will be pre.sent. I hope we
shall not be denied an opportunity in
the morning to have amendments con-
sidered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Tie order
for the hour of meeting was entered the
first part of the week. There U usually
a morning hour, and then a quo um call.
Voting on amendments would not come
until later. Many Senators wculd pre-
fer to meet at an early hour in :he hope
of concluding action on the bill on Sat-
urday.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the proposed order? The
Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.

Mr FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, the
development loan fund, to my mind, is
the first bold and imaginative !iew step
which has been taken u. our foreign-aid
policy since the inception of tie Mar-
shall plan and the point 4 program.
I think the Senate of the United States
can take a great deal of credit for push-
ing the concept of a development loan
fund.

Why do I say that this cono'pt Is a
bold concept^ I say that it is l>old be-
cause It may come somewheie near
meeting the great need which lie:i ahead.
All through the less developed parts of
the world— in Asia. Africa, and tie Mid-
dle East, particularly— millions of peo-
ple are desperately seeking to find a
better life for them.selves. We have 19
newly independent nations since World
War n. No political leader 1 1 these
young countries can survive w!io does
not pledge his efforts to create for his
people more wealth and a higher stand-
ard of hving. The.se underdeveloped
countries need two things. They need
know-how. and this we are prepared to
help provide through the techn cal co-
operation program. They als3 need
capital.

There are two ways to get capital— the
Communi-«^t leaders in Russia ha/e their
way of obtaining capital. In the Soviet
Union they squeezed it out of :he toil
and the very lives of their own people.

19.

> I

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8989

The Communist Chine.se are tiying the
.sime method. This method is brutal,
and It puts an end to freedom; but it
does work, after a fashion, as we have
.sfen in the case of the Soviet Union.

The other way for these countries to
f'ct capital is to borrow it. This is the
uay the industry of the United States
was founded. The leaders of the.se
rPHly indei>endent countries have this
choice before them — to develop thcm-
fclves in the Communist way or In the
free way. I say the development loan
fund IS a bold stop becau.se through it
ue are announcing to these young lead-
er^, that if thoy will foi-mulate intelligent
development plans for their countries, if
they will marshal their energies and re-
sources into worthwhile projects, the
neces.sary capital will be there, A great
deal of this capital can come from pri-
vate sources. Unfortunately, however.
American investment overseas tends to
L'o not to the least developed countries
but to the most developed countries.
The buTk of our inve.<;tmpnt has alwavs
!one. and probably will continue to go. to
Cinad 1. to Europe, and to Latin Amer-
KA. Tiie challenging concept of thi.s de-
velopment fund IS that we are saym? to
the new countries of Africa and Asia
and th" N!iddle Ea^t that we are stand-
ing ready to assist them with capital
loans if they can't get cf pUal el.sewhere
and if they will make their plans eco-
nomically .so as to justify our loans.
Thi.s policy, if we resolutely pursue it,
may piove to be a major turning point
in our effort to achieve a truly peaceful
world This approach is the way to chal-
lenge the dtx-tiuu-s of Marx This is the
wav to demonstrate the emptine.ss of
Cf)mmunist dogma.

Mr. COOPER Mr. President, will
tlio Senator yield?

Th.e PRESIDING OFFICER 'Mr.
C^'iROLL in the chair ' . Does the Senator
yield to the Senator from Kentucky .'

Mr. hXT-BRlGHT. I am very glad to
vifld.

Mr. COOPER What the Senator is
stating about the loan development fund
and th.e continuity of aid it offers. i'= very
important becau-e this fund and it:> con-
tinuity represent the most significant
advance which has been made in our aid
program .since its beginning.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I thank the Sen-
ator.

Mr. COOPER. A few minutes ago a
colloquy developed on the i.s.suc of waste
in the foreign-aid program. I should
like to ask the Senator if he does not
agree that the loan development fund
offers the opportunity to reduce waste
and intfficiency in that it affords an
o.oiiortunity to select the most worth-
wliile projects, and the mechanism to be
established, in the form of a loan board.
will be able to allocate projects and to
reduce personnel.

Mr FULBRIGHT. The Senator is
exactly correct. We have had several
mstances of what I would call bad plan-
ning, v,hlch resulted in some mistakes in
the program, becau.se of the way in
^\h!ch the projects had to be undertaken.
'I hey had to be undertaken in a short
time, .sometimes within only a few
months. We would rush into a program
without adequate preparation. That

would cause waste and mismanagement.
The Senator is quite correct.

The loan fund will give the planners
the feeling that they will have the funds
available and that they can take ade-
quate time in which to plan the projects,
and to plan them carefully. One great
example of what I have in mind is the
Helmund Valley project in Afghanistan,
which went awry, not under our pro-
gram, but under their own program, be-
cause of lack of planning and coordina-
tion. We stepped in and tried to sal-
vage it. Another pertinent incident was
described in the House report. That also
resulted from much the same thing.

Mr. COOPER. The Senator has
pointed out accurately the problem we
face in newly established, underdevel-
oped countries, in connection with their
desire to advance industrially. With
very limited funds, they .select wealth-
creating projects. The building of such
wealth-creating projects requires ex-
penditures which in some cases must
continue for 2 or 3 years or even 5 years.
If we continue the kind of aid we' have
f iven in the past, as the Senator has
said, these countries affected cannot ac-
cept aid on a major wealth-creating
project which will continue over 1 year.
What happens in many of these coun-
tries is that our aid is channeled off and
diverted into less important projects.
These projects are not always wealth-
producing. Under the loan development
fund, one great effect will be that our
aid will become more efficient and much
more effective, becau.se it will go into
freat wealth-producing projects in
countries that are trying to advance.
In creating wealth, the countries will
be able to return money into the revolv-
ing fund.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator has
put his finger on one very important
consideration, that this fund is to be used
primarily for wealth-producing projects,
not for social improvement or even hu-
manitarian projects.

Of ^'ourse. we do not have anything
against such projects. But, just as we
make distinctions in our own country
between certain types of activities, these
specially designed projects will increase
the wealth and increase the probability
of repayment through what is produced.

These funds are not intended to be
used for the relief of suffering. We have
relief programs for that purpose. We
have had very large programs of that
type. Certainly our country has done
more than Its share along that line.
This is not a relief program. If the ad-
ministrators are found to use the pro-
gram for that purpose, I am sure the
Senate will reprimand them. Certainly
I would, as would others who are inter-
ested in this program. That is not the
purpose of it. If we are to do that, we
will do it under another program.

Mr. COOPER. Another result would
be that the funds would be directed into
fewer and more important projects, and
in that way there would be an oppor-
tunity to reduce personnel. Is that not
correct?

Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator is
quite right. There has been the tend-
ency under the other program to rush
forward and undertake a short-term pro-

gram that looked all right, because it
was felt "Something must be done. We
cannot let this program bog down." So
some mosquitoes were sprayed, or similar
programs were undertaken very quickly,
which in themselves were all right, but
they did not contribute to what should
be basically done in these countries.

Mr. COOPER. Many of those projects
can be carried out under the technical
assistance program.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Yes; they can be
carried out under some other program,
not this one.

Mr. COOPER. I .should like to point
out one other thing, about which the
Senator from Arkansas knows so much.

Under the recent change in Soviet
tactics, the Soviets are able to move into
many countries by reason of the fact
that the Soviets are not restricted by
considerations of time, with which we
are faced, because our appropriations
are limited to 1 year. They have been
able to direct their funds, even though
they may be much smaller in size than
those that have been appropriated by
the United States, to larger wealth-pro-
ducing projects, mostly industrial proj-
ects, which are m.ost sorely needed in the
countries receiving the aid and there-
fore these projects have received much
more attention — and perhaps properly
so — than have the projects undertaken
by the United States.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator is
quite right.

Why do I say that the development
loan fund is the first imaginative for-
eign-aid policy step since the point 4 pro-
gram? I say it because it seems to me
that this idea is the only strategy which,
in the long run. can cause the Com.mu-
nist leaders to give up their ideas about
taking over the world. We cannot
change the Communist ideas by building
bigger armies and navies and air forces.
The United States must, of course, have
strong military power to deter Commu-
nist aggression and to protect ourselves,
but the best that these measures alone
can lead to is the kind of stalemate
which now exists.

We now can destroy the Russians, and
the Russians can destroy us. There is a
kind of uneasy and precarious military
stalemate, but this is not the kind of a
situation which is likely to change the
Russian minds, because they know that
there are ether ways, less costly v;ays,
situation which is likely to change the
world to become Communist. I think we
are realizing more and more that the
real struggle ahead lies in the under-
developed parts of the world which have
not yet decided which road to take to-
ward economic progress. They can take
the Communist method of development
or the democratic methods which have
been followed by the free world. The
existence of this development loan fund,
and the well-considered policy which lies
behind it, provides these new countries
with a real alternative.

If most of the newly independent na-
tions decide to try to raise their stand-
ards of living in a peaceful and a demo-
cratic way through their own efforts and
by accepting outside help on a loan basis,
the Communist powers, sometime during
the next 20 or 30 years during which this

11

8990

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June IJ

development will take place, will come to
reali/e that they are not gome: to con-
quer the world by force or by subversion
or by persuasion. They w:ll then be
forced to realize that they might as well
settle down and try to live with their
neighbors. becau.-e they will have no ac-
Ci'ptable alternative. The method here
su:4!;ested is the way that we may pos-
sibly resolve the C(-nflict between the
Communist world and the Free World.

The Committee on F'oreisn H'-Iauoi.^
propost's tiiat the developmeiu loan
fund work in the follow ir.K v.^y: We
prop<"se that there be an appropru.rioii
of $500 m;ll.on for the tiscal year 19o8
to start the fund o.T We propose that
in the fiscal year l\)L9 th-r' fund be al-
lowed to borrow up to $750 million from
tl.e Tr^?asurv. We propose that m th:;
ficcal year 1960 tiie fund be allowed to
borro* another ST50 million from the
Trea.'^uiy. if necessary.

Over a period of 3 years, then, a capi-
tal fund could be maiie availauie total-
ing $2 billiou. if that much proves to be
neces,L,ury for making loans for economic
development.

The priiposal Is that the loan fund bo
administered by the International Co-
operation Administration m very close
coordination with th.> other uiterested
Bkencie.s of the Government. All ba.-,;-:
loan policies and tvery propcsed loan .:
more than $10 million must be di -cus.stj
with an Advisory Loan Commute'',
which would be p-^tabhshtd bv law. Th.o
Chaanic;!! of th:.> Committee would he
the Deputy Under Secretary of Slate for
Economic Affairs. That ofUce :s filled at
pre.sent by an unusually capable and ex-
perienced man. Mr C. Dovi^las Dillon.
who was recently our Ambassador to
France. I think thi.'< is a very important
consideration m ^ettms the loan.s under
way m the proper manner. The com-
mitter. I feel, has treat confidence m tliio
arranjTement.

There would be repre.^entatives on the
Committee from ttie Department of Aj.-
ncuUure. the Department of Commerce,
the Export-Import Bank, from the
United States representation in the In-
ternational Bank fjr Rtconotructirn
and Development, and from any other
Government agencies which the F*resi-
dent feels ou-:ht to be represented. In
order that the activities of this fund will
be completely coordinated with all
sources uf cap;t.:I which flows abroad.

The fund will make no grants. Every
loan mu^t meet the.>e criteria:

Fir>t. The loan will not be made if
capital IS available from other Free
World sources on reasonable terms.

Second. The loan will not be made un-
less the activity of the project to be
financed is economically and technically
Kound.

Thi'd The lo?.n will not be made un-
le.xs the activity proposed gives a rea-
sonable prouiLse of contributuiJi; to the
development of economic resources or to
the iiio:ea.>e cf productive capacities of
tiie borrowinE! country. Let me read
t.h.s additional policy from the proposed
legislation;

Thj fund shall be aclmlnl.stercd so as to
support and encouraRC private Investment
«:iU other private participiition fur herlin?
l-io purposes oi this title, and U ti:.i'A bo

admmlstcrcU s»i as n^t to compete w.th pri-
v\'f liivps'tnei.t Ciipital. the Kxp< rt-Inipt.rt
B.mk. or the Internatlcnal Bank fur Rec n-
struotli'n and Devel..'pment.

To complete the description of how
the new fund w.il work, I should add
that the fund will be governed by the
«enenil principles of the Crovernment
Corporation Control Act, and the finan-
cial operations of the fund will be sub-
.ject to audit by the General Accounlini;
Oifi.^e.

Confire.ss will have firm control over
the propcsed development loan fund.
In order to put the matter in perspec-
t.vf. I would remind the Senate that
loan funds a:e not new L«t me cite
two surcessful examples, one in the
domestic field and one in tlie foreiun
field, both of which were e.st;:bh.«=hed
larvrelv by creatini^ an authority to boi -
row money from the Treasury fo be
loaned for purposes and on conditions
specified by the C( n^rcss On the
domestic siJe. the Reconstruction Fi-
nance Corporation was such a loan-
making organisation, and a succe.ssful
one. which earnr^d a profit on it^ opera-
ti^rs. On the foreign side, we still have
m operation the Export-Import Bank,
which finances its loans out of borrow -
mfs from the Treasury, and is doir:^ rx-
ctll.-nt work in it.s .«pt>c:al field

Conere^s would have pl-'nty ( f control
over the proposed development loan
fund provided for in the bill In the
t.r-.t place, the m.tial capital of the
fund will be established throuph an ap-
propiianon. S^-condly. the nnmmatinn
of the administrator of the fund is re-
quired by the bill to be confirmed by the
Senate

N'txt year wl.en the mutual <:ecur!tv
b'M comes to the Con.'re.vs th.e Commit-
tep on Poreipn Relations will revuw the
authority and will have an opportunity
to recommend its repeal or revi.vion if it
L- not workin?; pr iperly If the fund
ne^^ls additicn.^1 capit.il in th-^ fiscal
year I'^i't \l\,- bill provides that a budget
protfram must be presented la the Ccm-
ni.ttees en .■^ppripriations and be ap-
proved by them tx-fore the add.tional
capital can be borrowed from the Treas-
ury In the followuii: fiscal year. I>o0.
h" additional capital is n-eded by tlio
fund, the fund mu.-<t a^iain obtain the
approval of tiie .•Xppi opriatiuns Commit-
tets for Its bud;;ft program prior to bor-
rowing capital from the Treasury.
Throughout the life of the proposed
fund, tlie appropriate committees of the
Congress will receive reports by the
President on the operation of tiic fund
cv^ry 6 months. In addition to the.so
Semiannual repurt-s. Uie bill before the
Senate provides Uiat m any ca^e in
winch the administrator of the fund
iullov.s a course contrary to the advice
of a maionty of ti;e .A.dvLsory Lmn Com-
mittee of the fund, uith respect to any
basic policy matter, or with respect to
any loan In excess of $10 million, th.e ad-
mini.itrator must furnish to the Com-
mittee on Foreii^-n Re!ation.s of the Sen-
ate and the Committee on Foreu'n
.^rrairs of the House of Representatives
a statement of his reasons for dcins; .so
It seems to me that these several checks
and rechecks by Congress and tlie re-
ports to Congress provide adequate con-

trol over the activities of th- prcn^csed
fund.

Mr. Pre.':ident. I have taiknc about one
of ttie virtues of this bill — the Develop-
ment Loan Fund. I am nol, however,
in other respects, completely satisfied
with the bill. In some parts of the pro-
posed pro»;rams, and particularly in
.some countries. I fear that the emphasis
in prot-ramint,' is mucli too heavy on
the military side. As the committee re-
port p'>inLs out in it« conf'iujin;; para-
graph, y4 percent of the a.^s.: tance pro-
gram for the Far E.t&t is in the form of
milit^uy a.ssistance and deitnse support.
Of course, tins fi-iure dc:: not court
wii.itever part of tiie Development hoAn
Fund may i.o to the P'ar East, bu*, even
makmn allow, mces for tiiat. it strikt.i me
that tins IS not i4 prop -r L;..Iance.

1 he oes: — or perh.ips the worst — illu.s-
Iration of tlus imbalance ij Paki.ilan,
which nation we have, in n-y opinion,
encouravied to take on loo lie.ivy a mil-
itary burden. I think our mi tary plan-
ners have a tendency to treat '.ich coun-
try as if it alone liad to prepar'? to defend
iLs«»lf anainst a Ru.s.vian attack. Many
of th.c.H^ .'mall countries cannot posMbly
do so. They will do well enout h, it seenia
to me. if tiiey are able to m iintam an
adei-iuattf laiernal security lorce. Tiny
need all llie lest of thtir ru-ager re-
source., m their endeavor.^ tj improve
tlieir standards of livini.'.

The Committee on Foreii.n Relation.s
has made two typfs of changes in the
Presidents bill winch go a long way to
correct the overemphasis rn military
pnmrams wh.ch I have bet ii di.scu.v>-
mg In the last place, the committte
has made chan^^es in the existinj; law
which will more clearly plr.re responsi-
bility on the Secretary of State for co-
ordinatin.' tlie military s.dc of llie pro-
uram with United States economic and
foreign- policy otoe.tives. In the seconil
pi. ice, the committ-'e reduced th.e pio-
po..ed autlii.r./ation for military a.^-
si. tanre by $100 million, and reduced the
author^auon for appropriatioiis for d -
fense support by $100 million. In au-
Uiori/m..; approp: lations for tlie fiscal
year 1959 — next year— the cu.Timittce
has uidicated tlie downward direction in
winch we belie\e these appropriations
.'^hould i-o by fixing ceJmgs of $1.5 bil-
lion arid $710 million, respectively, fur
military aK&sistancc and defcn.sc support
for next year.

Mr. President, I clo.se these rcm.irks by
saying Qiat the Senate has before it
a sound mutual security bill. We are
now. I think, on the right track in our
economic- a.s:;istance procrams. The
proposed Dtvelopment Loan Fund is a
.-■ound and hopeful plan. It carries with
it the seeds uf its own termination. I
hope the Senate will support this new
approach to foreign aid — a ccnception
winch conform.'! to the general recom-
mendations of the Senate Special Com-
mittee To Study the Poreicn Aid Pro-
pram, and which has asain been re-
viewed and recommended by the Com-
mittee on PtJreiKn Relation.<?.

A.NftNDMr.VT PERMrTTING STTPi.RT TO AMmlCAN

sriioots ABitrnD

Mr. President. I send to Uie desk an
amendment to S. 2130. I regret that I
did not cffer tlus amendment when the

19

1 1

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

Committee on Foreign Relations was
considering the mutual security author-
ization bill. I hope that Senators will
study the amendment and that it will
prove to be acceptable to the members of
tlie Committee on Foreign Relations.

I may say that the committee took
te.' timony on the subject matter which is
dealt with by the amendment, but the
Committee itself was not given an opp)or-
t inity formally to pass upon it.

The purpose of the amendment is to
permit a .small portion of economic as-
.sistance funds to be u.sed for a.ssisting
American sponsored universities abroad.

If Senators will turn to page 27 of the
committee report on the pending mutual
.-ecurity bill, they will find a brief riis-
cusMon of this subject, and will also find
a recommendation of the committee
that the executive branch use the au-
tliority available to it to extend effective
a.s,sistance to American - sponsored
.schools, libraries, and community cen-
ters abroad such as the American Uni-
versity in Beirut and Robert College In
Turkey. I think it is well known that
these institutions play an important part
in a'^sisting in the training of teachers,
technicians, and others who are so des-
l)erately needed in underdeveloped coun-
tries

This statement in the report of the
C' mmittee on Foreign Relations on the
iM'nding bill is very helpful, but some-
thing more is needed. There ought to
be a dependable source of funds which
tiip executive branch can use to carry out
the recommendations of the committee
report. The new category of special as-
sistance provided for in the pending bill
Is an appropriate source of funds for as-
sistance to these American schools. My
amendment would authorize the use of
not to exceed $10 million of funds appro-
priated for special economic assistance
to be used for this worthwhile purpo.se.
I hope the amendment will receive fa-
vorable consideration by the Senate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be received and printed.
and will lie on the table.

Mr. AIKEN. Mr. Pre.sident. first let
me .say that the Foreign Relations Com-
mittee, under the leadership of the
senior Senator from Rhode Island [Mr.
CiREENi, and with the services of a very
capable and cooperative staff, has re-
ported to the Senate what I consider to
be the best mutual security bill ever re-
ported to this body.

Through the investigations and stud-
ies of this committee, the public has be-
come more Informed as to the purposes
and possibilities of foreign-aid programs
past, present, and contemplated.

I shall not discuss the provisions of the
bill before us in detail because others
have already done that or will do so.

I do wish to discusss in a broad sense
the question of why we have cooperative
aid programs with other nations and why
It is unthinkable that we should depart
from or weaken those programs at this
time.

The search for a formula for survival
occupies the attention of much of the
civilized world today. It is this hope for
survival, as well as humane Instincts.

8991

that is bringing the world closer in spirit
as well as in distance.

There was a time in the near past
when the oceans were considered ade-
quate protection to the United States
against any foreign foe. Our national
defense programs were predicated on
this assurance. At that time. too. the
tariff was considered to be adequate pro-
tection against foreign competition in
the economic field.

Now the tariff wall as a means of in-
suring economic prosperity has crumbled,
and the oceans are scant protection
against potential devastation from over-
seas attack. Instant communication
with any part of the world is now pos-
sible. Transportation speeds of equally
amazing comparison are not far behind.
The earth has become so shrunken that
people now living will surely be able to
circumnavigate the globe by the light of
a single day.

In fact, we are even looking at outer
space today, much better informed than
our European forebears must have been
when they looked westward across the
salt water and wondered how far one
would have to go before he fell off; and
how far he would drop; and what he
would land on, if anything.

It is recognition of the omnipotent
potentiality for self-destruction which
prompts the United States to join with
others in the search for a lasting peace.
It is this realization that inspires us to
try our utmost to make a going and
effective concern of the United Nations.
For this resuson too, we are carrying on
programs designed to strengthen other
people and their governments, so that
they, also, may make a full contribution
to the society of nations.

As we become better acquainted with
the people in other lands, we find that
under the surface all of us are very much
alike, having the same ambitions, the
same fears, and the same hopes.

We also find, to the surprise of some,
that there are countless people in the
world who equal us in intelligence and
excel us in patience. The fact that they
have been content to rely on their pa-
tience is one reason that so many of
them live today in underdeveloped coim-
tries.

Yet, In spite of the patent urgencies of
today, we still have in our own country
people who see little advantage in our
carrying on cooperative programs with
those in other lands. One of the favor-
ite indoor sports of some people is writ-
ing their Members of Congress demand-
ing that President Eisenhower's budget
recommendations for the next fiscal
year be drastically cut. Where the cut
shall take place, however, is a disputed
question. Almost nobody wants his own
benefits reduced.

So, Inasmuch as the benefits from
mutual assistance programs are largely
intangible, so far as most people are con-
cerned, there is a tendency to make
foreign-aid appropriations the logical
target for those who want to reduce
taxes and expenses without upsetting
their own gravy boat.

However, to those who think that for-
eign-aid appropriations are a total loss
to the American taxpayer, and benefit

solely the people of foreign countries, I
suggest a further review of the situation.
Most of the money appropriated for
mutual-aid programs is spent directly
for American goods and services. While
I carmot give the exact amoimt, it is not
far from 90 percent of the total.

There is waste in these programs. Mr.
President; but the percentage of waste
is no greater than the percentage of
waste in some of our domestic programs
which benefit the critics of foreign-aid
programs.

Last year, the gross national product
of the United States reached the stag-
gering total of $412 billion. It is ex-
pected that it will exceed $425 billion
this year. A sizable percentage of this
total was generated through direct for-
eign-aid programs and the greatly in-
creased international trade which they
engendered. These programs meant
business for our manufacturers, for our
shippers on land and on sea, for our
shipyards where new ships are con-
structed. They meant more business for
our wheat growers, our tobacco grow-
ers, and our cotton growers. They
meant infinitely more business for our
processors and handlers and suppliers.
Speaking of international trade, this
business has now reached enormous pro-
p>ortions, and is still growing.

From January 1, 1956 to January 1.
1957. the total amount of United States
exports is reported to have been $17 bil-
lion— and I believ3 the revised figure
will exceed $17 biUion by a considerable
amount — or nearly $5 billion more than
the total amount of imports into the
United States.

For the calendar year 1957, it is antici-
pated that United States exports will ex-
ceed $20 billion with a continuing large
balance of trade in our favor — a far
greater export trade than was even
dreamed of in past years.

The mutual aid programs, which must
continue, have contributed tremendous-
ly to the increased export business of the
United States. Some persons think
Public Law 480 is responsible for the in-
crease in our exports of farm com-
modities. It is; but Public Law 480
works with our mutual-security pro-
grams. Through Public Law 480. we sell
surplus farm commodities to other coun-
tries, and take their currencies in pay-
ment. Then, through the mutual-se-
curity program, we lend the currencies
back to the countries which bought our
surplus farm commodities; or in some
cases we contribute the currencies to
them as grants. If it were not for the
fact that we lend the native currencies
back to the countries where they orig-
inated through our foreig:n-aid pro-
grams, we could not make, through Pub-
lic Law 480, the sales we make now, be-
cause some of those countries simply
could not afford to let such enormous
amounts of their own currencies get out
of their own hands.

So let us ask ourselves this question:
If it had not been for the combination
of the programs carried on under Pub-
lic Law 480 and the mutual security pro-
grams, woiild we have sold almost 8 mil-
lion bales of cotton, last year — an in-
crease of 2 Vi million bales over the sales

X

8992

CONGRESSIONAL R I- CORD — SENATE

June 13

if

I

It '

t.'-.e year tefore? Would we have tn-
creait^d our saiea of wheat overseas 100
million bu^heii over the .saiea of the pre-
vious years '

Would our manufacturers and deal-
ers have sold millions of dollars' worth
cf wire, pump»s. k;eneraiors, ma^netcs,
and the k.;nd of equipment which th'V
ci^d i-eli? Would there have been a
siiorta^e of ^hip.s. cau^inj; our ship-
yards lo work overtime to build moie
sh;;>j. h.id it not been for these pro-
pram^- ^ Wjiild we l.ive sold milLon^
and m^llioiis of tons of coal to foreign
countries, giviru; our coal miners the
best seas«in they h.ive luid in years, had
It nut been fjr pro^rum-s »h;ch si>me
people, ill advisedly, I behove. ihin< we
should di^coniaiue or drasticaliy slasii?

Mr RET/EKCOMB. Mr. President.
uiU the Ser.ator yit Id at tiiat point?

Mr. AIKEN' I vield.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I wish to say the
Senator from Vermont i.s mak.in« one
cf th'^ cleart<it and one of th.e dbie:-,t ex-
posilions of th.s subject that I liave
heard. I compliment hrm upon u. At
this point in his statement, when tie u
telliHo of the k;reat advanu^e-s that have
come to this country and to the people
of this country and to thoiie cnua^^ed m
the various industries of the country as
a result of mone\s stiit .ibroad. I * anted
to call this to the ai'eiit.on of the den.i-
tor. and. for my own information, put
this question The bill provides for v^hat
i.s known as the development loari fund-
Is that correct .^

Mr AIKFN That Ls correct

Mr RE\T:RC0MB Tliat is a new
prov(.=;ton in the Mutual Security Act.
IS It not.'

Mr AIKEN Yes. I thinic that is a
drastic improvement over the programs
of the pa'-t

Mr REVERCOMI^ I want to concur
heartily in such a provision, because,
instead of direct Krants of money by"
thi.s ctnmtry, there is now proposed a
provi.'Jirn that countries v^e beheve re-
quire economic aid mav borrow money
upon the basi.s that tliere will be a re-
payment Is that correct?

Mr AIKEN Th.at i, correct, and
most of the countries prefer to pav bticlc
the loans. I expect to cover that point
a little later on in the statement I am
mafcm r i think that is one of the best
provisions in the pending bill, and one
which wi!! receive a threat deal more
favor from the people of the United
States than some of our programs, and
certain provt.'^lons of those prcgrams.
have received in the past, and very
properly .-lo

Mr f?E\'FRCOMB. May I .say to the
Penator the provision for the Develop-
ment Loan P^nd is one that brings ^reat
satisfaction to the Senator from West
Vlrx;mia. because for some time, since
the countries of the world have more
and more gained their economic footing'.
and since thev have been on more solid
r.round eeonomicaLly than they were be-
fore. I have ur;;cd ti^pe and time a^xaiu
that advancements of funds for eco-
nomic purposes be placed upcn a loiin
basis. So It IS heartening to me, and I
believe It Is sattsfylns to the people of
th^s country, that now at last Instead
cf providing grants or. as many persons

have der.cribed them, handout-s or give-
a.\,ays. th.ere is included in the bill a
provision for the lending; of money where
tlie Gtjvernment feels il shoul*.! oe loanetl
for needed internal development of coun-
tries that are o'Oi' allies. Am I correct in
that conclusion .>

Mr. AIKEN The S nator is ctrrect
In his assumpttcn.

Mr KEVKKCCMU. I thank t!ie Sena-
tor very mu'-h.

Mr AIKEN I have pointed out tha'.
btcauje ot a tiemt'iiOous vo.uine of ex-
ports, we have a considerable imbalance
of trade. In cliier words, we are expoi t-
Ki:; many biihcns of dollar^ more of I'oods
arul conl.^^oll.:le,•> than we are r»veivin»;
from utiirr countries. This situut.on
cannot kio (m forever without sreally dis-
turbing; w'jrld condition.^ and crtutiii:,'
friction beiwet-n naLi«'n.»>

How to correct tins imbalance p» .-...>, a
m.iMr problem

I he United States ls already one of Ihe
low taritl countries of the world.

We canuut tiuow cur ^atcs wide open
and admit any and all products from
fore.^n lands vnthout restriction.

To do so would Ui^l only jeopardue
hundreds of smaller industries m our
country, but would probably faU to sol.c
llie problem

Reduction in trade barri-rs mu. t L-»
mure ^leneral and ni,t a one-way street
for a single nat.on.

The .situation is presently be'in*; amel-
iorated by a large increa.>e in furei^in
tra\el by Amencuis. This ijets many
dollars into tlie hands of ut/n-r petiple.
and to Uiat extent helps to reduce th.e
imbalance of trade Then there are di-
rt'ct kjdns to fort'u'n businesses, sales of
.American surplus commodities for for-
fi«:n currency, and private invfstment
by Americans in othfr countries

It is apparent that only a general
strtn^tlienin^ of the ecoriomy of free
nations will be the ultimate answer to
borJi our economic and political prob-
lem.s.

In 1956. Americans invested two and
three-quartf>r billion dollars In other
countries, and tliis in;e;.tmert is earn-
uu' money for the Americans who put
niuney into that mvestment and who
spend their income in the Un.ted States.
Ho'Aever. without our niutuai aid pro-
grams with foreifrn countries, we all
know that American investors would not
have dared to put %2\ billion into pri-
vate investments In foreign couritries
List year

American investoi-s, contractors, tech-
mcians. and operators are now to be
found literally from p«jle to pole and
in virtually every coiiiitry on the globe
outside the Iron Curtain.

Mr. HUMPIIREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield ^

Mr AIKEN. I yield.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I am very pleased
to hear the Senator from Vermont make
tins point, k)ecause I think it is one of the
mivst telling arguments m behalf of a
mutual secimty program from what one
may call the economic viewpoint of our
own country. I believe In mutual secu-
rity on the basis of tlie Interests of our
own country, and that Ls collective secu-
rir.y a»;ainst Commum:;t aggression, but
here is an argument that can be docu-

mented by facts. In term.s of business in-
vestmenus. busine.ss opjwrtuiiities. and
what I beheve to b»- the spr-adinK of the
finer aspect.s of the American poLtical
and economic system to other parts of
the world.

Tto often pt^cple in and out of Con-
gress condemn American enterprihe,
eitiier unkiwwingly cr m a way I thin.»c
unfortunate, by .saying eveiy time an
.Air.ciican busine.ss t-nu-rprist- goes ovtr-
st as »t is some kind of eApluitation.
Tliat lo nut true. Wt have tiad example*
of expluitim.; enleipri.s4-s. out in llje
maui I think it c.ui >je saiil that an
Amtrican bu.^.n^-^^, enieipiL'-e going
overseas takes uitli It not onlv American
tfchnoloKv. know-how. and manage-
ment, out Like^ with it ^.me of tlie
social standards of employt< relation-
.'^h.:i:s. and s<^me of the social .standards of
bttter working conditions, schiiols, aiid
hospitals. I think those st.mcaids can
be .veil all over tlie world, and I tiiink
that strengthens our general foreign
policy.

Mr AIKEN. I thank the Senator
from Minnesota f.ir hi.s rtmaiks. I am
speaking in t;ene.'-al terms today, but ihe
Senator from .Minnesota and ctheis
know everythiiiL; I h.a\e said can be sub-
.sf.mtiated -and documented, if that is
the word to use— by records which are
available to all I am tryin;; to puint out
some a.spects which I feel liavc i.ut been
properly .set before the p«'iplc of the
United States, .some of wh«.m have t>een
Inclined to re^-ard tluse piunrams a.s
k'lveaway pr.u,rams. At tinus they
have been. We are trying to get away
from that. I think tlie bill before the
Senate does help us ^vi away from that.
Mr REVERCOMB. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield '
Mr AIKEN I yield.
Mr. REVERCOMB The Senator waa
kind enou*.'h to yield to me a few mo-
ments ago. and we discussed the devel-
opment loan fund a basic part of tins
very .mportant bill To what extent, can
the Sen-itor advise us. are there to be
KTrants to countries abro;id in addition to
tlie loan development fluids for ecoru>mic
purposes'*

Mr. AIKEN. That is difficult to tell
until we fini-sh action on the bill and aLso
on the appropriations. However, even in
the funds which would be available for
grants, tlie trend ls toward loans The
committee, for instance, was asked to
include $2,5 million for Latin America.
I thuik Uiat was a good idea. We also
provided that 90 percent of the $25 mil-
lion sliould be m tlie forms of loans. We
had a similar appropriation of $15 mil-
lion last year. If I remember correctly,
only half of that was required to be in
loans.

We are steadily working away from
grants and toward loans, except for the
purely military aid program. I believe
this bill is a further step away from
grants and toward loans than any legLs-
lation which we liave had to consider
since the end of World War II.

Mr. REVtlRCOMB. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr. AIKEN. I yield.
Mr. REVERCOMB. Let me say. with
respect to tfie military, where the

10.

> t

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

prints are made under mutual security,
I do n')t rai.'e any question and I have
no quarrel with that procedure. I again
emphasize, if the able Senator will per-
n.il nie to do so in interrupting him. the
Importance of the loan feature, which
vi' !:nd iiere in economic development.
I .s,iv again it i.s most heartening, and I
L' ';i •, f will be heartening, to the Ameri-
c.\.x\ people throughout the lengt.h and
bi( adih of this huid to know that at la.st
the Cjngres.s is recognizing Uie fact that
wii.l'' ui' want mutual security, we have
a regard for our ix'ople, their property
and tl.iir mom y, and t!;at funds ad-
v.incid Will be upon a loan basis rather
tiiaii upon a giant ba.sis.

I w isii to .say I concur heartily in the
btlief expres.stKl Ly tlie Senator from
Vermont, that tliose with whom we deal
would r.i'.h'r hir. e tln.s ui-vm a sound
basis i,f l.,,ir.s rather than prants.

Mr AIKEN. If the proposed Icgisla-
ti.-n did not work us in the direction
of loans rather than grants, Uie Senator
would not find the Senator from Ver-
mont supporting It quite .so vigoroUi^ly
a.i he Is today.

Mr REVEI^COMB. I thank the Sen-
ator.

Mr AIKEN. It is something we must
do. It is not only fair to our own people,
but it is fair to the i>eoplc of other
countries. Once their economies reach
the level where they can deal on a busi-
nesslike basis, that is the way we should
d'.al.

Mr REVERCOMB. Mr. President,
v^\\\ th.e Senator yield?

Mr. AIKEN. I yield.

Mr REVERCOMB. And we feel that
th.it lime has come, and that under this
b.ll. when it becomes law. we shall then
pi\>«t'(d ut)on tl^e advancement of
i;.oneys by loans rather than by gifUs.
uiidrr the provLsions of the law. when
Wf deem it best to send money abroad
for economic development.

Mr AIKEN. We are going that way
v< :y f.ist. I will point out a few excep-
tions before I conclude my remarks, but
in general we are going m the direction
of busines.slike arrangements in the
ii.akmg of loans rather than grants, at
a rapid pace. This is the longest step
forward we have Uken in the last 12
years.

Mr REVERCOMB. Mr. President.
\Mll the Senator yield?

Mr. AIKEN. I yield.

Mr. REVERCOMB. May I express the
hoix? that for soundness, for fair deal-
ing, and for mutual trust between this
country and other countries, I hope that
soon we may proceed entirely upon the
basis of aid to economies by loans.

Mr. AIKEN. I would say almost en-
tirely. There will be a few small coun-
tries which will have to be helped In
other ways for some time, but we will
almost go on a businesslike basis with
them.

Mr REVERCOMB. I thank the Sen-
ator.

Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President. I men-
loned the Iron Curtain before the col-
Iwiuy with the Senator from Minnesota
it^id Uie Senator from West Virginia.

T his leads us to the question. What is
goinei on behind the Iron Curtain? Is it

cm 506

8993

bepinnJnp to crack and, if so, what can
be done to widen the crack?

Totalitarianism In any form la the
natural enemy cf democracy.

At the pre.sent time, international
communism is re?-arded as the most
dominant and dangerous form of totali-
tarianism.

It is a means to an economic as well
as a political end.

It controls countries having a total
population of some 800 million people.

It has Its disciples in most of the
other countries of the world.

It has as its goal the domination of
the world and the people who live
therein.

Yet. today, International communism
Is wavering in those nations -here it was
thoupht to be most strongly entrenched.
I do not mean to imply that Ru.ssia,
Czechoslovakia. Red China, and the
others are eoing to change their form of
povernment in the near future. Havin?
in mind Mr. Khrushchev's prediction
that our grandchildren will be living
under a Communist form of government.
I think the .'^afer prediction is to say that
Mr Khrushchev's grandchildren will be
livrik under a fairly democratic form of
government.

The crack in the Iron Curtain is
widening. It first appeared in 1948
when Yugoslavia, ravaged and betrayed
and stricken with hunger, appealed to
the United States for aid. We gave the
Yugoslavs about $38 million worth of
food that year. Corn was one of the
items — I think the principal item.

This enabled them to come through
the w inter and to establish and maintain
a government which, while still profess-
ing to be communistic, vigorously dis-
sents from the international brand of
its neighbors.

But for American aid. Yugoslavia
would undoubtedly be another controlled
and dangerous satellite today. Heaven
knows what would then have happened
to Greece.

With hardly any exception, the other
satellite nations are looking hopefully to
the day when they, too, may be free
from the control of International tyr-
anny. They cannot win that freedom
without our help and encouragement.

We have indicated a willingness to sell
goods and commodities on favorable
terms to Poland, a nation which has
recently taken a step — though a very
short step — toward future independence.
We are taking this action with the
full knowledge that there is an element
of risk involved. There is always the
chance that the Communist government
in Moscow, seeing its hold on the satel-
lites weaken, may choose to create inci-
dents leading to armed occupation. It
is also possible that these same rulers,
seeing loss of power lying ahead of them,
may choose war rather than risk certain
destruction at the hands of those people
who have been suppressed by their dom-
ination.

So long as the United States possesses
the power to dehver total destruction
upon any aggressor, it Is unlikely that
the hazard of an atomic war will be
risked by any nation. As a matter of
fact, it has been in the news much lately.
Mr. President, that we have 250 or more

airbases around the world from which
counterattacks could be launched
against any country which had the te-
merity to undertake to attack us, or even
surprise us. These mutual security pro-
grams have played a large part In hav-
ing those 250 airbases made available to
us by many, many nations of the world.
Our information is to the effect that
even now millions of people in Eastern
Europe and in Russia itself are eagerly
seeking news and hope from the Western
World. Radio Free Europe and other
apencies, public and private, are keep-
in'T that hope alive and growing.

Tho.^e who have been permitted to
travel in these countries and those
upon whom we depend for information
advise us that there is almost a com-
plete lack of bitterness and hostility
towards Americans in those areas today.
We are now considering the mutual
security or mutual aid program for the
coming year. I wish to point out briefly
why this program is so important to the
United States.

In the first place, the greater part of
the money spent on foreign aid pro-
grams is either spent in the United
States or returns to the United States.
There are three phases involved in
foreign aid programs.

First, there is direct military aid,
which is comprised of ships, guns,
planes, tanks, and the usual military
equipment.

Almost invariably the contribution of
military equipment to a foreign country
Is accompanied by a replacement of such
equipment with more modern weapons
for the American Armed Forces.

So, actually, in furnishing outmoded
or surplus equipment, we are simply
charging to a foreign aid program ap-
propriations which would otherwise be
required to maintain an up-to-date Mil-
itary Establishment at home.

Included with the military aid there
Is the defense support program, through
which we contribute food, clothing, fa-
cilities, and other equipment necessary
to maintain the armed strength of
friendly nations.

In this program, too, nearly every dol-
lar spent for material is returned to the
United States.

As a matter of fact, almost three-
quarters of the cost of all foreign aid
programs is in the interest of our own
national security.

It is claimed, and with much justifica-
tion, that instead of being an added
expense, foreign aid for military pur-
poses is actually a substantial saving to
the United States taxpayer.

This is because of the far lower cost of
maintaining armed forces in other
countries.

The next phase of our foreign aid pro-
gram is economic. Last year, this cost
us about $250 million. This type of as-
sistance is a comparatively small part of
the total, yet it draws the most fire from
foreign aid critics. This nM)ney Is spent
largely In construction of roads ports,
bridges, schools and hospitals, and for
water supplies and irrigation.

Part of this expenditure also returns
to this country, but, in the main, our
benefits are derived by strengthening the
economy of the participating nation.

i«i

S994

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

1

The final phase of our foreign aid pro-
gj-am IS the technical assistance pro-
gram. This amounted to only $135 mil-
lion last year — I believe the bill calls for
$151 million this year— but dollar for
dollar undoubtedly yields iireater returns
than any other money spent in foreign
lands. Through this prot^ram, we help
other people to help them.selves in the
fields of management, industrial produc-
tion, and agriculture.

Through technical as.sistance. many
countries in a short period of years have
been able so to improve their own econ-
omy and their own .standards that they
are themselves bearing mo.st of the co.'^t
of continuing the.se programs.

Just as the county agent, the home
demonstration agent, and the club
worker in the United States have made
their contributions to the welfare of our
country, so have their counterparts ::i
foreign lands made equally great con-
tributions to rai.sing the living standards
of many millions who live in under-
developed countrie.s.

Although for the first few years of the
foreign aid programs, assistance to un-
derdeveloped countries was given largely
in the forin of grants, we are now reach-
ing the point tt-iiere most of the assist-
ance in the future, aside from outright
military aid. will be made in the form of
loans.

The establishment of the development
loan fund is a striking departure from
former methods. I e.xpect it will not only
prove to be effective, but also will be
understood and accepted by the Amer-
ican public.

The question is frequently raised —
How do you e.xpect to collect a loan from
an underdeveloped country' Why not
give the cash and let it go at that.' The
same question was raised 23 years ago,
when the Export-Import Bank was or-
ganized. The initial purpose of the Ex-
port-Import Bank was to lend money to
people in foreign countries so they could
buy from American industries and busi-
nessmen. It was really a domestic-aid
program. At the time it was set up. there
were some who believed that if we ever
collected 50 percent of the loans made
we would be doing very well.

What has happened' In the 23 years
that the Export-Import Bank has been
in existence, the losses from bad loans
have not only been negligible, but the
bank has accumulated profits amounting
to $435 million above all expenses. This
has been done on an initial investment
of only $1 billion.

We help the other countries which are
potentially wealthy, but have no pur-
chasing power so to develop their re-
sources that they can convert some of
their mineral wealth. agricultural
wealth, or whatever kind of wealth it is.
Into improved purchasing power, not
only for their own people to use at home,
but also to enable them to do a greater
amount of business in the world market.
In the future, I should say that, except
for the costs which we incur In South
Korea, Taiwan, and South Vietnam, we
may expect that a large percentage of
loans made In foreign countries from
now on will be repayable.

I do not suppose the public generally
knows that over the past few years we
have received one-hundred-and-sixty-
million-odd dollars in interest from so-
called .soft loans made a few \ears awo.
We are beginning to collect on the prin-
cipal as well, having received some $14
million or $15 million in principal on
loans made a few years ago The ren-
son we have not collected more on the
principal is that when such loans were
made there was a provision in the con-
tract which exempted the borrowers
from making payments on the principal
for the first 5 years In the case of some
countries, the 5 years have expired, and
th.ev are not only paying interest, and
enabling us to get .some income back.
but they are paying something back on
the pnnciparfis well, although it will be
a long time before we get it all back.

Many countries in rhich we have aid
programs are rich in resources. They
simply have no way at present to con-
vert their resources into purchasing
power. Of course, there are some areas
where it will be necessary to continue
grants for the foreseeable future, but
the world at large, including many of the
less developed areas, has now reached a
point where more businesslike methods
may be employed

Summing up the results of our endeav-
ors over the past 10 years, we find that
although there have been failures in the
field of foreign cooperation the successes
have outweighed the failures. World
trade has increased enormously, health
and education have made much prog-
ress in so-called backward nations. Fear
of famine has been mitigated.

The charge that the United States was
motivated by imperialistic ambitions has
been generally discredited. Several
countries which tottered between totali-
tarianism and the western democracies
are definitely on the side of popular gov-
ernment today.

The people of the world are becoming
better informed each year. Colonialism
is waning, and some governments are at-
tempting to t)ecome more democratic.
The United Nations is still a going con-
cern and making a considerable con-
tribution to the efforts for world unity
and amity.

The danger of war has not been elim-
inated. It could start from either of
two sources. The leaders of interna-
tional communism, feeling themselves
hemmed in from the outside and facing
revolution, peaceful or otherwise, from
within, could resort to desjjerate meas-
ures. Or. smaller nations, seeking to
fulfill nationalist ambitions, might re-
sort to violent methods, thereby striking
a spark which could kindle war on a
major scale. The United Nations If
properly equipped and implemented
could do much to obviate the latter risk.

This Is no time to abandon or impov-
erish a program which has already
greatly strengthened the world economy.
Including our own; brightened the fu-
ture for free people, and enhanced the
security of democratic nations.

The bill before us Is a good bill, its
estimates of cost are reasonable and the
long step it takes away from grants

toward more businesslike methods Is
highly desirable.

Let us not emasculate it. either as to
policy or the means of implementmg
that ixilicy.

Let us go forward and not retreat just
as the goal comes in sight.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
bill IS ot)en to amendment.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President. I
suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President. I
ask unanimous con.sent that the order
for the quorum call be re.scinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.

STATISTICAL PROCEDURES OF THE
CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY

Mr. SCHOFPPEL. Mr. President, on
July 27, 1956. in volume 102. part 11.
pages 15067 to 15072 of the Congres-
sional Record. I analyzed the so-called
Presidential support scores prepared by
Congressional Quarterly, a private or-
ganization. I was critical of their .sta-
tistical procedures, as they are ba.sed on
the editorial selection of certain rollcall
votes which their editors decide should
be used to reflect support or opposition to
the Presidents program. Apparently
many people are confused and believe
that the Congressional Quarterly is an
official Government document.

My review of their work a year apo
convinced me that they present statis-
tics labeled as factual and nonpartisan
to support their own political viewpoint.
Since I challenged their statistics. I be-
lieved it was my responsibility to make
my own study of the entire record of
rollcall votes during both the 83d and
84th Congresses. I endeavored to deter-
mine the support for President Eisen-
howers program by the members of the
two parties in the Senate, My study
was printed in volume 102. part 11. pages
15618 to 15628 of the Congressional
Record on July 27. 1956. Unlike the
Congressional Quarterly. I reviewed all
of the rollcall votes which could possibly
involve the President's program over a
4 -year period.

Mr. President, my statement of Au-
gust 17 said;

There were 271 rollcalla In the 83d Con-
gress, and 230 roUcallg in the 84th Congress,
or a total of 501 rollcalls. Every r( llcall has
been reviewed and accounted for sc that the
record will be complete and all inrlualve.

After eliminating prcKedural votfs. as well
as Issues which were clearly not .i part of
the Presidents proj^ram. I find tJiat there
were 220 rollcalls In the 83d Congress and
203 rollcalls In the 84th Congress which rep-
resented a clear test of support for President
Elsenhower.

In the 83d Congress on this ent re group
of issues, the Republican Memljers cast 7.525
votes In support of President Ela«nhowers
program or 64 7 percent of the to',al. The
Democrats cast 4.114 votes or 35.3 percent
of the total.

In the 84th Congress when the Damocrata
were In control of the Congress, the Re-

10.

I I

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8995

publicans ca.<^t 6.682 vot'^s or 59 4 percent of
the vutes cast fur Pre.sident ElsenhowLT, and
tlie Dcmi'cr.Tts ca.st 4.575 votes or 40 6 per-
cent nf the vot<»8 for his program. Over the
4-year period on these 423 Issues. Republl-
cms c.ist 14.207 votes for Presldtnt Elsen-
hower's program or 62.1 percent of the to-
tal The Democrats cast 8,089 votes or 37.9
j^ercd.t of the Ujtal.

An cx.auiin.itlon of t±ie voles ctut In oppcj-
sJtlun to President Elsenhower's progr;im
shows a sh.irp party division. During the
fi3d Conrress. Republicans cast only 1.630
vcjtcs In fippwUhJii to the Prehldenfs pro-
pr:im or 25 7 percent Cif the total. Demo-
crats cast 4.701 votes or 74.3 percent of the

total. During the 84th Congress once again
we find Republicans casting only 1,715 votes
In oppocltlon to President Elsenhower's pro-
gram or 29.7 percent of the total opposition
votes with the Democrats casting 4.053 or
70.3 percent of the opposition votes. Over
the 4-year period, the Republicans cast only
3,345 votes In opposition to President Eisen-
hower s program or 27.6 percent of the total
opposition votes. The Democrats cast 8,754
or 72 4 percent of the opposition votes.

cording to their board of editors, meas-
ure support for the President.

Mr. President, I have prepared a table
listing these votes and the pages of the
Congressional Quarterly on which they
appear.

I included a summarj' table in my re-
marks which I wish to include at this
point in the Record. It is self-cxplana-
toi-y.

A:L F.i.^ii.hi,--r.T rollcalls

Con?

i'i--. i.l.d'Apr [Kxsiticn

Opposf'ii to F.i.scnhowpr position

volis I '

)( nKKTntJ! I I>.-miKT.its K.r'ijl'!.can.s

V'.lnv ' ]\ r- Vn(c5 rrr-
r.i.-l ' (•< lit c:i.-t I (tilt

Vf]tf« ]Vr-
(■;Lst I writ

Vdtfs
ca.«t

P«T-
Clllt

fX\

^4Lli

T'.i.i!.

iS.i

7. .'-.'^ I
H. Lie •

H 7

.'W.4

t i I

4.114

4, .'.7.';

8. tK!)

4<i. b

4. 7' II i
4, !!.=;.> I

8.764 I

74 :<
711.3

l,i.3fi
1, 71J

2.V 7
■i'j.7

T2. 4 i 3, 54i

27 6

Mr. President, it is impossible to
measure either party support for the
Pres'.drnt or the position of individual
Srnators on the basis of a few scattered
roik-alls.

On May 14. 1957. I received a letter
from the executive editor of the Con-
rrc^sional Quarterly, which I wi.sh to in-
clude in the Congrfs.sion\l Record at
this point:

Congressional Quarterly.
Wa.^nmfjton. D C, May 14, 1957.
Hon. A.vDRFw F SrH(iLFi>rL.
Si nale Ufficc Bu-Ulittg,

Washingtun, D C.
Df\r .^^fnmtor S< no!PPiL In view of your
1:-.'frf!5t l;i thl.s .■^ubjfct last yo;ir. I am Fend-
Ir.c ynu the firFt Interim measure of presl-
dpiitiiil RupfKirt done by Concresslonal
Qu.irterly for ihe ses.slon up to May 12.
Cordially,

THOMA.S N. SCHKOTH.

Executive Editor.

I have examined this so-called interim
ni(asure of presidential support by the
Conirressional Quarterly. It is an amaz-
in'r document. It was timed to reach
the press when Pre.sident Eisenhower
made his first television addre.ss.

The Cvonrrre.ssional Quarterly says:

C ni^psslnnal Republicans have opposed
President El-enhower's legislative program
ninrp nften than they have supported It so
far In the Democratic-controlled 85th Con-
gress.

7he opposition Democrats not only have
suppf.rted the President more than the
members of his own party, but also have
Eiippnrted him more than" they did in the
p.Tst two Congresses of his administration.

The Republican level of support, mean-
while, has dropped lower than at any time
In the past and has drawn the average Con-
gif.sbional support score to a lower point
than it reached in the 83d and 84th Con-
grp.'sps

Tiic^ results of Congre.-sslonal Quarterly's
niiflse.sslon survey of House and Senate vot-
l!ig explain more than anything else why
Pre.sident Eisenhower feels compelled to by-
pass Congress and take the case for his
pr'>v;rain directly to the people through
ua'at^Lwule radio and television.

He recognizes the need to light a fire un-
der his fellow Republicans on Capitol Hill,
whose support of the Eisenhower budget
and legislative program has dropped sharply
since the President won his landslide reelec-
tion victory last November.

The so-called interim measure of
Presidential support released by the
Congressional Quarterly as nonpartisan
was actually a Democratic Party propa-
ganda piece to give the impression of a
deep rift witliin the Republican Party.
The Congressional Quarterly statement
to the press continues with the following:

The weakening of Republican support has
caused the President some legislative losses.
HLs position was upheld on 19 of the 31
rollcall votes in 1957 for an average of 61
percent. In the Democratic 84th Congress
(1955-56). the President's winning average
wa. 72 percent: in the Republican 83d Con-
gress ( 1953-54 ) It was 83 percent.

Mr. President, In analyzing the 31
rollcalls, I find that they include votes
in t)oth the Senate and in the other body.
I do not know how one can combine
votes in the two Houses and come up
with an overall winning a%'erage for the
President's program. No one can claim
that a measure based on so few votes
is an objective statistical procedure.

I shaJl not concern myself with the
votes in the other body. The Senate
picture is so distorted that I shall confine
my remarks to it.

The Congressional Quarterly release
said:

The 9 Senate votes included 3 budget
tests, the Mid-East doctrine, and such contro-
versial nominations as those of Scott McLeod
and Gen. Ralph Zwlcker.

Since the controversy of a year ago. the
weekly issues of the Congressional Quar-
terly Indicate on each roUcaU the posi-
tion which they say would support the
President's program. I have made a very
careful examination of the weekly issues
of the Congressional Quarterly and can
find only 7 votes, not 9 votes, which, ac-

LoUcall Xo.

DaU

PrPsidPTit'f

posinou

Paso

4

Feb ]K ]i..';7 Voc

2-Jii

■Ml

41-^
4I^

65J

10.

17 :

1^.

21...

22

M:ir. Z V.:-
Mar. 5. I!(.'i7
Apr. 1. ly57

d(,

^Tny ,S. I9.-7
May 9. 1957

.Nav

Vps

Yes

Nav

.NnV

Ves"

Mr. President, the flexibility of the
Congressional Quarterly's methods are
illustrated by the fact that we now find
that 9 Senate votes are included in
their support scores while there were
only 7 selected in their weekly tabula-
tions.

Obviously it is impossible to reflect
the position of any Senator in terms of
the President's entire program on either
7 votes or 9 votes. If 9 votes are used,
each vote counts for 11 percent of the
total score. If only 7 votes are used, each
vote counts as 14 percent of the score.
The only way a support score or a party-
unity score can have any meaning is
in terms of the entire session. That is
why I prepared my study a year ago
ba.sed on the entire record.

Through May 12, the cutoff date for
the Congressional Quarterly interim
measure of Presidential support, there
were only 22 Senate rollcalls. Based on
past experience, by the time we adjourn
there should be sufficient rollcalls to
provide some Information that might be
meaningful. I have examined the past
record to see how many rollcalls we
normally had taken by May 12 and the
number of rollcalls by the end of the
session.

Mr. President, I have summarized this
data in a table which shows the unfair-
ness of preparing an interim support
score at this date. It is self-explan-
atory.

Number of rolicall votes

Bv

May 12

By end of

83<i Cfinc.. l5t s<''ss

19
37

^

b4tli Cong., Istscss.

n

In reviewing the issues they selected to
measure support for the President, the
Congressional Quarterly says:

Two-thirds of the 22 House rollcalls were
on the budget. The others Included the cora
bill, tlie Mid-East doctrine, and a probe oi
monetary and fiscal policies.

Mr. President, the corn bill in the
House was a part of the President's pro-
gram. As I said previously, the Congres-
sional Quarterly stated that:

The 9 Senate votes included 3 budget
tests, the Mid-East doctrine, and such con-
troversial ncwnlnatlons as those of Scott Mc-
Leod and Gen. Ralph Zwlcker.

Apparently the corn bill was not con-
sidered a part of the President's program
in the Senate. This is a further example

w.

8996

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

June 13

of the flexible methods used by the Con-
tiressional Quarterly to make the sta-
tistics fit their own purposes. Their
purpose in this case was to divide the
Republican Party and to continue to
furlher the Congressional Quarterly
theory that over the years President
Eisenhower has been supported by the
Democrats in this body and opposed by
the members of his own party

In my remarks on July 27. 1956. I in-
cluded a letter which I had received from
the distinguished senior Senator from
Maine. I wish to include at this point
the final paragraph of her letter to me,
which reads as follows:

I believe that Congressional Quarterly doea
provide a valu.ible service. But I think liiat
ltd publishers have a verv seriou.s ,jbU;:atiiiu
to avoid editorial slanting in their an.ilyses
If for only two reasons: lU the very name
of the publication causes many people to be-
lieve that It 13 an official publicarion of Con-
gress, and (2 1 it represents itseli' to be com-
pletely objective.

I then said:

Mr r*Tesident. the distinguished Senator
from Maine has raised the intere-stir:; point,
that many people may believe that Cotik^res-
slonal Quarterly is an official or semi 'iflcial
publication of the Congress. I intend to
study this matter fully to determine whether
legislation should not be introduced t-) pro-
tect the use of the name •Cotigressional" just
as tlie Congress has protected i;ie U5o of
such words as "United States" and 'Red
Cross " fr':m commercial exploitation.

In View of this completely distored
"interim mea.sure of Presidential sup-
port" whicli has been so widely quoted
in the press. I can understand why there
are requests to introduce legislation to
protect the name congressional" from
misuse by a commercial organization.
This obvious political use of what many
consider an official Government publica-
tion has gone far enough. It is t.me to
call a halt to these misleading practices.

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT OF 1357

The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill iS. 2130 • to amend furlher
the Mutual Security Act of 1954. as
amended, and for other purposes.

Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina.
Mr. President. I beliovp all Senators
know my p<isitinn on the pending
measure even before I speak, because m
years gone by I have always expressed
mvself against the giveaway program,
as I call it. which some others call the
mutual security program

The so-called mutual .security b.ll now
before the Senate, as I see it. is merely
another de\ ice to tako away from tl-.e
American taxpayers more bilhons of
dollars for giveaway programs for foreign
governments.

There is little mutual security in the
bill In truth, there is httle of anvthing
mutual about the bill other than the fact
that American taxpayers are mutually
sick of paying the full load for the le.st
of the world The very term security"
is a misnomer In fact, it is simply a
cloak behind which hides the bigiiest
pork-barrel legislation the world has
ever known.

I call attention to th'^ fact that at pres-
ent wl> are giving away so much money

that we do not know how to distribute
it properly. At present, approximately
$6 billion has not even been allocated,
although its spending has been author-
ized. That proves to me that, the for-
eign nations have not been begging quite
fast enough for us to give out what has
been appropriated for them I noticed
in the newspaper today that one small
country had refused our money; it did
not want any of it.

The moneys being asked for in the
name of mutual security are. in the main,
nothing more than subsidies for foreign
i'.overnments to use in building up a;ri-
cultural and indu.>ti'.al programs in their
countries which will be used in competi-
tion With American busme.ss. uidustry.
and workers. This is exactly what hap-
ened m Japan when we — and I say
•"we ■ loosely, for I opposed th.e program
when it came up — helped them with sub-
sidies to build up their textile mduNtnes

Oh, ic was said tl;at we mu.>t buiki up
a textile indu-stry in Japan, in order to
get that country back on its feet. Today
the whole textile industry of the United
States is pleading with our Goyernment
to take action to prevent the United
States from being flooded with cheap
cotton materials made in Japan, whf^re
the laborer works for 15 or 16 cents an
hour, as against the $1 25 or $1 50. or
more, an hour which is paid in America.

We must bear in mind also that when
the foreign countries buy our cotton, we
are mvmg them in addition an advantage^
of approximately 6 cents a pound over
our textile industry m the United States.
Th«* foreiu-n ccuntiies buy on the world
market, which is usually 6 or 7 pticent
below the price on the American market

The bill is called "mutual security "
I do nnt call it that There is no doubt
that all the money we are dumv^n': into
the iapi; of foreign countries m the sacred
name of security will come back to haunt
us and our children

Many persons are wondering today
why It is that forei^iii countries have
reduced their purcha.-es of American
cotton. I can teil theni why The reason
is that we have poured mutual-.-ecurity
money into those countries and have
taught them how to grow cotton They
do not need to buy cotton fiom Ameiica
whpn they can grow it at home

We have given away money, here.
there, and yonder to build dams for irri-
k^ation purposes Then we complain
when surpluses are built up m the United
States. We have helped to build them
up In helping to build up surpluses, we
have liurt our own people at home

There is no dnnbt that all the money
wliich IS being dumped into the laps of
foreign countries in the sacred name of
mutual security will come back to hurt
u.^ and even our unborn children

We should stop to think of the people
who Will pay the taxes for mutual se-
curity. We do not have the mo run- . we
have to borrow it. and we have to borrow
It at a high rate of interest. Interest
rates have gone up during the last few
years by approximately 50 percent. If
we do not stop spending and giving away
our resources, how can we expect the
American people to reduce their personal
debts, consumer credit, and the like. We
aie continuing to give away bilhono of

dollars while the American people are
unable to pay off their national debt.

If our national debt were to be reduced
by S2 billion a year, I wonder how many
Senators realize how lon^ it would take
to wipe it out entirely. It would take
more than 140 years. We would still be
paying off the debt in the year :!097.

Senators who pride themselves on the
virtue of prudence should think of what
we are doing and of the example we are
.•^etting for our people. We should re-
member that our economic security is
just as important as our militi ry secu-
rity.

I said the oth"r day that If the salaries
of the Government workers ^ere in-
creased a little, if the Governrr ent paid
out a little more money for the benefit of
its employees, it would enable :he Gov-
ernment employees to meet the rise in
the cost of living.

The more we uo into debt, the cheaper
the dollar tx'comes It will co:>tinue to
become less valuable The val le of the
dollar today i.s already down to 50 cents.
I hope Senators will realize that the de-
cline l;,i.s not stopped at 50 cents but that
the value of the dollar will continue to go
down It will drop to 45 cents, and then
to 40 cents, if we do not at seme point
stop increasing the debt.

Many of the Nation's schoclchildren
annually visit Washington to view the
National Capitol and all its sacred
shrines of liberty. Let us look around us
when we are spending money en foreign
governments. E^•ery year the Federal
Government lose.-, millions of iolhirs in
woik hours because the Feoeral em-
ployees must be dismi.ssed from work be-
cause m.idequate housing -nakes it
impossible for them to continue their
work in the national interest in inclem-
ent weather

Let Senators walk down Constitution
Avenue. Tb.ere they will .see .'•ome little
sl.acks which have been sla idmg for
15 or more years — buildings m«de of plv-
wood It is said that the Gcvernment
cannot affoi-d to con.>truct the necessary
bu;!dinv.s m which its emplo/ees mu.st
work. In the summertime, th3.>-e build-
uigs are so hot tliat the employees must
be di.smi.ssed at 3 or 4 oclo:k in the
afternoon In the winlerlime, the
buililings become so cold tha" the em-
ployees cannot remain in them because
of in..uf!icient heat If the pioper kind
of buildings were erected, .•■o a^ to enable
the employees to work a fuK day, tiie
CT()ve:nment would benefit by real
econrimy But. no. we send o ir billions
of dollars overseas Some Senators say
we cannot afford to correct -.he situa-
tion I have just spoken of. T^ey say we
cannot afford to provide adequate hous-
ing for the Smiilisonian In.->litution or
otlier agencies of the Government, but
now we are asked to authorize Kiving
away money to foreign governments .so
thev can make adequate provisions for
tlieir people

Mr. PreMdent. I see sitting oefore me
the Senate pages. It is hard to believe
that the House of Represent;. tives and
the Senate say the Government cannot
afford to build a small home for them.
So, instead, they must live in various
b<i,irdini;ho!;-es all over the city of
Wa.^lun^ton. I have been advocatinij

1957

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -^- SENATE

8997

the construction of a home for the
pages. It Is said that the Government
does not have suCaclent fimds for that
purpose. Yet the Government says It
can give billions of dollars to foreign
countries. Mr. President, that does not
make sense either to me or to my con-
stituents.

Today, the taxes on our people are
oppressive. They are still paying for
two World Wars and a depression, and
now we expect them to support the en-
tire world.

Mr. President. I say "No." We are ask-
ing too much of a generous but tired
people. What we need to do Is to re-
duce taxes at home. We need to
strengthen our economic front at home.
While we continue these spending pro-
grams in the name of security or any
other name, we can never reduce taxes
here or reduce the national debt with-
out sacrificing some domestic program
the people of our country are In need of.
We shall never satisfy the needs of
t!ip world. We shall never be able to
satisfy the appetite of some countries
that already are playing a game of
blackmail — such as Egypt, which is
threatening to turn to Russia If we do
not come across with more. I say, let
them go to Russia for money, if they
can get It. In 6 months after Russia
cuts them off, they will be right back
nt our back door. Everyone knows that
Ru'-sia Is In pK)or economic condition,
and that her own people are no better
off than those whom we are helping.

Mr Piesident, only a short time ago
Eni,iand told us she could not pay the
Interest then due on the money she had
obtained from us — one of the first loans
We made following the war, in the
amount of $3,750,000,000, But at al-
most the same time, England reduced
the taxes on her own people. Yet the
United States excused England from
making that Interest payment, and
threw it into the future.

Our course should be one to cut for-
eign spending, reduce taxes at home,
and reduce the national debt by a speci-
fied amount each year, until it is wiped
off the txwks.

Mr President, would any good busi-
nessman conduct his affairs in the way
our Government is being operated?
Think of it.

If we authorize this spending, and
later give these foreign governments this
money, mark my words, other countries
will follow the course of England, which,
as I have said, not long ago cut taxes.
iind then began to trade with Red China,
which we would not do.

Instead of making all these gifts to
foremn countries. Mr. President, I should
like to see the per.sonal exemption for
)!:come-tax purposes Increased from
Sfino to $800. That would provide some
relief at home; and most of the money
the taxpayers would save as a result of
that increase in the exemption would be
put into circulation, and thus would aid
buMnes.s in the United States. But if
th.e United States continues to send its
funds abroad, such an increase In the
personal exemption will not be possible.
Mr. President, the enactment of this
bill will result in throwing away the
money of the people of the United States;

and the bill will accomplish nothing
more than an increase in our indebted-
ness.

Mr. President, did you ever loan
money to a friend or acquaintance, and
then find that he would not pay it back?
Under those circumstances, did you ever
see him, one day, coming down the
street toward you, and find that either
he darted into a store, so as to avoid
meeting you, or crossed the street, in-
stead of facing you? So It is. Mr. Presi-
dent, with the countries to which we are
sending our money— to which we are
lending It, so to speak. In many cases,
they will never pay it back.

I, for one, do not Intend to be a party
to giving away the money of the tax-
payers of the United States.

Mr. President, I would prefer a bill
authorizing the appropriation of the
same amount of money that this bill
would authorize, and then have that bill
submitted to the voters of the United
States, so as to learn whether they wish
to give that amount of money to foreign
countries. I would even be willing to
have such a bill provide for double the
amount of authorization the pending
bill provides, and then have that bill
submitted to the voters of the United
States, and let them vote on it. We
would find that they would not vote on
it in the way that some Members of the
Senate have been voting.

Mr. President, no good will come from
this kind of international pork-barrel
legislation.

I hope other Members of this body
who think as I do about the pending bill
will stick to their guns and will vote
against It.

I. for one, intend to vote as I have in
the past. I am glad to see that gradu-
ally more Senators and more Members
of the House of Representatives are be-
ginning to vote as I have voted. I be-
lieve it will be found that they will con-
tinue to do so, as they become more
familiar with the sentiments of their
constituents. If the Members of the
Senate and the Members of the House of
Representatives will only make this ques-
tion an issue in their States, they will
find that the program is not so popular
with the voters who are paying the na-
tional debt as some persons may think
It is.

So, Mr. President, I sincerely hope
each Member of the Senate will seriously
consider the issue before he votes on
this bill, and will reach the same con-
clusion that I have reached, namely,
that the proposal to give the money of
the taxpayers of the United States to
foreign countries is a bad one.

Mr. JAVTTS. Mr. President, I have
had in mind making some general ob-
servations on the subject of the pending
bill. Tomorrow I shall have an oppor-
tunity to speak with respect to certain
amendments which I shall propose to
the bill. They will be amendments de-
signed to fortify the bill in respects
which I believe important to the ulti-
mate objectives of the measure.

But, Mr. President, today I should like
to confine my remarks — which will be
brief — to some of the major objections
which have been made to the bill by the

Members of the Senate whom I have
heard today.

I wish to qualify myself on this point,
Mr. President. For a number of years
I served in our sister body, across the
Capitol, on the committee which was
concerned with legislation in this field.
Prom the initiation of the Greek-Turkish
aid program in 1947. I became very fa-
miliar with the objections which have
been voiced here today and with some of
the answers to them.

Mr. President, I think It significant
that today we hear almost the same ob-
jections to this program that we heard
back in 1947 and 1948. I am amazed to
find that in all this time, apparently
nothing has been learned by the oppo-
nents, at least as judged from the fact
that they continue to make the same
arguments they made before. Certainly
they are sincere, and they are entitled
to have their objections answered; but
it is very interesting that their argu-
ments remain much the same. It is also
very interesting that, despite those argu-
ments and after the test of 10 years of
experience by the American people, the
foreign-assistance programs have con-
tinued to be supported by the Congress,
with substantial majorities in both
Houses, year after year.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. Mr. President,
will the Senator from New York yield
to me?

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Yar-
BOROUGH in the chair). Does the Sena-
tor from New York yield to the Senator
from Wyoming?

Mr. JAVrrs. Certainly.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. I was reading the
report of the Foreign Relations Com-
mittee, when I heard the Senator from
New York say that the opponents of the
bill are reiterating the arguments which
have been made in the past, and ap-
parently the Senator from New York
said the opponents of the bill have
learned nothing from the past.

I should like to have the Senator from
New York know that formerly I was an
enthusiastic supporter of the program.
I find that it is not the same as it used
to be. At the precise moment when the
Senator was making his statement, I
was reading this sentence from the first
page of the committee report. It reads
as follows :

A development loan fund is created —

"Created" is the word. That is some-
thing new, something summoned out of
the atmosphere and given a body and a
form for the first time. It never existed
before.

A development loan fund is created to
make loans and to engage In financial trans-
actions, other than grants or purchase of
equity securities.

I repeat the words, "other than
grants." The Senator, of course, is
aware of the fact that there has been
growing opposition to grants and that
there has been growing support for lim-
iting aid for foreign nations to loans.
But here, apparently, according to the
interpretation of the committee:

A development loan fund is created to
make loans and to engage In financial trans-
actions, other than grants or purchase of
equity securities, designed to promote tiie

Rl

8d98

CONGRESSION.^X RECORD — SENATE

Juric IS

economli] defclofanent of le

countries.

derelopwl

TYte next sentence reads:

Approprtatlons of $500 mlillon are aut^.or-
Ized for fiscal 1958. and In addition the fund
Is authorlred to borrow frnrn the Trenaury
•750 mlUlun In each of Oscal yviirs lOSO and
1960.

Members of the Senate who v,:\l be
elected in 1958, Menibt>is of the Hou.se
who will be elected iia 1958, the new
Congress which will be brought into ex-
littace by the electorate ol the United
States. wUl be bound by t2ie terms of
this bill, if tl\e report correctly states
Uic situation.

I think the Senator for letting .ne in-
terrupt him to point out that tiiere are
new arguments corauitj up const.uitly
against U)ls bilL

Mr. J.WITS. I thanlc the Stuiator for
his observation. I think he has hel;it'd
me demonstrate ray pomt. and for liuK
reason: I said tliat I hear now tiii? same
arguments I heard m 1W8, aiwl I think
tliat Ls true. What the Senator has
pointed out is that tiie proponents of
loreitrn aid have leained a grtat many
things. I hasten to add. mdeed we iiave.
We have learned a creat many thm;;.s
ourselves, and we ai"e tryini? to put tiiem
into effect. I think this idea of a devel-
opment loan over a period of tune is a
di.stinct iniprosenient:. I am fi;r it. I
wish to point out that the ?«"ntl*Tnan
from Ohio Mr V'oavs . a Member of
the Houie of Fiepre.'^entatives, ad\ocat*'d
it for a very lon^r tin-.e and I worked
vvith him on a good many occa.s;cns.

As to tiie Senator's observation th.it
we ."^hall have no control over tins au-
thori.'Atiou becau-e vie m.\ke it for the
jears aiiead. tiieie, too. I pouit out tiiat
any Congress can annul anytiuag Umt
any other Con^zT^i iiAS doi;e Tins is
only cUi autiiorii'ation bill Not a siniile
dollar can be obli^atcHJ undtr tius bill
until It IS ap'Jrot riat*tl. This Congiess
and every cuiier succetding Cong re j
must make an appropriaUun

I have a tremendous rei,'ard and re-
spect for my colleague the Senator fa).'Ti
Wyoming I tiiink we represent njrn;al
differences on a \ery basic i.ssue. I re-
spectfully submit that an anabsis of
the arjTviments w.il bear out what I have
said. I h'lpe my co;i'M-;Me will do me tiie
tireat honor of sland^rvj by and LL>Le:ui. ;
to the arguments and himself clieckini^
the avTument.s that have bten made be-
fore and time and time aeain since

I dn nr>t wnnt to b*» absoUite and doc-
trinaire about It and say nothing: new
ha.s been learned by ti^.e opp<^n'^nt and
I would withdraw .such an Rb.<?( luu'
statement by the same arguments In
subirtance are .^ill made by mo.st oppo-
nents of foreicn aid. But the propo-
nents have le.imed a lot, tecaiise tiie.r
ni.uds have been open to wh.it is hap-
peniriK in the world— I think that is the
fundamental Lssue.

P.rst, It IX said we are encased in nive-
a\\av.s ■ Giveaways" is a word that his
been u.^sed constantly. We hear it all the
time We hear it said there should not
be such giveaways at a time when vve
need schools, housing, help for the aged,
help for the ycuth. public works of vari-
ous kinds, and when we ought to be re-

dudnx taxes. I acre with all of the
objectives but I do not aee that It m«ans

kniicking out f'^re-.^^n a:d.

Let us test ttiat arsumcnt. One en-
gages In a giveaway when he give^ some-
thing to somebody unnecessarily. It Is
not engaging m giveaways when we give
something to somebixly tliat le. conducive
to our own security and to furthering our
own policy. Also, used m the same con-
text m which it Is used m the arTumcnts.
we would be givmg away something when
we ?ive it to somebody who is doing very
well and who does not need it. Some
of us know the diiflcuity of trymi; to give
a -;:ft :o si-meone wh.^ already has every-
thing. By either analot:y, #hat »•« a;e
doin^; IS not ti kjiveaway.

F'list of all. the overwhelming; amount
of money involved m this measure and
lu the preceding forc^n-aid measures
goes directly for military equipment and
mii.tiiry preparation on the part of our
allies 111 the Free World. e:th»r in terms
of h.irdware, training, or foo«.!, or otiier
lu^ms which are neceosaiy to equip
armies. So it is not a niveau ay to furtily
our military strenjiLii in that way. Prac-
tically everybody has agreixl that the
military aA>i.st nee ph<iA*s of tiie pio-
gram are all ri^ht.

I pMiit odl to my colleague, the Sena-
tor from Wyomitu tiiat I re .id with in-
terest the remaiks m opixisition U) this
pi- ;ir-al by tiie very diAlinnuislied .senior
Senator fr>m Ore^;on, who is a friend of
miiiO, and for vkhom I have a hi^h re-
. .i:d He, t lO, says, at pa^,e C of the mi-
nority views;

rhi« Ciiun'ry needs allW-s ar.d. in tt-ir.\e
c*tit^.. exU" io;Ui:;-*ry u..UU.ry .ir.d suj)i>*j.'t a^U
ni:iy be necessary tt) a.^^slst them in resisting
cl.;nit;cr'jiLs tctnlltarlan pre?sur»»3 frr-m with-
in nr.^1 wi'r; Mjt. That was tnje when NATO
■w.vs organized.

Every report of every committee tl^.at
has reiKjrted upon this subject accepts
Lliat pretty much without que.stion.
'iheie are some d.fit rences on details, on
whether it us bun^ don? eiTir.ently or
not. but the fiuidara»'nt.il principle of
military a.s.siatance is accepted.

I cume now to the quejUon ul eco-
nomic aid. It means J6U0 mill:ur-i a year,
w lien we strip it of all the m.;iit.\iy piiases
of t;;e pro,;ram. Whtu it i.s biokea
down, we find tliat half of that amount
a'^tually will go to the great majority of
underdeveloped countries like Korea.
Formosa. Vietnam, and Turkey, and
s.miLir nati«-^ns where even nonniililary
economic aiSiitonce i.s directly tied into
Lhe overall r.ational security situation.

There is a very interesting article m
the New York H« raid Tribune of today
which lUuslrates this point. I a.->k
unanimous consent Uiat it be printed m
Llie Uzk-urd as a part of my rcmarl-is.

There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in tlie Record.
as follow a.

Tu»Krr Is Goimo Tnaoosji a Paioo or
Utrra. 'jltuji

(By Metlii Ergln)
Th<» Ruoslnn diploma t.s have Ir. the last
n a. •.'13 been very artive betilnd the 8c«*ne« in
Tiiricey iryUig fcj ci>aviuc« Juritiih st.iUj;imp:i
to ivc«.'e{it a Ras.si.ia iuan wliich wui liicliida
le'-hnical and ei^'ivnUc assi.'rr.in.-e. But tJie
T'lrtcs w^'iM ri'h'T b^ w'.'hoiit rofT'" tea,
tueLllkU:i«, and even esa«i;Ual food Uuiu ac-

cept ft Ruaalan h.ind of frien<Uhip. Despite

Uiair tUm staiul agaUiA the ;30vietM. nulxniy
cui deny Uuit t^e Turlta are haUng the nio^t
diftcull lime stnre Uie found-ttli-n of llie
re;niblir In 1923 by Kemal Ata'xirk.

This cifMT.trr la sh.^rt of for^l^n c\irrenry
nnd an aetioua iiAS bAcome tine riaanctal m-
au Uiat lb* very e.\latenc3a of Western de-
fo:-.se 19 l!i d.\:-.|<iT lirkey. whl-h hjw beea
keeping an army at 40U.OOO r^M- a lun^ ttir.r.
Is Inclined U< de<cre.iae it l3y one -fourth iujw.
A W'\-j1 member 'f N.\rO a.iuX U>e llu«.hp'.a
f r t!.e C.i^hdad P.ict f ^r the d -feni^e of the
M'.d.r.e P-\st. Ti'.rXey l9 »!«^ holding; the
51 ."•.lit.!", ^h: h the Ii:;.^.s'..iii.s hav? been trying
tn orcvjpv for thre* rentiiriea.

Ttie en-.orgenry her* can ue sared hy
greater ar.d autre iDMIU^nt United St«t<e«
eonioxulc i\:ul nr.nnclAl ar.slsLan :m. Pre.<udent
K.&eiih.j«er s Middie Ea!>t pr^gr im caine just
1:; time But .^nicrlc.in state.s nen are still
tiikUi? th!r.fc^ ' T pmnted In '^irkev, whl>
o«.l-<. rn'.ng .^mblc r» antrtea a-« considered
U) be the mali; tarsrt

TtaxFTS THOTTBii wrm (rntAT

In i:»54, Mr Adnan Menderef , the Turkish
Prpn.lT askfd t.'ie t.'n;'e<l M*tir-a frr a credit
of »3O0 niini-'n Thix waa b: aahed ofT l!i
W i5hlnr*on mainly berau.•^e a {;r i«rain *how-
tn« how the crecM vould be f;)ent wu de-
nvinded by tfie Cnii^tl bta'ea trorerjunent.

IhU w»» rotiaklered li;'.erfejc:ice by fur-
key. i%A It wa« a i'>^a to be re; .i.id.

I he I:a»-r!'„iUM:i.il C^x^perat .n Adm'.nl.s-
t ration h,xs nevertheless exp.^ir'eU its help to
T',!rk.'-y In obt.-x'iiinv? emeTreni y snjj^llea of
whent. fuels, ll.^d «i»«re ptirtu

Aa a mat'er < .f fart, nuiuy r tlier f.irtori
h;i\e crintrtbuted to t.Ms ai tuition. CiraJn
crojm in the last 3 yt»*.'« hare jeru ii failure
iiiAtniy b«<'au:>e of ine ttml Ae^ttier C'lidi-
t; >aa wiiic*i furred a wheat -ex;). .ft Ing tut\ii:-
try V.J inipurt nill'.i.-ua f.' dollu; s" worth frc^m
fnlted St.ites surplus tn he pjtlj for In l\]Tk-
ish riirrer.rv Thfs T-«r t!.e ciuitry w.U
still n»^1 to imp" rt whe«*

Then suddei :r lost mor.tli a serlea of
en.-*!.qu «ie« v;ped lut aeveial cUiea and
tfi*:ji m »"'tern Anatolia Tlie aecond
blow c^i'.e In lute M^y ai.cl h.t the l<>'An uf
Boui aud moiiy vU". i^fii.

pacMiv'c MtNorars c is His ind ;st«im.izatio?«

Prff.iler Adnan Menderes baa faced aiJ
criticism since 19^0 us the lead >r of the Dem-
ocratic P.trty. w.'iich defeat d Uic Ri-pub'.;-
CiiiLS. In p-iwer fiT 27 years F.-llc^Aii.g the
D»'m if-r.itlc Party s greaf-r T'ctrry In 1^54.
Mr MtT. IcTf-s i-!(-re.-\.'<*^ his ternpo of mn-
▼~rtlnc Turkesf fn 3i an »^rS-r\ :tuml r<n;n»rf
t'l iMi lr.Ll',i«.'r:.il [i. -vrr If he iucreeda ha
*ould b^ci'n.e t.hf aemnrt .greatest ita'rT.m.i;i
In nri'idern Ixirkey's Uutfry. fcilom.ng Kernel
At.iturk.

In the face of rising prices his Government
Ls cuntiuulng un a huge Uidustrlal develup-
mcnt pr grum — d.ims. pcwerplants. ^^ifTUs.
f.TrtiTles. mills, and hlRhws\-s

.A[>«t fr >m wh i' » h^ A.Ti*»r;'*nn or Turkish
eciMintr;.<tii nav a^n nt thJa ln.'lu-!trlaUz;ill<<n
under difflrilt c:rcum.';tan<e«. the 1956 e'.ec-
U< ns are g^ ir.g ti be the hottest ever and
u '.i.d sh w whe'ber the 2fl million Turk*
a^i-u-ijve the Goveriinicnl« pt'.icy or ni't

Ciernia'.s h.4-.<" almdy cl^en the'.r hands .J
rr;er.d.>i!;lp tn Tnrk»'T mntnly tjernusf they
weT»> th*" nrst U< dl-C'^ver this rnin'ry's tre-
mend iia natural \-id mlnera resonrces

The flrri step Upward this n-aa the recent
•sjreempnt pnjvidmj; f.-<r th« purch \»e by
t.crmany of amuiur.Ulon an.l acudl arms
mjide lu Tarkey amuuntirig ij "40 niliilun
Clerman n-.arks Of this sum. 250 m.lir.i'n
m.irks wttl be imniedin'ely rr-nltted as nn
ndrrvnr ' p^rrr.er'.t T'lrkey w!'.: n?e this for-
el?:i rnrr^ncT t/i pav Its debts U) Cletmany
and Imivrt badly needed gooda 'or tile coun-
try s Indtistrles.

OIL nKWPBcnifs rr roanci* WAnrvs
Tt should aUo be r.otet that 13 ff rel^n
Oil compajile* liava la vested grt^t am^itinta

29.

I i

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE

8999

f r r .1 [ r-xpertlnp The national oil crm-
ji ,:.y 1!. Turkey Is already supplying 30 per-
cent of the needs of the country. According
to siome forei>?u ex{>erts, there I.s more oil In
Turkey than all Saudi Arabia. Iraq, and Iran
cnmblned. But the country lacks the neces-
fary cajtital to direct tlie research and build
ihe huge plants.

There Is such secrecy among foreign oil
companies In their search for oil that big
news can be expected any day. This factor
alone would be enough to change everything
and 8ol\e Turkey's difncuUles

In the mldftt of these problems a cable
sent to Archblshi'p Makarlos by Governor
Harrlmnn of Nevi- York stirred up the nor-
mally calm Turks ^!r Harriman'fi cable say-
ing 'Thi- .state of New York will shortly ha\e
the opportunity of extending to you Us
hospl'allty and warm welcome ' waa consid-
ered an Invitation In Turkey The Governor
l.i'er denied It But Makarlos accepted the
bid and wrote to his friends that he would
i>e In New Yc^rk In late July or early August.
The Tiirkush reaitlnn wa.s bitter, ginre they
blame Makarlos f^r the present terrorism In
Cyprus, which hiis become a gre.it conflict
among England, Turkey, and Greece The
Harrlnian letter was cunsldered to be the
policy of the United Stales Government.
The people of Turkey were confused, as their
governors represent the central government
In their proviiKes The American officials
spent a K.t of effort convincing them that
Governor Harrimaii was elected by the peoule
cf his State and has no conriectlon with
American foreign p<jlicy

TfRKFY ALV^ATS AI I Y Or rNITED STATTS

The Turks appreciate the $700 million In
econoniic aid and approximately $1 billion
In military equipment g.ven as United States
assistance. This country Is also {)repared tn
fight any aegres.^or at any time. The Turkish
brigade :n Korea proved that they are among
the worlds toughest fichters They hate
communism and don't like U) play a double
gnme tn pontics Ttirkey is always going to
tie a friend and ally of America, whatever
the sltuH! !- )n Is

The Turks know that If a country Is not
strdiig enough economically, the best-
equlpj>ed armies and the toughest soldiers
may not mean much As a nation which has
fought thirteen wars with the Russians In the
last three centuries, the Turks believe they
know more alxnn Ru.ssla than any other
country And while trying tn develop eco-
nomir.»;;y and socially, they hope not to make
the mistakes of Egypt and Syria In permit-
ting the Russians to gain a foothold In their
country.

Mr J.AVrrs The article Is headed,
'Turkey I.s Going Through a Period of
Difficultie.s."

The first .sentence reads:

Th*> Russian diplomats have in the las;t
m i.ths been very active behind the scenes
in Turkey trying to convince Turkish states-
men to arcept a Russian loan which will
include technical and economic assistance.

I think there are very few who will
deny that one of the stoutest and most
militant allie.s aRainst communism we
have in the world Ls Turkey. So, in
respect of Turkey, not only has Turkey
been heavily dependent on our economic
find military assistance in the foreign aid
bills, but we are also facing great compe-
tition at a vital strongpoint of the Free
World. So far as giveaway is con-
eerned in that respect, it is a question
of w helher it does or does not contribute
to our national security.

In terms of whether it Is going to peo-
ple who are already enjoying lush Uv-
inu. where we are giving them a lot of
cream for their coffee, everybody knows

nothing could be further from the truth.
As a practical matter, most of the people
of the Free World— more than a billion
people of them— are hving on a stand-
ard of living which is roughly one-eight-
eenth of our own. I repeat that figure-
roughly one-eighteenth of our own.
They have about $100 a year in per capita
income, as compared to about $1,800 a
year— dollars of the 1947 vintage — for
the people of the United States. No fair,
decent, and just person begrudges the
well-beir" of the people of the, United
States, in my opinion. But at the same
time it .seems to me we must have some
comprehension of the responsibilities of
the man who earns 18 times more than
the <3ther fellow, and yet who lives on the
same street. The question is, in very
elementary terms, what condition do we
want this .street to assume; ours, or the
standard allowed to the $100-a-year
man?

That Is esfentially. in my opinion, an
extremely important element in this
question of giveaway.

Finally we have the question of reduc-
ing taxes. Again, it Is so easy to make
sweeping generalizations, but we should
consider a few figures. In order to re-
duce the personal exemption by $100 a
year per person